Music teacher 'dared teen girls to kiss' and texted one saying 'I love you'
A music teacher accused of historic child abuse allegedly dared two teen pupils to kiss and sent a text to one of them proclaiming her love, a court has heard.
Janelle Colville Fletcher, 40, from Trinity Gardens in Adelaide, South Australia, allegedly groomed and sexually abused a girl over several months while holding a position of authority. The flautist has appeared in South Australian District Court over the allegations, which she denies, with the court hearing she told one of the unidentified students she was "so in love with her". On one occasion, the court heard, the flautist dared two girls to kiss one another during a game of truth and dare.
Prosecutor Chris Allen, opening the trial, alleged Colville Fletcher had used the game to "encourage" the girls to participate in sexual activity.
He said: "The accused encouraged (the two teens) to engage in sexual activity with one another in her presence. On the prosecution case…the accused came into the room and there is effectively a game of truth or dare that commenced." The prosecutor went on to allege that, at one stage, Colville Fletcher performed "a lap dance on a chair".
He continued: "At one stage, the accused did what could be described as a lap dance on a chair. The accused was saying things to each of the girls like 'would you date (each other)', 'I dare you to kiss each other'."
Mr Allen accused Colville Fletcher of engaging in sexual contact with one of the girls after the other had gone to sleep, alleging the two kissed before the teacher touched her "genital area".
The teacher has been accused of engaging in other sexual acts with the teenager on following nights, with the relationship allegedly continuing for several more months.
A sexual relationship, the prosecutor alleged, took place in the girl's home, in Colville Fletcher's home and car, and at other undisclosed locations.
The teacher has also been accused of sending text messages and emails to the girl. The prosecutor said: "On the prosecution case … while the sexual relationship continued, the accused sent messages including saying how attracted she was to (the girl), how she was feeling.
'She expressed the following …'I'm so in love with you, you make me so happy'." She is also alleged to have texted her: "Right now we can't be open. We have to continue as we are, in secret … I don't know if that is fair on you."
The court heard that the child eventually ended the relationship. Colville Fletcher has pleaded not guilty to one count each of sexual abuse of a child and communicating with intent to make a child amenable to sexual activity.
The trial continues.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
BBC News
4 hours ago
- BBC News
Should teen sex be a crime? Indian woman lawyer mounts challenge
In late July, lawyer Indira Jaising mounted a challenge against the legal age for having sex in India - which is 18 years - in the Supreme Court, renewing conversations around the criminalisation of teen Jaising argued that consensual sex between 16 and 18-year-olds is neither exploitative nor abusive and urged the court to exempt it from criminal prosecution."The purpose of age-based laws is to prevent abuse, not to criminalise consensual, age-appropriate intimacy," Ms Jaising has said in her written submissions to the the federal government has opposed this, saying that introducing such an exemption would jeopardise the safety and protection of children (persons under the age of 18, according to Indian laws), opening them up to abuse and case has re-ignited debate around consent and whether Indian laws, especially the country's main law against child sexual abuse - Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 or Pocso - should be altered to introduce a provision exempting 16 to 18 year-olds having consensual sex from their rights activists say exempting teens protects their autonomy, while opponents warn it could fuel crimes like trafficking and child question whether teens can bear the burden of proof if abused. More importantly, who decides the age of consent laws - and whose interests do they truly serve? Like many countries, India has struggled to set its age of sexual consent. Unlike the US, where it varies by state, India enforces a uniform age legal age for having sex is also much higher than most European countries, or places like UK and Canada, where it is was 10 years when India's criminal code was enacted in 1860 and was increased to 16 in 1940 when the code was introduced the next major change, pushing the "age of consent" to 18 years in 2012. A year later, India's criminal laws were amended to reflect this change and the country's new criminal code, introduced in 2024, has adhered to this revised is consensual teen sex a crime in India?But over the past decade or so, many child rights activists and even courts have taken a critical view of the country's legal age to have sex and have called for it to be lowered to 16 years. They say the law criminalises consensual teen relationships and is often misused by adults to control or block relationships - especially those of remains a taboo topic in the country even though studies have shown that millions of Indian teenagers are sexually active."As a society, we're also divided along caste, class and religious lines, which makes the [age of consent] law even more susceptible to misuse," says Sharmila Raje, co-founder of Foundation for Child Protection-Muskaan, a non-profit working to prevent child sexual abuse for over two decades. In 2022, the Karnataka High court directed India's Law Commission - an executive panel that advices the government on legal reform - to rethink the age of consent under Pocso, "so as to take into consideration the ground realities".It noted several cases where girls over 16 fell in love, eloped, and had sex, only for the boy to be charged with rape and abduction under Pocso and criminal its report the following year, the Law Commission ruled out lowering the age of consent, but recommended "guided judicial discretion" during sentencing in cases involving "tacit approval" from children aged 16 to 18 years, meaning where the relationship has been this is yet to be implemented, courts across the country have been using this principle to allow for appeals, grant bail, make acquittals and even quash cases after taking into consideration the facts of the case and the victim's testimony. Many child rights activists, including Ms Raje, urge this provision be codified to standardise enforcement; left as a suggestion, courts may ignore April, the Madras High Court overturned the acquittal in a case where the 17-year-old victim was in a relationship with the 23-year-old accused and the two eloped after the victim's parents arranged her marriage to another man. The accused was sentenced to 10 years imprisonment."The court adopted a literal interpretation of the Pocso Act," Shruthi Ramakrishnan, a researcher at Enfold Proactive Health Trust - a child rights charity - noted in her column in The Indian Express newspaper, calling it a "grave miscarriage of justice". Ms Jaising argues that judicial discretion at sentencing isn't enough, as the accused still faces lengthy investigations and judicial system is infamously slow with millions of cases pending across all court levels. A research paper by India Child Protection Fund found that as of January 2023, nearly 250,000 Pocso cases were pending in special courts set up to try these cases."The process is the punishment for many," Ms Jaising notes. "A case-by-case approach leaving it to the discretion of judges is also not the best solution as it can result in uneven results and does not take into account the possibility of bias," she urges the court to add a "close-in-age exception" for consensual sex between 16- and 18-year-olds in Pocso and related laws. This "close-in-age exception" would prevent consensual acts between peers in that age group from being treated as and child rights activist Bhuwan Ribhu warns that a blanket exception could be misused in cases of kidnapping, trafficking, and child marriage. He advocates judicial discretion paired with a justice system overhaul."We need faster processes so that cases are disposed off in a time-bound manner. We also need better rehabilitation facilities and compensation for victims," he Ganguly, co-founder of HAQ: Centre for Child Rights, however, agrees with Ms Jaising. "We can't shy away from making changes because we're afraid of the law being misused," she says, adding that Ms Jaising's argument is not new as over the years, many activists and experts have made similar recommendations."Laws need to keep pace with changes in society if they are to remain effective and relevant," she BBC News India on Instagram, YouTube, Twitter and Facebook.
BreakingNews.ie
9 hours ago
- BreakingNews.ie
Acquitted law professor Diarmuid Phelan in legal fight with State over 'enormous' trial costs
The State appears to have suggested that even people of means should make legal aid applications, which a barrister for law professor Diarmuid Phelan, who was acquitted by a Central Criminal Court jury of murdering a trespasser on his farm, has argued is "entirely contrary" to spirit of the scheme. A judge will give her ruling in September as to whether the State should pay the "enormous" legal costs for Mr Phelan following a trial that ended last January. Advertisement The costs issue was raised this evening on the last day of the Trinity term before Ms Justice Siobhan Lankford, who presided over the 10-week murder trial that ended on January 3rd last. Law lecturer Mr Phelan, who has assets valued in the millions, instructed two senior and two junior counsel at his trial and did not receive legal aid. He also called expert witnesses who gave evidence following the close of the prosecution case. Mr Phelan maintained from the outset that he had no intention of shooting the deceased Keith Conlon and had acted in self-defence when he fired three warning shots. The jurors unanimously agreed with the defence case following the trial that Mr Phelan was entitled to defend himself when he came under threat on his own land. Mr Phelan (56) went on trial in October 2024 after he pleaded not guilty to murdering father-of-four Keith 'Bono' Conlon (36) at Hazelgrove Farm, Kiltalown Lane, Tallaght, Dublin 24 on February 24, 2022. Advertisement Mr Conlon from Kiltalown Park in Tallaght, was seriously injured in the shooting incident on February 22 and died at Tallaght University Hospital two days later. The defendant is a barrister, law lecturer and farmer who owns Hazelgrove, formerly a golf course in Tallaght. It was the defence case that this was an unintended killing and what Mr Phelan had been trying to achieve in discharging the shots was not to strike Mr Conlon. Opening the application on Thursday evening, Sean Guerin SC, who was one of two senior counsel representing Mr Phelan at his trial, told Ms Justice Lankford that the starting point - and also expressly the most important consideration - in awarding costs was the verdict. Advertisement Counsel submitted that Mr Phelan was entitled to his costs and the onus was really on the prosecution to show why he shouldn't succeed in the application. He said there was no substantive reason as to why costs should not be awarded. Mr Guerin said one of the prosecution's submissions, which had previously been handed into the court, was that Mr Phelan had the option of applying for legal aid but had chosen not to do so. The lawyer said legal aid had been put in place because of the desperate injustice done to people who couldn't secure the means to defend themselves and to protect those of limited resources. The barrister said the State appeared to be suggesting that even people of resources or means should make a legal aid application, which he suggested was a complete misunderstanding of what the legal aid scheme was. "There is no suggestion of that in the authorities and is entirely contrary to the word and spirit of the statutory scheme of legal aid," he added. Mr Guerin went on to say that the personal financial consequences was that Mr Phelan had to bear "the enormous costs" of being on trial in the Central Criminal Court for nearly three months. "The court doesn't need to be told what those financial consequences are and how they weigh on anyone who has to meet their defence". Advertisement Opposing the application, John Byrne SC, for the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP), argued there was no presumption in favour of costs and one cannot simply say they had been acquitted so were entitled to their costs. He said a more complex and nuanced enquiry was required by the trial judge. The barrister said an award of costs is a discretionary order and it was "too simplistic" to say an acquittal gives rise to a presumption in favour of costs being awarded. Ms Justice Lankford said she had not finalised her view in relation to awarding costs but asked both parties to articulate their views if she decided to award Mr Phelan his costs but confined it to legal aid costs. She noted there was quite a wide discretion in case law, where 50 per cent of costs had been awarded to applicants. Mr Guerin told the judge there was no warrant for doing so as those weren't the costs his client had incurred. He said legal aid was not a guide or a measure as to what are the appropriate costs in a case. "If the court concluded Mr Phelan is entitled to his costs, then the appropriate order is for the adjudication of those costs in the usual way". Advertisement Whereas, Mr Byrne said the discretion seemed to be very wide and awarding legal aid costs was not something the court couldn't do, provided it set out the basis for it. Ms Justice Lankford said she hoped to deliver the court's judgement as to whether Mr Phelan can recoup his legal costs from the State in the first week of September. Ireland Young man jailed for raping teenage girl and engag... Read More Mr Phelan's trial heard that Keith Conlon and others were trespassing on Mr Phelan's land at Hazelgrove Farm, Kiltalown Lane in Tallaght on February 24, 2022. Mr Phelan shot a dog belonging to one of the trespassers due to concerns the dog might go after his sheep. An angry confrontation followed in which Mr Phelan produced a handgun and fired three shots, the third of which struck Mr Conlon in the head and caused his death. Mr Phelan said he acted in self-defence and that the fatal shooting was accidental. The jury had rejected the State's case that when the third shot was fired by Mr Phelan, the gun was pointed in the direction of Mr Conlon, who was shot in the back of the head when it was argued he had turned away to leave. It was in those circumstances, the prosecution said, that Mr Phelan intended to either kill or cause serious injury to Mr Conlon. Instead, the jurors accepted Mr Phelan's position that he was acting in self-defence after two trespassers were "coming to fulfil the threats they had made" and that he was fearful and facing an "imminent attack" as the men closed in on him.
Reuters
11 hours ago
- Reuters
Fact Check: French court ruled on defamation case appeals, not Brigitte Macron's gender
A court in France ruled in early July on a defamation case involving Brigitte Macron, the wife of French President Emmanuel Macron, not on her gender, contrary to online claims. Social media posts, reacting to the Paris Court of Appeal decision, said it was confirmation that Brigitte Macron was a transgender woman born a man. 'Brigitte Macron is not a woman,' said one July 13 Facebook post, opens new tab. 'What once sounded like a conspiracy theory now stands confirmed in a court ruling.' However, a copy of the July 10 ruling seen by Reuters shows the Paris Court of Appeal acquitted two women of defaming Brigitte Macron. The court did not rule on the truth of the claims about her gender. Delphine Jegousse and Nathalie Rey had claimed, in a video published in December 2021, that Brigitte Macron was a transgender woman born a man, originally called Jean-Michel Trogneux. That is also the name of her real brother, who was a co-plaintiff in the case. A criminal complaint was filed, and in September 2024 the Paris Judicial Court found both women guilty of defamation., opens new tab They were fined and ordered to pay 8,000 euros ($9,150) to Brigitte Macron and 5,000 euros to her brother. The Paris Court of Appeal in July 2025 said the allegations about gender and transition were made 'in good faith' and therefore did not constitute defamation given the importance of freedom of expression in a democratic society, court documents show. The court overturned the women's convictions and acquitted them of all charges. All credible media, opens new tab reports, opens new tab say the Paris Court of Appeal acquitted the women of defamation and did not rule on Brigitte Macron's gender. An attorney representing Brigitte Macron and her brother did not immediately respond to a request for comment. Jean-Michel Trogneux is appealing the latest ruling to a higher French court, his attorney told AFP, opens new tab on July 13. On July 23, Emmanuel and Brigitte Macron filed a defamation lawsuit in the U.S. against right-wing influencer Candace Owens, centred on her assertions that Brigitte Macron is a man. In her podcast that day, Owens said, "This lawsuit is littered with factual inaccuracies" and part of an "obvious and desperate public relations strategy" to smear her character. Reuters has previously addressed baseless claims about Brigitte Macron's gender. In August 2024, a fact-check showed that an altered picture of a young Russian male model had been shared online with the false suggestion that it was Brigitte Macron as a young man. False. The Paris Court of Appeal ruled on a defamation case involving Brigitte Macron, not on her gender. This article was produced by the Reuters Fact Check team. Read more about our fact-checking work. ($1 = 0.8744 euros)
