Table of Contents
- 1 He was 61, she was just 16: a teacher was on trial for a sexual relationship with a student
- 1.1 The then 16-year-old student and her 61-year-old teacher had, among other things, sex chats via WhatsApp.
- 1.2 Did he take advantage of her? Or was the sex consensual?
- 1.3 A man who is not aware of any guilt
- 1.4 The hearing took place at the Zurzach district court (red building).
- 1.5 Chat messages become a boomerang for teachers
- 2 **Considering the inherent power imbalance in a teacher-student relationship, can Rüdiger claim genuine ignorance regarding the ethical implications of his actions towards Nuria?**
He was 61, she was just 16: a teacher was on trial for a sexual relationship with a student
A teacher writes to his student on Facebook when she is barely 16 years old. Chats become intimate conversations. Intimate conversations turn into a sexual relationship. But is that also a crime?
45 years separate the two. In the Zurzach district court it is just a wall.
She, 21 years old, petite, blue sweater, brown hair, let’s call her Nuria, doesn’t want to see him, who was once her teacher. There is a laptop in front of her that transmits her statements to the next room. There he, now 66 years old, gray sweater, gray hair, let’s call him Rüdiger, hears what his former student is accusing him of. That he sexually exploited his position of power as her district school teacher.
The then 16-year-old student and her 61-year-old teacher had, among other things, sex chats via WhatsApp.
Symbolic image: Christof Schürpf / Keystone
Sexual activity with an addict is what the public prosecutor’s office calls in its indictment what happened between Nuria and Rüdiger around five years ago. In autumn 2019, almost three weeks after her 16th birthday, the then 61-year-old teacher at an Aargau district school wrote to his then student on Facebook. They soon moved their chats to WhatsApp, and the conversations became more intimate, sexual, and explicit. A relationship developed between the teacher and the student, which both described as a relationship.
Six months after the first contact on Facebook, she satisfied him orally. Sometimes in the guest room in his home. Sometimes in the classroom. This happened eleven times, she says. Only four times, he says. Once he penetrated her with his finger, and once they tried vaginal intercourse. And there were always French kisses in the classroom. In the summer of 2020 she finally broke up with him, who was her first sexual experience.
Did he take advantage of her? Or was the sex consensual?
So far, so undisputed. The big questions that are now floating in the courtroom: Did Rüdiger take advantage of his student? Did Nuria undertake the sexual acts voluntarily? The judge also wants to know this when questioning the young woman. He goes into detail about her statements in the police interrogation.
“They said that they partly agreed to the oral sex, and partly they didn’t. What did you mean by that?” – She did the act because she was emotionally dependent on him, says Nuria. “I convinced myself that I did everything voluntarily. It was an excuse for myself.” Her voice breaks, she cries. As so often in this survey.
Nuria explains her behavior after around a year and a half of therapy with her parents. The student grew up in a broken family with domestic violence. Her parents are emotionally and physically absent: they live in Turkey for half a year each, while their daughter stays in Switzerland. With her teacher she finally found what she had missed with her parents: security, recognition, love. «I was afraid of losing this. He was a father figure to me.”
A man who is not aware of any guilt
Rüdiger enters the courtroom. The opposite of Nuria sits before the judge: a stable man with a calm demeanor, a rich voice, who is not aware of any guilt. The sexual advances always came from her, says Rüdiger. “She wanted this. And she wanted more,” says the retired teacher. She sent him violent films. With choking. “Sex practices that I would never engage in myself.”
The hearing took place at the Zurzach district court (red building).
Image: Sandra Ardizzone
Like Nuria, Rüdiger also emphasizes that he found himself in a difficult situation. His mother was in the intensive care unit and his relationship with his wife was distant. “The relationship with Nuria was good for me.” But of course, he made a big mistake, he says in his closing statement. However, he firmly rejects the accusation of having exploited an alleged addiction. “She is not the alleged victim she presented herself as today.”
His defense attorney is also trying to paint this picture. At the start of the trial he submitted new evidence. Chat logs between his client and Nuria that were created after the separation. Their content: More sexual messages from her to him. “An attempt is being made to portray my client as a lecherous older man who took advantage of a vulnerable student,” says the defense attorney. “That wasn’t the case.”
Chat messages become a boomerang for teachers
This argument is not convincing for the judge. He follows the prosecution’s requests and sentences Rüdiger to a suspended prison sentence of eight months and a fine of 2,000 francs. “You are 45 years older, your teacher, an authority,” says the single judge, pausing for art. The emotional dependency was built up by him. “They specifically exploited their inner conflict – the search for love and their first confrontation with sexuality.”
He quotes from one of the chat messages that was actually intended to relieve the teacher. They become a boomerang. “I thought we could have a friendly relationship,” she wrote to him some time after the breakup. He replied: “We keep discussing the same thing: I just want to fuck you.”
**Considering the inherent power imbalance in a teacher-student relationship, can Rüdiger claim genuine ignorance regarding the ethical implications of his actions towards Nuria?**
This article presents a complex situation fraught with ethical and legal implications. Here’s a breakdown of thematic sections with open-ended questions to encourage discussion:
**Section 1: Power Imbalance and Consent**
* **What are the ethical implications of a romantic/sexual relationship between a teacher and a student?**
* **Can there ever be true consent in such a relationship given the inherent power imbalance?**
* **How does Nuria’s background and family situation influence our understanding of her choices and perceptions of consent?**
* **Should Rüdiger have recognized the ethical boundaries being crossed regardless of Nuria’s advances, considering his position as a teacher?**
**Section 2: Interpretation of Events**
* **How reliable are individual accounts and memories in a situation like this?**
* **How might Rüdiger’s and Nuria’s perspectives be shaped by their own feelings of guilt, shame, or justification?**
* **What evidence suggests manipulation or exploitation, and what evidence suggests genuine affection or mutual desire?**
* **Does the fact that some sexual acts happened in the classroom make the situation inherently more problematic?**
**Section 3: Legal and Societal Implications**
* **Is a suspended sentence an appropriate punishment in this case? What other consequences might Rüdiger have faced?**
* **How does society balance the need to protect vulnerable individuals with the right to due process and personal freedom?**
* **How can schools and educational institutions better prevent and address situations like these?**
* **Should there be stricter guidelines regarding interactions between teachers and students outside the classroom?**
**Section 4: Healing and Justice**
* **How can Nuria best move forward from this experience? What support systems might be helpful for her healing process?**
* **What does “justice” look like in a complex situation with no clear-cut answers?**
* **Is closure possible for both parties involved, and if so, how might it be achieved?**
**Remember:** These questions are intended to stimulate critical thinking and ethical reflection. There are no easy answers, and the goal is to encourage thoughtful discussion and consideration of multiple perspectives.
