Trouble is far from over for Brainne Altice – a teaching assistant Mr. Conservative has frequently reported on. As her trial is underway, one of her victims, a 17-year-old student she had sex with, has come forward describing Altice as a “teacher with benefits.”
Altice was a teaching assistant at Davis High School in Kaysville, Utah and had been since 2012 where her short time of employment has led to 9 felony charges she now faces. Although her lawyer says that she never used her position as a pedestal to lure victims from, but rather succumbed to the sexual advances of one of the students, one pupil is saying otherwise.
Amidst testimonies being heard, one male – now 18 – explains of his sexual relationship in graphic detail that he had with Altice at the age of 17. Starting off by telling they simply began by kissing in between classes, the relationship eventually evolved into having full blown intercourse inside Altice’s home.
He eventually came forward with the description of Altice as his, “teacher with benefits.”
Unfortunately for the teaching assistant, she has recently been ordered back to court on October 9 where she is set to face the music regarding three counts of rape and one charge of forcible sodomy to which she has pled not guilty on all accounts.
Furthermore, her defense attorney has come forward to demand that her testimony, in which she acknowledged the sexual allegations, be tossed out on account of the methods they came to light. According to the Mail Online:
But Brass (Altice’s defense attorney) has asked the judge to not allow those statements at her trial, arguing that she was intimidated by the eight to 10 male officers who came to her home last October to interview her about the allegations. Brass argued that the officers would not let her care for children, call an attorney or use the restroom for nearly four hours as they questioned her.
‘Her statements were coerced and involuntary and were taken in violation of her so-called Miranda rights,’ Brass wrote in court papers.
‘The evidence she provided was the product of that tainted statement.’
Its irrefutably wrong that Altice took advantage of pubescent teens, but is there a gray area here? Should the blame entirely fall on Altice shoulders when the boys, along with their raging testosterone, were undoubtedly willing participants in all this?