I bet he was registered when he paid a teenager to have sex with his 16-year-old girlfriend, while he watched.

The various teacher union oppose Charter Schools because they say the teachers won’t be required to be registered. They reckon kids will be at risk.

I’ll bet this teacher was registered when he was offending:

A former Tauranga teacher paid a teenager to have sex with his 16-year-old girlfriend, while he watched.

Andrew Loader, 49, pleaded guilty to a charge under the Prostitution Reform Act 2003 in Tauranga District Court today, the Sunlive website reported.

A charge of paying a 16-year-old for sexual services was withdrawn and replaced with one of contract sex with a person under 18.

Loader paid the man, who was in a consensual sexual relationship with the girl, to have sex while he watched. He was remanded on bail for sentencing on March 15. 

I wonder what the NZEI and PPTA and the Teachers’ Council have to say about that? Probably as much as the catholic church, if anything.


THANK YOU for being a subscriber. Because of you Whaleoil is going from strength to strength. It is a little known fact that Whaleoil subscribers are better in bed, good looking and highly intelligent. Sometimes all at once! Please Click Here Now to subscribe to an ad-free Whaleoil.

  • stinkeye3

    You guys just don’t understand, being a teacher means your exempt from the rest of societies rules.

    Right Meg?

  • SJ00

    Lets start a tally of Schools Vs Chartered Schools:
    Registered teachers convicted: 22 (guessing, I’m sure its more)
    Chartered school teachers convicted: 0 (granted they don’t exist yet but will update if and when one goes bad).

  • Why exactly is what he did a crime? If 16 year olds can have sex legally and all he did was watch with their consent the what business is it of the law? Whos rights were violated? Sure it sounds ‘off”…..but what seems to be the issue is that he offered money to people freely and consentual engaging in a perfectly legal activity…..mmmm

    • Hollyfield

      The article says “pleaded guilty to a charge under the Prostitution Reform Act 2003” A quick search of http://www.legislation.govt.nz gives the following info:

      Prohibitions on use in prostitution of persons under 18 years
      20 No person may assist person under 18 years in providing commercial sexual services
      No person may cause, assist, facilitate, or encourage a person under 18
      years of age to provide commercial sexual services to any person.

      23 Offence to breach prohibitions on use in prostitution of persons under 18 years
      (1) Every person who contravenes section 20, section 21, or section 22 commits an offence and is liable on conviction on indictment to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 7 years.
      (2) No person contravenes section 20 merely by providing legal advice, counselling, health advice, or any medical services to a person under 18 years of age.
      (3) No person under 18 years of age may be charged as a party to an offence committed on or with that person against this section.

    • Tristanb

      He paid a 16 year old for sex. It’s illegal.

      • Richard McGrath

        So if you buy your 16 year old girlfriend flowers the day after you’ve given her one, that should be illegal too? I agree with JJ – three people were involved who were all over the age of consent. Where’s the crime? The victimless crime of paying someone between the ages of 16 and 18 for sex should be abolished, or the age of consent raised to 18.

        • StupidDisqus

          More leftertarian crap. At least this makes it very clear how left-wing leftertarians are – and why real conservatives want nothing whatsoever to do with them!

          • Richard McGrath

            You have not offered any sort of argument to refute my points, so I assume you’re slinging insults out of sheer frustration. I fail to see what is ‘left-wing’ about standing up for individual rights. However, libertarians agree with the left on some issues (though for different reasons) – e.g. there should be no compulsory military service (conservatives, on the other hand, advocate this sort of involuntary servitude or slavery); there should be no state-imposed censorship (conservatives don’t trust parents enough to allow them to act as censors for their children); and adults should be allowed to take mind-altering drugs (conservatives think the state should own people’s bodies, another form of slavery).

        • Tristanb

          I wouldn’t have a 16 year old girlfriend as I am no longer in my teens. Only creeps and weirdos do. Even at 19 it’s a bit dodgy, but if you’re trash it’s pretty accepted.

      • grumpy

        Nope, the teenager was going to have sex anyway. He just stayed in the room.

    • DJ

      So you’d be happy if this was your daughter or son involved? You’d be happy if this was the teacher entrusted to take the team away for an out of town tour?

      You need to be able to trust your teachers to do what you would do with your kids. I don’t know about you, but I would not prostitute my kids out!

    • James M

      He was charged under the Prostitution Reform Act 2003 which i think you will find requires participating parties to be of 18 years or older. remember you still have to be 18 to purchase porn.

      • Mr_Blobby

        So you can engage in sex at 16 but have to be 18 to watch it.

        • WayneO

          Yes. When involved in the act lights off and close your eyes. Thinking of England is optional.

        • Tristanb

          It’s the payment that makes it illegal.

    • Blair Mulholland

      I think the general view is that, while 16 year olds are old enough to engage in consensual sex, they are not old enough to engage in prostitution. That seems fair enough to me, and fair enough that the guy got pinged for it. Yes I recognise that, had he not paid for it, no crime would have been committed, and that seems a bit silly, but the premise, that a 16yo is too young to be solicited for sex (with anyone) with money, still seems a sound one to me.

      No, I don’t think it should be illegal for the fellow to watch 16yos get it on, but I don’t think he should be allowed to keep his job either.

    • Lion_ess

      He could have gone to a knock-shop where they’ll perform anything he wants; – business transaction, no harm done. Paying 16 year old to fuck in front of him is different two-fold. 1 – They’re underage for accepting money for sex from an adult, and 2, if he’s got those ideas running around his head, I wouldn’t want him teaching my teenage children. He’s a bit creepy and hasn’t managed to negotiate a valid sexual business transaction.

  • Gazzaw

    He was a pretty popular teacher too. Check him out on the Rate My Teacher site.

  • GregM

    Hmm, so he paid to watch. Not quite as bad as paying for a blowie I suppose.

    • Richard McGrath

      Or a hand job… which reminds me, one of my female co-workers remarked today that I’d been busier than a one armed prostitute on Free Hand-job Friday.

      I work with some amazing women!

    • Alex

      Doubt it was good value. Not like a pair of skanky teens would’ve amassed enough techniques in their repertoire to keep one’s attention. But then I suspect this fellow just gets a kick from “young meat”.

      • Lofty


  • Pissedoffyouth

    TeachersRock is strangely missing on this story.

  • Patrick

    Teaching – has to have more deviants per square metre than any other so called profession.

  • BJ

    Lets get it right. Sad as it sounds, he paid to watch – thats all. Before the advent of Facebook, where so many people just can’t help but tell everybody about what they’ve been up to, I guess we wouldn’t have found out about such an event.