Teacher’s double life
A teacher jailed for sex with students in December has abandoned an appeal to keep her name secret. Jennifer Eder goes back to where it started.
Jaimee Marie Cooney, now 38, had been working at Marlborough Boys’ College for about 12 years when police started investigating her ‘‘close relationships’’ with students.
She was appointed head of languages by the age of 32, and later wellness co-ordinator, after revealing to senior staff she was struggling with her own mental health issues.
Several sources told Stuff she had been sexually abusing students for a long time, until she approached a boy in an empty classroom last year. That student, described by his peers as a ‘‘whistleblower’’, reported Cooney’s
advances to senior staff.
Shortly afterwards, explicit video of the woman was circulated through the school.
When the rumours surfaced, students who spoke on the condition of anonymity said they thought it was ‘‘kind of funny’’, but also ‘‘weird, and a bit gross’’.
Some were also not too surprised, saying rumours had been floating around for years.
‘‘We were hearing about her flirtations with older students, but we just thought she had some close friendships,’’ one student said, when the allegations first became public in May last year.
Principal Wayne Hegarty and the school board were notified on May 8. Oranga Tamariki, the police, the Ministry of Education and the Teaching Council were contacted and Cooney was put on leave.
Emails later released through the Official Information Act showed board members deliberating about whether to tell parents or the media first.
A statement was made on May 17, confirming a staff member was on leave while an investigation was carried out. A letter to parents was sent shortly after, saying the college was working through a ‘‘matter relating to a staff member’’ with an investigation under way.
One father said he was bewildered by the letter.
‘‘We don’t really know what the problem is. They’ve alerted us to a problem, and said they’re handling it and there’s no need to worry. But that does make me worry a little bit. I don’t like the fact there’s no transparency,’’ he said.
The nature of the allegations rapidly surfaced as students came clean to parents, and police began their interviews.
The mother of one of the boys involved with Cooney told Stuff she was ‘‘furious’’ with her.
‘‘I feel sick. You send your kids to school to think they are protected by teachers and they’re looking after your kids.’’
She heard the video circulated at school sparked the investigation, she said. ‘‘I’d say the boys were showing their mates thinking it was pretty cool.’’
Some of the students involved with the woman had worried they would be punished or expelled, she said.
‘‘I was real angry, real angry. These are young boys ... She’s messed with a lot of their heads I think.’’
One boy told his father he rebuffed Cooney’s advances, the father told Stuff.
‘‘I talked to my son when this all came out, and asked him how many boys were involved. He said, ‘Dad, this is years’ worth of stuff’ . . . My jaw just dropped.’’
Some boys started to panic about getting caught with the explicit video of the teacher downloaded to their cellphones. At least one destroyed his cellphone.
Students said senior staff mentioned it in assembly that week.
‘‘The school board couldn’t tell us what happened. They were very vague, they were trying to keep everything under wraps . . . Students were told not to say anything to the media,’’ one student said.
High-profile Christchurch lawyer Jonathan Eaton, QC, was hired by Cooney by May 22 and obtained a High Court injunction to prevent the woman’s name being made public.
Later in May people questioned why police were taking so long to press charges.
Tasman Police District Commander Superintendent Mike Johnson said police were still collecting evidence, and would not make a decision about prosecution until all leads were fully investigated.
Several sources confirmed police interviewed dozens of current and former students during their investigations.
Cooney had resigned by June 21, and the Teaching Council Register showed the teacher had ‘‘voluntarily agreed not to teach’’, pending the completion of a conduct investigation.
Police confirmed on July 25 a 37-year-old woman had been arrested and charged with sexual connection to two under-16-yearolds.
Four days later Cooney appeared at the Blenheim District Court. Her lawyer Miriam Radich said they were still waiting for the disclosure of police evidence before considering pleas.
She also asked for interim name suppression, which was supported by police, and granted by Judge Bill Hastings.
Cooney was remanded on bail, with conditions not to contact anyone under the age of 16 apart from family members.
However several parents questioned how closely her contact with young people was monitored, saying they were ‘‘outraged’’ to see her on the sidelines of several youth sports games.
An anonymous mother said she was ‘‘disgusted’’ to see Cooney at a game, and called the police herself.
‘‘She was left to do whatever. I rang the cops and said, my son’s just been at a thing and she was there . . . And he felt uncomfortable about that. And the cops are like, ‘that’s just how it is’,’’ she said.
One father said a man facing the same charges would not be able to attend public events as Cooney had.
‘‘Down the pub they all say, if it was a male teacher . . . he would not be walking around town like everything’s fine.’’
Cooney pleaded guilty to seven charges of sexual relations with minors and two charges of sending sexual material to minors at the Blenheim District Court on October 29.
The police summary of facts was finally released, revealing the teacher befriended one student at a school production in 2017.
They started texting every day, spending lunchtimes together before their relationship became ‘‘flirty’’, and she took him for a drive one lunchtime, saying she would fix his attendance record, the summary said.
They had sex on the back seat behind tinted windows in a Blenheim car park. It was the first of many meetings, sometimes on lunchbreaks, and sometimes on a Friday after school while Cooney waited to pick up her child.
The student told police he believed they were in a relationship. She would say she loved him, the summary said.
She took explicit photographs of herself and sent them to the boy through Snapchat, or videocalled the boy.
The relationship lasted a year. He wanted to break up with Cooney earlier, but was reluctant because she seemed suicidal, the summary said.
The student invited another boy to join them in the back seat. Cooney continued to meet the second boy on several occasions, the summary said.
After her guilty plea, parents previously unable to speak publicly in case it prejudiced a fair trial were then able to reveal the scale of Cooney’s behaviour.
Dozens of students had been targeted by the woman over several years, several sources told Stuff.
But because the majority were older than the legal age of consent, Cooney’s relationships with them were not illegal under the Child Protection Act, but rather a breach of the Teaching Council Code and Standards.
After the woman’s conviction in October, she was struck from the Teachers’ Register by the Teachers Council.
She was also issued a first strike warning by the judge, which meant harsher penalties for repeat offenders of serious violent and sexual crimes.
When Cooney returned for sentencing in December, the courthouse public gallery was almost full.
Crown prosecutor Mark O’donoghue said Cooney’s offending was more serious than other cases of teachers sexually abusing students.
‘‘She emotionally manipulated both boys. You can tell that from their victim impact statements,’’ O’donoghue said, reading one aloud.
‘‘’Mrs Cooney made me worry about her as when I tried to stop what was happening between us she told me she would harm herself. This is not fair, she should not have put that burden on me.’’’
The two boys were not in any of Cooney’s classes, ‘‘but that doesn’t make any difference’’,
O’donoghue said.
‘‘Society relies on parents’ ability to rely on teachers having care of their children.
‘‘Young people are significantly different, neurologically, to adults. Their ability to control impulse and make wise judgments are the last part of the brain to develop. And an adolescent is more prone to acting with impulsive behaviour. It was the adult in control here, and the adult who was doing wrong.’’
Cooney even used the phrase ‘‘sex offender’’ herself, O’donoghue said, reading aloud her letter to the court: ‘‘I accept this will involve myself accepting treatment as a sex offender’’.
O’donoghue said he opposed final name suppression, saying it could encourage other victims to come forward if Cooney’s name was published.
The boys told police they wanted the teacher to be named, as long as their own identities remained protected, so police also opposed final name suppression.
‘‘Her name being published would also lift suspicion from other female teachers who have left the college,’’ O’donoghue said.
‘‘And lastly there is a police connection in this case. And the Crown needs to be seen to be not giving her any preferential treatment because of this. This is open justice, and the whole system needs to be transparent.’’
Her husband is a constable in Blenheim and is standing by her. His posting to Marlborough is his first job as a police officer. Previously he worked as a teacher at Hillmorton in Christchurch.
Any effect on Cooney’s family from publication was the normal
‘‘I feel sick. You send your kids to school to think they are protected by teachers and they’re looking after your kids.’’ Mother of one of the victims
result of offending, O’donoghue said.
‘‘She’s really placed herself in this position with her conduct.’’
Home detention would be ‘‘totally inadequate and disproportionate’’, O’donoghue said.
‘‘The section does not discriminate for gender. If this was a male offender doing this to school girls aged 15, I don’t know if we would even be having this discussion.’’
Eaton said Cooney was still struggling to understand why she offended, but took full responsibility and showed genuine remorse.
Cooney had borrowed money from her family to offer as an ‘‘emotional harm payment’’ to the boys, which could have reduced the sentence, but the boys refused it. It would be kept in an account in case they changed their mind.
They also declined to attend a restorative justice meeting with her.
He said it was less serious than other cases involving teachers because it was with ‘‘significantly bigger’’ students. ‘‘This is not a young girl physically dominated and then fearful.’’
‘‘But are these the bodies of men and minds of children?’’ Judge Zohrab asked.
‘‘Yes, that’s why there’s a line in the sand,’’ Eaton said. ‘‘But once you’ve drawn that line in the sand about age, then it’s a very fact-specific inquiry, about what the culpability is.’’
Cooney had not approached any boys through her position as wellbeing co-ordinator, Eaton said.
Sending nude photos of herself was unusual – usually it was the adult coaxing the young victims into sending photos of themselves, Eaton said.
‘‘You lose any prospect of concealment ... Anyone would think that was an error of judgment, because young boys are likely to circulate that, and that’s exactly what’s happened here.
‘‘It’s quite self-destructive in the sense of, ‘I’ve given up and I’ve lost all control and if it comes out and I’m destroyed, oh well, because I’m not worth anything’.’’
The short victim impact statements showed a lack of negative effects on the boys, Eaton said.
Defence lawyer Miriam Radich read Cooney’s apology letter aloud to the court.
‘‘I accept I humiliated and embarrassed you ... I’m deeply sorry I hurt you and brought shame to your family.
‘‘I hope you’re able to recover and put this behind you, knowing it was only me who has done anything wrong.’’
Cooney knew her behaviour had caused difficulties for the college, and her coworkers had been tainted by her actions, Radich said.
‘‘She will for a long time be identified with and defined by this . . . For those who know her, it’s incomprehensible, totally out of character.
‘‘She’s a devoted and caring mother with a close bond to her children, a gentle and kind person who always put others ahead of herself. She’s a dedicated volunteer in the Renwick community.
‘‘And still today she’s supported by her husband who describes her as a loving and committed wife.’’
Poor mental health had contributed to her uncharacteristic behaviour, following ‘‘serious pressure at work’’, and she had taken a part-time position in 2015 because she was not coping, Radich said.
Cooney had since been attending mental health treatment, struggling with feelings of anxiety, worthlessness and shame, and was ‘‘heavily medicated at her own cost’’, Radich said.
‘‘She has difficulty regulating her emotions, and a fragile inner sense of self ... fear, difficulty processing information, a history of self harm and self-destructive behaviours to seek approval.’’
The ‘‘significant’’ public interest had already held Cooney to account, Radich said.
‘‘It’s not a case where the public needs protection . . . There’s no reason why home detention can’t be granted here.
‘‘She will be in a rural community, completely isolated, it would be very tough.’’
Cooney’s children had already faced bullying at school due to publication, and could experience the ‘‘extreme hardship’’ needed for final name suppression, Radich said.
‘‘In a small community, the likely consequences are going to be more severe because you don’t have the benefit of a larger community where you might have anonymity.’’
Judge Zohrab said Cooney had seriously compromised her obligations in a senior leadership role at the school.
‘‘No-one should have been more attuned to the needs of young boys as they turn into men, as they try to develop a sense of self.’’
He sentenced Cooney to two years and six months’ imprisonment.
He also refused name suppression, but granted interim suppression so Cooney could appeal that decision. Her lawyers filed the paperwork on Friday, but withdrew the appeal on Monday – Cooney’s 38th birthday.
After sentencing, the school board revealed an independent investigation it commissioned found school staff had suspicions about Cooney but did not act quickly enough.
Coworkers had raised concerns about her ‘‘close relationship’’ with students in November 2018, but she provided ‘‘plausible reasons’’ such as tutoring or counselling.
Another complaint was made four months later, but no action was taken due to miscommunication and a computer glitch.
Board chairman Sturrock Saunders said the school had changed policies and procedures to ensure concerns were clearly reported, he said.
‘‘There must be a new culture developed within the college whereby staff feel comfortable discussing concerns with the principal direct.’’
The Ministry of Education said it would not investigate the issue any further, saying parents dissatisfied with the school’s handling of the case should contact Student Rights NZ or the Ombudsman.
The Teaching Council had closed the case after Cooney was convicted, but would open a new investigation if they received a new complaint about the teacher, a spokeswoman said.
After sentencing, a parent said he was pleased Cooney was imprisoned, but had lost faith in the school.
‘‘Quite clearly the school has not acted appropriately. They’ve let us down hugely.
‘‘What they’ve signalled to me is that teachers need to make sure their victims are the age of consent. As a parent, I don’t feel safe sending my kid to school there. It’s so wrong that we can’t rely on the school to adequately protect our children.’’