Ohio Teacher Loses License in Alleged Fondling Case

(Canton, Ohio) In May 2010, a local teacher at Hope Academy, Kristen M. Marginean, was indicted for gross sexual imposition stemming from the alleged fondling of an 8 or 9-year-old female student.

Yesterday, Stark County prosecutors dismissed the case against 29-year-old Marginean with the understanding that she will permanently surrender her teaching license.

Assistant Stark County Prosecutor Lori Curd said the case was dismissed with the consent and cooperation of the alleged victim’s family, and after a review of the case and psychological assessments of both Marginean and the girl.[...]

Marginean “crossed the lines of where a teacher should be with a student,” but her conduct didn’t rise to the level of gross sexual imposition or any other crime, the prosecutor said.

Marginean brought the girl home with her, took her to the movies and bought her gifts, and there was inappropriate touching, but it wasn’t for the purpose of sexual gratification, which is a necessary element of gross sexual imposition, Curd said.

I don't understand. It appears that inappropriate touching is acceptable in circumstances where no gratification is derived. What does that mean?

Not only that but it's not clear how one would know that the inappropriate touching "wasn’t for the purpose of sexual gratification." No alternative purpose has been proposed.

Tip: Lame