‘Teacher of the Year’ in San Diego accused of sex crimes involving minors
CHULA VISTA – A Lincoln Acres Elementary School teacher was ordered to stand trial on 18 felony sex crime charges for alleged sexual misconduct involving two minors.
Jacqueline Ma, 34, who was named one of San Diego County’s 2022 “Teachers of the Year,” is accused of grooming two boys and entering into a sexual relationship with one of the boys beginning when he was 12 years old.
Among the charges Ma faces are felony counts of lewd acts on a child, contacting a minor with the intent to commit a sexual offense, and possession of child pornography.
Jacqueline Ma was named one of San Diego County’s 2022 “Teachers of the Year.”
Photo from the San Diego County Office of Education website
READ: American and British nationals nabbed in Cebu for sex-related crimes
The teacher faces up to 165 years to life in state prison if convicted of all charges. Ma was initially arrested in March and remains in jail without bail.
At a preliminary hearing held in Chula Vista Superior Court, National City police Detective Colleen Stanich, the lead detective on the case, testified that police were first alerted by the mother of one of the alleged victims, who was referred to in court as John Doe 1.
John Doe 1 testified in court on Tuesday, but reporters and members of the public were not permitted to hear his testimony in order to protect his privacy.
Vanish mode
Stanich testified that in March, John Doe 1’s mother told police she found messages on a tablet between her son and the teacher, in which Ma directed the boy to delete some of the messages or to communicate with her in “vanish mode” so the messages would eventually disappear.
The detective said she later spoke with Ma about her connection to the boy and the teacher allegedly told her, “It’s complicated and I may have blurred the lines.”
A subsequent search of Ma’s cell phone turned up numerous text messages within a hidden application.
Many of those messages were read in court and described sex acts between Ma and the boy, while others included explicit photographs of John Doe 1, Stanich testified.
READ: Age of sexual consent now 16: Why this ‘hard-fought’ win is crucial in PH
In other messages, Ma described being in love with John Doe 1 and being saddened that their relationship would not last and he would eventually start dating girls his own age.
The teacher was initially charged solely in connection with John Doe 1, but in July, prosecutors added additional charges regarding a second boy, referred to as John Doe 2.
Sexually charged text
At the preliminary hearing, prosecutors alleged Ma exchanged a series of sexually charged text messages with John Doe 2 starting when he was 11.
John Doe 2 allegedly told police that he and the teacher had devised a “plan” for him to meet with her in her classroom, Stanich testified. When he entered the classroom, Ma allegedly took off her shirt and “tried to get close to him,” but the boy left the classroom because he was afraid, the detective said.
Stanich testified that Ma groomed both boys by buying them gifts, including clothes and gaming-related items.
READ: 4 minors rescued from cybersex den run by own parents
‘While prosecutors elected to dismiss one of the counts Ma was originally facing, they requested that several of the counts be amended to reflect that the alleged acts were committed while the victim was under duress.
Ma’s defense attorney, Mario Vela, argued against those amended counts, saying duress should involve some level of physical force or threats, while Deputy District Attorney Drew Hart said Ma’s position as a teacher and an authority figure placed pressure upon the victims.
Superior Court Judge Maryann D’Addezio agreed with the prosecution’s request, stating “The evidence is overwhelmingly clear that the defendant took advantage of two children.”
READ: 7 minors, including infant, rescued from ‘cybersex den’ in Cebu City
Disclaimer: The comments uploaded on this site do not necessarily represent or reflect the views of management and owner of Cebudailynews. We reserve the right to exclude comments that we deem to be inconsistent with our editorial standards.