'I did not break any law': Mother, 32, who was cleared of having sex with boy, 14, after claiming she thought he was over 16 says people will 'always see me as a sex offender'

Teah Vincent, 32, admitted she did initiate sex with the teenager at her home in Woolaston, near Lydney, Gloucestershire, but told Gloucester Crown Court she believed he was over 16

A mum who was cleared of having sex with a 14-year-old boy has told how she fears she will always be considered a sex offender.

Teah Vincent said she expected to be being shunned at the school gates by other mums – despite being walking free from court.

The mum of three had admitted having sex with the teen but said she thought he was over the age of 16.

Teah said: 'I was cleared by the court but there will always be people who see me as a sex offender.

'I can see why people think what happened was wrong, but I did not break any law.'

Teah, 32, burst into tears after a jury at Gloucester Crown Court took just over an hour to find her not guilty of knowingly having under age sex.

She told the trial she believed the boy she had invited into her bedroom was at least 16 years old and was shocked to discover he was only 14.

Teah said she had lost two years of her life waiting for her trial to begin.

Her mum Helena said her daughter had been left devastated by the court case.

Speaking at the family home in Gloucester, she said her daughter was on anti-depressants and had not been able to sleep.

Helena said:' This case has wrecked my daughter and it is going to take a long time to get over.

'She is worried that people will consider her a sex offender even though she was cleared by the court. The jury took a few minutes over an hour to give their verdict.

'It is a great relief, but we are still angry that it came to this.'

Helena said she was so relieved at the verdict that she took a photo of her daughter with a friend outside the court.

Following the verdict, Ms Vincent posted a picture of herself celebrating outside court

A jury of eight men and four women today found Ms Vincent (pictured left and right) not guilty of knowingly having sex with an under-age boy on October 21, 2018

'After what she had been through and what people had said, I just wanted to show that she was innocent. The best way was to post a photo of her.

Teah wrote on the photo posted to Facebook; Not guilty. Thank you everyone that stood behind me and believed me it's been the hardest two years of my life.

She added: 'Welcome 2021 for me and my kids.'

The verdict came after late evidence emerged in the trial yesterday about the false date of birth the boy had given on his Facebook profile.

Defence lawyers had unearthed the evidence which was considered by Judge Lawrie before it was ruled admissible and put before the jury.

Christopher Smyth, prosecuting, told the jury that 'during the hearing many issues were raised about the victim's Facebook profile which needed investigating.'

He showed a screen shot image giving the alleged victim's profile and his date of birth as 2000 - making him appear much older than his chronological age.

The youth was recalled to the witness box and explained that he had entered the false date of birth after being given a new phone for his 13th birthday.

The court heard that the boy and a 14-year-old friend had been playing football near her home and Ms Vincent invited them in for a soft drink

He said he received a phone a week ahead of his birthday so 'I put in a false date of birth because you have to be 13 to access Facebook. This was because I wanted to access games and other things straight away.

'I chose 2000 because 2001 or 2003 was 'disorganised'. I forgot to change it when I got older. I have very little usage of Facebook as I mainly use it for games.

'I could have waited six days before I became 13 to register with Facebook, but I chose to be 16 almost 17, for Facebook purposes.'

Pressed about what age he told Ms Vincent he was he said: 'I definitely did not tell her I was 16 going on 17.'

During her evidence to the jury yesterday Ms Vincent said: 'I'm sure he told me he was 16 and I felt he looked much older. It didn't occur to me that he might be underage.

'He definitely didn't tell me he was in Year 9, or that he was only 14, before we had sex.'

Prosecutors alleged that Vincent 'mounted' the boy and began having sex with him without previously discussing it with him 

Vincent admitted having sex with the boy on October 21 2018 but maintained that she believed he was over 16 at the time

Defence barrister Catherine Flint, in her final speech to the jury before they retired to consider their verdict, said: 'You have heard a lot about Ms Vincent's behaviour on that Sunday.

'You may have formed a view that her behaviour was morally questionable.

However, your role is not to make moral judgements, but to decide if she broke the law.

'Can you be sure he told her she was 14 before they had sex or had he lied about his age?

'You'd be hard pressed to find a young teenager who doesn't wish they were a few years older.

'It seems that Ms Vincent had a sort of fascination with this group of boys.'

In his summing up to the jury before they retired to consider their verdict Judge Ian Lawrie QC told them: 'The issues in the case are straightforward. It comes down to the question of the boy's age.

'The victim was a young virgin and she was a lot older than him, being more than twice his age. Ms Vincent took the lead sexually.

'Ms Vincent stated that the boy was flirting with her before he was taken upstairs to her bedroom. This might seem to be stretching credibility, as he was naive about sexual matters.

'Ms Vincent had never met the boy before, but had seen friends of his who were a lot older than him. She said she believed he was much older.' 

'However your role is not to make moral judgements, but to decide if she broke the law.

'Can you be sure he told her she was 14 before they had sex or had he lied about his age?

'You'd be hard pressed to find a young teenager who doesn't wish they were a few years older.

'It seems that Ms Vincent had a sort of fascination with this group of boys.'

In his summing up to the jury before they retired to consider their verdict Judge Ian Lawrie QC told them: 'The issues in the case are straightforward. It comes down to the question of the boy's age.

'The victim was a young virgin and she was a lot older than him, being more than twice his age. Ms Vincent took the lead sexually.

'Ms Vincent stated that the boy was flirting with her before he was taken upstairs to her bedroom. This might seem to be stretching credibility, as he was naive about sexual matters.

'Ms Vincent had never met the boy before, but had seen friends of his who were a lot older than him. She said she believed he was much older.'