Police: Destrehan teachers had a threesome with a student

This is an archived article and the information in the article may be outdated. Please look at the time stamp on the story to see when it was last updated.


Shelley S. Dufresne and Rachel Respess are both accused of having sex with a Destrehan High School student.

Shelley S. Dufresne and Rachel Respess are both accused of having sex with a Destrehan High School student.

KENNER, La. (WGNO) – After a weekend of rumors, Kenner police released mug shots and additional details on a sex scandal involving two Destrehan High School English teachers and a student.

Jefferson Parish authorities said both teachers, Shelley S. Dufresne, 32, and Rachel Respess, 24, are facing felony charges of carnal knowledge of a juvenile, contributing to the delinquency of a juvenile and indecent behavior with a juvenile.

According to Kenner Police Chief Michael Glaser, the two teachers met with a Destrehan High student after a football game on September 12th, then drove to Respess’s Kenner apartment where the three had sex simultaneously until the early morning hours of the 13th.

“You have an educator, I guess, the responsibility is the safety and education of the children and when it goes outside those lines I believe the community should be outraged,” Chief Glaser said at a press conference Wednesday.

The student, who authorities say is a junior at Destrehan High, is now 17, but was 16 when the alleged relationships began. Former students told WGNO the student and both teachers had been involved for some time, meeting for sex multiple times and documenting some of their encounters on video.

"This Rachel Respess was an English teacher of the victim last school year, so she did have some type of contact and knew him. Shelley Dufresne is his current teacher," Glaser explained.

For Shelley Dufresne this is her second trip to jail in one week. She is also facing charges out of St. Charles Parish where authorities believe the relationship continued.

According to Dufresne's Destrehan High profile, she is a Louisiana State University and Destrehan High alum, graduating from DHS in 2000. She is currently in her tenth year as a teacher, is married with three young children, and is the daughter of St. Charles Parish Judge Emile St. Pierre.

Rachel Respess's profile showed she began her second year at DHS and is also an LSU and Destrehan High alum, graduating high school in 2008.

Chief Glaser said the alleged acts are unfortunate, but not surprising.

"Nothing surprises me anymore really, but I do believe its lack of a better judgment. They should have known better," he said.

Glaser also addressed the double standards surrounding the case, saying either way, the crime is sickening.


  • ccarter

    Being a male, I can understand the thumbs ups and pats on the back other men would like to give this young man. I would have loved to have had a threesome with two hot teachers. But if you reverse the sexes, you instantly see why this situation is not ok. If it was two male teachers and a female student, everyone on this forum would be in agreement that what transpired was wrong. No one here would ever say “that student was lucky to have experienced that”. Young females are just as interested in sex as young males. I’m sure it wouldn’t be hard to find a young female student who hasn’t fantasized about having sex with an attractive male teacher.

    Of course there’s an obvious double standard when it comes to sex and the participants but under the law, everyone must be treated the same. These teachers should have known better.

    • Kazrath ThatsMe

      So you are saying that a male can make a choice to have sexual partners but a female cannot? Or that men having sex is inherently bad in some way because, well why?

      I understand the need to protect “children” from people that have authority over them. But I think it is absurd to think that this “child” was coerced into performing these actions. He knew exactly what he was doing. He is obviously a stud football player and most likely could have overpowered both of these women simultaneously if he did not want to be there.

      But in our society we have completely demonized the sexuality young adults in their mid/late-teens. We not only use these same laws to punish adults that are in many cases barely older than themselves but it is even used against other-children and in the case of sexting themselves. Our hysteria over scenarios similar to this one is just ridiculous.

      • Urwhatufeedumind

        Society has promoted sex to everyone for years. Do you live under a rock? People like u are the problem

    • GIGi

      All Dufresne had to do was get a grown a** man to particiapte and then we would not be reading about this. Regardless of the high five’s out there including a child in the acitivity is sick and antisocial behavior
      Go to the internet and ask an adult to particpate the next time

  • Arbiter

    It’s not “double standard”, Carter. It’s different standards for two different categories of people. We instinctively feel that sex is more serious for a woman, because she can get pregnant. “The woman holds the tribe in her womb.” Women can only have a small number of children and usually died in childbirth. A woman having careless sex was a great risk for her family and tribe, who would have to take care of the child. By contrast, a man could impregnate a woman of another tribe/village and walk away, and that would only spread his own kind’s genes at no cost to them in that scenario. So that is why we have this very strong instinct to view sex differently for men and women. And not surprisingly, then, women’s psyches are more fragile when it comes to sex, easily feeling “dirty” and depressed at a much lower number of sex partners than when the same feeling occurs for the average man.

    • Ant G

      You do realize the reason you said this is not a double standard is because thousands of years ago birth control did not exist, right? Stop living in the neanderthal age, we are in modern times now, and in modern times this is indeed a double standards. Men and Women today can and should do with their body as they please as long as it doesn’t harm themselves or others. And Im just going to ignore your “women’s psyches are more fragile” comment so we can pretend that stupid generalist statement was never uttered. I bet you are over 50 years old and are simply a product of your time because the way you think is so unconsciously sexist, it’s pitiful.

      • John

        Psychology is an evolved feature. Consider behavioral genetics and research into the BIg Five (check agreeableness, for example). The pill is not an evolutionary factor, it’s not been around anywhere near long enough. So yes, women’s sexual psychology is still old. There’s the influence of conscious and intermediate environmental factors, but the core remains. Further, the pill – even practically – does not do away with differential parental investment. Women still get much more emtionally attached when having sex, and they face much greater risks (law aside). There are exceptions, but law is based on groups, on statistics, on probability. Consider the different reports and behavior of men and women to the respective sexual scenarios, statutory rape should be legislated and construed differently for women than for men. (Even if you pretend that all psychological differences are merely the result of social construction, as opposed to partially determined by differential pressures of sexual selection, you can’t reasonably avoid acknowledging “gender differences”. Whatever the source, the law has to take differences – has to take reality – into account.) Stop confusing is and ought. Your agitation is ridiculous. You’re being sexist.

      • Jarrod

        John, I don’t know what paternalistic, crap-hole country you live in, but in the United States, we don’t generally believe in legislating what Arbiter laughingly described as “It’s not “double standard”, Carter. It’s different standards for two different categories of people.”

        You have already admitted why, from a United States legal perspective, your entire argument is a non-starter: “There are exceptions, but law is based on groups, on statistics, on probability.” Like I said, under whatever authoritarian regime you live under, this might be a valid statement, but in the United States, our laws tend to be a bit more deferential towards individualism and personal responsibility. Here’s an example: If you break people down by ethnic groups, some groups have substantially higher rates of certain crimes than others. But when we write the laws prohibiting these crimes, we don’t put in anything about “because this race is prone to this crime, we’re going to give them a break because they can’t help it/we’re going to punish them even harder to discourage the rest of them.”

        You might be right that women, in general, are more attached after sex, and that this is due to evolutionary biology. But as someone who has experience having sex with women, and has known many men and women who have also had experience having sex, I can tell you pretty confidently that in this case, the difference between the means is insubstantial compared to the magnitude of the standard deviations.

        In case math isn’t your strong suit, let’s put it another way. Men are substantially bigger and stronger than women. If you take the most average man and the most average woman, the man will be bigger and stronger. If you take any random man and woman and put them into a fight, more often than not the man will be bigger and stronger than the woman, BUT NOT ALL THE TIME. Now, imagine that you’re trying to pass a law to discourage bigger and stronger people from picking fights with people who are smaller and weaker than them. You have two options.

        The first is John’s law, which will state that in any fight, the man will be punished more harshly than the woman, because John likes laws based on groups and statistics, and statistically speaking, John’s law will punish the bigger and stronger party more often than not. The disadvantage is that in the minority cases where the woman is bigger and stronger than the man, the wrong party gets punished, creating serious issues regarding due process and equal protections. The advantage of the law is that it’s lazy and easy.

        The second option is that the finder of fact (judge and/or jury) gets to look at each individual case, examine evidence as to which party is bigger and stronger, and punish the person that is actually bigger and stronger, regardless of gender. The disadvantage is that it will take slightly more effort to write the law and to enforce it. The advantage is that it respects everyone’s individual rights, and treats individuals based on their traits as an individual and the particular circumstances of their case, rather than based on some amalgamation of data based on their gender as a group.

      • John


        Reduce your hilarious idiocy, in which your righteous lecturing abounds in unintentional irony.

        First, note that I did not advocate paternalism. I did not prescribe, I did describe. That makes your pompous diabtribe entirely besides the point. Now let’s look at the logic of the law as it is (funny thing, you don’t get the “is/ought” distinction even when it’s pointed out; that was actually in my text, unlike an adequate cause for your rambling). The very concept of staturory rape is one based on groups and probabilites. The criterion is harm, the factor informed consent, the proxy age. The law assumes that some number of people under a certain age are unable to consent, and that this inability causes them substantial harm. In order to prevent that harm it makes the sexual interaction illegal (and consent no “justification”). There are basic possibilites to handle this case, they respond to Type 1 and Type 2 errors, and consider economics. Economics are an aspect of justice, because rescources are limited, and inefficient allocation prevents the use of funds to alleviate suffering (by, for example, [governmental] investment in health care, education, housing, environmental protection and so forth), which would be a moral wrong. The two types of errors are false positive, and false negative, respectively. (What I’ve previously outlined indicates, if anything, that I consider the relevant criterion to be harm, not gender, and that accordingly distinctions should be made based on actual sex differences, which means greater specificity. My understanding of sex differences is also informed by a number of academic books. If your “I had sex” comment is in line with the absurd disorientation of your reply, you could have at least avoided that level of idiocy.) Study this stuff. Whether you understand the relevance here is irrelevant; you’re not worth more of my time.

        As for statutory rape, either one advocates eradicating that institution entirely. Or one adjusts burdens of proof (including assumptions). I have no doubt that there are 14-year olds who benefit from being allowed to have sex with a 20-year old person; they are able to actually – disregard formally – render consent. I have no idea how many they are. (Correspondingly, voting age.)

        As for probabilities in other cases, tests of ability are group- and probability-based tools. Good grades at Harvard usually correlate with actual, good ability. But there are false positives: in some cases, the well-graded graduate has poor abilities. In some cases the one who failed Harvard has excellent abilities (false negative). We rely on these tests; the law condones them. Applying further and more intricate tests across the board would make transactions impossible, progressively slowing them to a stop. (There’s no certainty. There’s only probability. When you have two people, one 60% likely to be qualified, the other one 50% likely to be qualified, then – ceteris paribus (excluding, for example, compensation of “historically disadvantaged” groups) – you employ the first one.)

        Read Schauer’s Profiles, Probabilities, and Stereotypes, Harvard UP, 2003. Consider Jussim, Social Perception […], Oxford UP. Your reply to me is misguided in its entirety. But it makes intelligence appear likely. If you can calm down, you may give me your e-mail address, and I’ll consider discussing the inevitably implicated, negative liberty and egalitarianism. I dislike paternalism, but the conflict between utilitarianism and natural law (positive law is indeterminate) is reasonably complicated.

    • biggydingus

      “It’s not “double standard”, Carter.”
      Go on…
      “It’s different standards for two different categories of people. ”
      You do realize that you pretty much just stated the precise definition of a double standard, right?
      Let’s apply your definition to a real life situation and see whether it feels like a double standard or not: Slavery. Does it have different standards, per your definition? Yes. One set of people could be owned, one set could not. One set of people had certain individual rights protected by the government. The other set didn’t. Does it involve two different categories of people? Yes. One category of people is “black.” The other category is “white.”

      By your argument, this doesn’t reflect any sort of double standard, but rather is merely “different standards for two different categories of people.” I would disagree.

      *Yes, I know my example technically isn’t correct because in the antebellum South, blacks weren’t legally regarded as “people,” so technically they aren’t a “category of people” per Arbiter’s definition.

      Also, when it comes to making laws that limit the freedom of our fellow citizens and give more power to the government, “we have this very strong instinct” isn’t a good argument that we should make a law a certain way. I grew up in a rural area of the South. The only major black communities around us were very poor, and full of crime. And if you asked me or anyone else growing up around there about our “very strong instinct,” I would honestly have to say that my very strong instinct around black people was to be a little bit scared.

      Thank God we have a pretty strong system of checks and balances and a Constitution that prevents me from going by my “very strong instinct” and passing a law that puts special restraints on ALL black people so that I can feel safe. Otherwise, we might end up with a legal system that punishes the law-abiding, middle class black family in Boston for the actions of some poor black gang bangers in Atlanta because the law can’t be bothered to sort out the difference between one black guy and another.

      • H

        To be honest, @ 16 having a threesome with teachers would of been awesome. do you know why?…..sex is thrown into our faces more and more in the past 20 years its on tv adds its on advertising boards…sex is everywhere two mjaor examples of this ( the song staceys mom..yes its not about teachers but same thing, amercian pie….wild things which is funny because that was about two female students have a sexual relations with a male teacher…. i can keep on going) play with fire ur eventualy going to get burnt and when u do get burnt you make such a fucking big deal about it….I DO NOT AGREE with the decission and comments that people have been saying about these teachers…seriously for one the teachers could of been doing alot worse could of been dealing crack to these students would you rather your kids hooked on crack at the age of 16 or having sex with a teacher cmon… even though there most probably is…. I also guarantee you, that police officer when he was 16 do you think he would of he turned down two female teachers wanting a threesome? fuck no he wouldnt of. if he was agreeing to have sex why the fuck dont you ask the kid if he wants to press charges…dont call him a fucking VICTIM, he isnt a victim he knew exactly what was going down and he wanted it just like 95% of the 16 year old boys world wide …sure teachers should be punished but nothing like rape of a seriouse crime.

  • skinner

    Of course there is a double standard. The courts are tilted to women,you’d have to be suffering from cognitive dissonance or be a feminist to believe otherwise. Whatever the courts hand out as punishment it will be significantly less then what would be the punishment for a man. Oh ya…high fives to the boy.

  • Norwegian guy

    ”And that was the last time i saw Shelley dufresne..” no seriously, Jail? the boy isn’t pressing any charges! he’s 16 and he wanted it! they probably had a really great time aswell. I’d agree to having them fired as this is a very non professional thing to do, but jail? are you kidding me…

    • High5

      Bragging to his friends and high fives, believe me this kid enjoyed EVERY BIT of this fantasy. I just bet he wishes he kept his mouth shut, because now he’s getting nothing.

  • Bam

    So what happens to the student? Doesn’t he get in any sort of trouble for this? What happened was not okay however the boy consented too. I don’t think he’s much of a victim, maybe under law he is, but at that age, you have all those hormones running through you and you know what you are doing.

  • Frank Wright

    It’s called “Getting lucky.” And no, these ladies didn’t damage the lucky kid either. He simply had the experience of a lifetime!

  • Frank Wright

    Chief Gaser is a jealous prude. Just because you didn’t get lucky in high school doesn’t mean that this kid has to suffer, Chief.

  • bobreal

    SAD, I hope their Husbands FORGET Their Wife..
    Then GO HUNTING for the KID that wrecked their marriage.

    • Shawn

      Got that right, Bob. The teachers should go to jail and lose their licenses for life. The high school kid should have the crap beat out of him by the husbands. And the poor children of that teacher. . . God help them!
      Eph 5:5-6
      5 For of this you can be sure: No immoral, impure or greedy person-such a man is an idolater-has any inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and of God. 6 Let no one deceive you with empty words, for because of such things God’s wrath comes on those who are disobedient.

      • Tabatha Hatfield

        This has nothing to do with God and everything to do with free will. All three people had a choice and they made that choice. Should they be punnished for that choice no they should not. It is not like they raped that boy, he consented the same as the women did. Yes the women involved should lose their jobs but to be prosecuted as sex offenders and have to register as such is a bit harsh don’t you think.

  • Kurt

    I think what’s missing in so much of this conversation is the profoundness of sexual experiences when one is so young. Add into that mix the abuse (and yes, it is abuse) of the power differential when one is so young, and you have a recipe for disaster. Look at the long term effects when all the high 5s and back slapping are said and done:

    “….there is growing evidence that not only are young male victims of female sexual abuse severely affected, but that they are also at higher risk of going on to become abusers themselves.

    “When you look at these men who have been abused by females, and compare them to the men abused by males, in terms of psychological function, they were doing as badly as the men abused by males,” says Dr Patrick O’Leary, a senior lecturer in social work at the University of South Australia.

    O’Leary, who conducted Australia’s biggest study of male victims of sex abuse, says that having been sexually abused by a woman was for men a higher risk factor towards becoming a sexual offender than being abused by another male.

    A study sponsored by the Public Health Agency of Canada, titled The Invisible Boy, made similar findings. Citing four research papers, the report said, “there is an alarmingly high rate of sexual abuse by females in the backgrounds of rapists, sex offenders and sexually aggressive men (and) male adolescent sex offenders abused by ‘females only’ chose female victims almost exclusively”.

    “Yes, he says, adolescent boys are often obsessed with sex, scanning porn magazines and surfing websites, but this process of discovery and exploration customarily occurs alone or in company with peers, male or female. To have an adult of either sex intrude on this exploration interrupts an otherwise normal process of learning and maturing.”



    • Ricky jones

      Very good post. When I was 17 I got involved with someone much older than me. I was a willing participant, but I eventually bragged to friends and the word got out. It ended badly, but the worst part was that once girls my age found out, they wanted nothing to do with me. As one girl I was crazy about told me, “how can I compete with that?” Very difficult time in my life that I wish had never happened. It’s not all high fives and back slapping, and this kid is going to have a rough time of it. I hope he has a mature adult to help him through this.

  • Joe the Plumber

    The older one on the left is freaking hot. She would have been enough but the boy really scored big-time.

  • Karl Max Sax

    Really bad teachers!!! And video tape too? I’m sure the sex was nice, but that is not the main thing here. They deserve to go to prison, and never ever work as teachers anymore.

  • Shawn

    Contrary to what the police chief said, this isn’t bad judgment; it is evil. Pure and simple. Our country is going down the toilet. It is utterly beyond my comprehension how any sane parent would put his/her children into these debauched government schools. Bring your children home and school them yourselves, folks.

  • Magic

    The lucky, lucky, lucky bastard! Back in my day, you’d never risk having sex with one of our teachers in case their colostomy bag split. I’m seething that these young, fit teachers are putting it about like this. Seething I tell thee.

  • stevedore

    Would YOU trust any female school teacher, in the present day? Married, with three young children, she “goes out for the night with the girls”, puts the horns on her loving husband with some underage BBC, then wiggles her skank self back home. Mommy of the Year candidate, for sure. Of course, the competition is mighty fierce, these days.

    Boys, pay cash. You’ll have much better life.

  • GIGi

    All she had to do was get a man even if he were 20 years of age off the internet to participate and then we would not be reading about this. The law is the law which means to leave the underagers alone

  • Car Insurance

    I do not even know how I ended up here, but I thought this post was great.
    I don’t know who you are but certainly you are going to a famous blogger if you aren’t already ;
    ) Cheers!

  • Johnny Walker Jr

    Almost everywhere in the civilized world the age of consent is 16 or below, too bad this guy happened to live in a third world state. High five anyway!

  • High5

    Believe me this kid enjoyed EVERY BIT of this fantasy. The only regret he has, is that he can’t keep his big mouth shut. Because now his fantasy has come to an end. He was a willing participant 100% there is no doubt about it.

  • dickhead

    i wounder how many of you bloggers that are saying this is a crime had sex in high school. Its that we all pass judgement but we do not hold are selves to the same standard. the girl i dated all through high school is now a judge in the county i live in. if everyone knew what a freak she was back then things would be quit different. So think about what you have done in your passed before you judge someone else.

Comments are closed.

Notice: you are using an outdated browser. Microsoft does not recommend using IE as your default browser. Some features on this website, like video and images, might not work properly. For the best experience, please upgrade your browser.