Rebecca Joynes is accused of taking part in the sufferer as a result of she is a girl

 A ‘pretty’ maths teacher who is accused of having a sexual relationship with two pupils has been accused of seeking ‘sympathy’ and painting herself as the ‘victim’ because she is a woman, a court heard.

Rebecca Joynes, 30, is said to have ‘groomed’ one 15-year-old boy by taking him on a shopping trip and buying him a £345 Gucci belt before they had sex at her apartment.

She then became pregnant after allegedly starting a relationship with a second 15-year-old boy while she was on bail over those allegations.

Joynes denies her relationship with the first boy – known as Boy A – ever became sexual and claims she only had sex with the second boy, Boy B, after he had turned 16 and she had been sacked from her job – meaning she was no longer in a position of trust.

She’s on trial at Manchester Crown Court where today the jury heard final speeches from prosecution and defence counsel.

Joe Allman, prosecuting, said Joynes’ tears in court and her display of a pink baby bonnet, which she has worn tucked into the front of her trousers for every day of her, trial was an attempt to win ‘sympathy’ from the jury.

And he accused her of ‘gaslighting’ – a claim she had made about the two schoolboys.

‘One of the very first things her honour said to you was sympathy has no place in these proceedings,’ he said.

‘You are here to clinically analyse the evidence.’

He added: ‘It was a pretty naked attempt to garner your sympathy.’

The court previously heard how court proceedings led to Joynes having her baby ‘taken off’ her 24 hours after she was born.

 ‘Who is being gaslighted, and who is doing the gaslighting?’ he asked.

He said: ‘Is it possible her approach to these proceedings is that she hopes you will treat her differently because she is a woman and not a man in the same situation.’

Jurors heard both boys sent her flirty Snapchat messages before Boy A was taken shopping, bought a £350 Gucci belt and went back to her flat on Salford Quays where they had sex.

Boy B claims sexual activity began when he was 15 with kissing and full sex when he was 16 and while he was still a pupil.

Joynes claims no sexual activity ever took place with Boy A and a relationship developed with Boy B while she was suspended from her job and only became sexual after she was dismissed and he had left school at 16, so no offence had taken place.  

Mr Allman said Joynes hoped she would be ‘treated very differently’ and they would see the evidence ‘differently’ because she is a woman and not a man in the same situation.

‘We have to ask in the cold light of day would Miss Joynes and those acting on her behalf appealed to your sympathy in that way if she’d been a 30-year-old man called Robert Joynes?’ he asked.

He also asked whether the two boys would have ‘been disparaged in the same way in attempt to discredit them’ if they had been two girls of a similar age.

‘Would the defence on Miss Joynes’ behalf – in our theoretical scenario on Mr Joynes’ behalf – have suggested to you that the girls the were the ones that wanted it to happen?’ he asked.

‘It could just not have taken the same lines in questions because it would have been quite obscene.’

He said it was easy to forget that Joynes was a mature, adult teacher, he said, and they were two teenage children and ‘that’s how she would like you to see this case.’

‘So, she almost becomes the victim and the boys become the perpetrators,’ he said.

Earlier, Joynes told the jury she had ruined her ‘dream job’ with stupid ‘mistakes’ by meeting up with the two teenagers and having them back at her flat, but denied under-age sex.

Both boys were 15 when Joynes began taking each one into her flat and both had been communicating with her on Snapchat where messages are deleted and not recoverable by police.

In both cases, the activity was a secret from their parents and they both flirted with her, Boy A calling her ‘sexy’ and Boy B sending her a message saying: ‘Get your tits out.’

Joynes admitted she was lonely and flattered by the attention after her nine-year relationship ended.

In a letter, she wrote to Boy B, saying: ‘Every inch of you is perfect. You are all I ever dream about.’

Joynes wept as she told jurors their baby was taken away from her hours after giving birth and she now only has limited access, three times a week.

She denies six counts of sexual activity with a child, including two while being a person in a position of trust. 

Michael O’Brien, defending, said he wasn’t seeking to ‘blame’ Boy A for what allegedly happened but for the ‘lies’ he’d told.

He said Joynes had got things ‘spectacularly wrong’ but had not had sex with Boy A and only had sex with Boy B after he had turned 16 and had left school.

Mr O’Brien said Joynes ‘feels guilty’ for what happened but that didn’t make her guilty of the alleged offences.

He urged the jury not to treat the case as one of ‘no smoke without fire’, therefore Joynes ‘must be guilty’.

‘She’s not proud of herself,’ he said. ‘She’s let herself and her family down – she feels guilty.

‘But does that mean you find her guilty without any consideration of the evidence in this case?

‘Does that mean you find her guilty just because she met two students outside of school?

‘Of course, it doesn’t. Because meeting two students outside school isn’t by itself a criminal offence.

‘It was wrong – yes it was. But by itself it does not make her guilty of the offences on the indictment.’

He urged the jury to ‘put emotions to one side’ and reach a true verdict according to the evidence.

Mr O’Brien claimed Boy A had lied about having sex with Joynes because he had told his mates that ‘he had s****** her’ and was ‘stuck’ with his story.

He had then ‘developed the lies’ about what happened in police interviews and while Boy A had stayed over at Joynes’ apartment he had slept on the couch.

Mr O’Brien claimed ‘self-confessed liar’ Boy B had ‘twisted dates’ and ‘changed the timeline’ and he wanted to make ‘the position worse’ for her.

He said the jury should use their ‘common sense’ to make ‘safe and sure conclusions’.

Mr O’Brien said Joynes had accepted breaching her safeguarding responsibilities and did not blame the two boys for that.

‘She accepted she got things wrong as a teacher – spectacular wrong, you may think,’ he said.

‘But she did not have sexual activity as alleged by the prosecution.’

Police launched an investigation after rumours spread around her school and she was subsequently arrested and suspended from her job in October 2021 and sacked in July 2022.

Joynes denies two counts of sexual activity with Boy A, two counts of sexual activity with Boy B, and two counts of sexual activity with Boy B while being a person in a position of trust.

The trial continues.