Staggering number of times glamorous teacher is accused of sleeping with student as husband stands by her side amid fresh claims
A glamorous teacher accused of grooming an underage student allegedly slept the teen boy at least 50 times.
Christina Formella, 30, faced an Illinois court on Tuesday as she was hit with 52 new charges, supported by her loyal husband Michael, who has stood by her side throughout the scandal.
The teacher and soccer coach is now accused of additional counts of sexual assault, indecent solicitation of a child, grooming and aggravated criminal sexual abuse.
According to the new complaint, Formella groomed a 15-year-old male student and then had sex with him at least 45 times at Downers Grove South High School while classes were in session, and another five times at her home.
She was the boy's soccer coach and tutor.
The alleged abuse began in January 2023 and continued through at least August 2024. It was only discovered when the student's mother found disturbing messages between the two when she logged into her son's iCloud account.
'The new allegations against Ms. Formella, including the allegations of grooming and that the abuse lasted nearly two years, are beyond disturbing,' State Attorney Robert Berlin said.
'I thank the victim in this case for having the courage to come forward during what I image is an extremely difficult time for him.'
Prosecutor Jaclyn McAndrew told the court that the new evidence suggests Formella first began contacting the boy when he was just 14 years old.
The contact, McAndrew said, lasted far longer than prosecutors initially believed when she was initially charged.
Formella was arrested in March during a traffic stop outside of Chicago and initially charged with just three criminal counts. She has pleaded not guilty.
'She is unbelieving conniving, and she is unbelieving controlling,' McAndrew told the judge, according to the Daily Herald.
McAndrew claimed Formella had told the boy she did not intend to marry her husband, and that he was having an affair with her best friend.
Formella allegedly told him that her husband would leave her and she would come into millions of dollars.
It is also alleged that she was texting the boy while on a vacation with her husband in Italy.
Shocking police bodycam footage captured the moment she was arrested as she sat in her car next to her husband.
DuPage County prosecutors claimed that during her police interview, Formella tried to portray her victim as a boy obsessed with a teacher because she's 'good looking' and claimed her husband was aware of the situation.
'Throughout her interview, [Formella] tried to paint [the accuser] as her 'stalker' and claimed that her husband was aware,' prosecutors said in court documents obtained by the New York Post.
However, her husband told investigators it was the first time he had heard about a situation involving the boy.
'Oddly enough, her husband told detectives that he knows nothing about [the accuser] beyond his status as a soccer player,' prosecutors said.
Formella allegedly sent shockingly lewd messages to the boy, telling him how much she 'loves him' and 'loves having sex' with him.
The teacher has maintained that she never sexually assaulted the student and that 'everybody comes after her because she is good-looking,' according to court documents.
She confessed to police that she 'cared too much' about the student, but claimed that he broke into her phone and sent the text messages as blackmail.
'She claimed that one day, [the boy], had grabbed her phone unattended, had entered her passcode... had sent the message to his phone, had then deleted the message from her phone, and had saved it to his phone as blackmail,' the documents said.
Formella's next court appearance is scheduled for August 4, 2025.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Times
2 hours ago
- Times
The missing link in the grooming gangs report: cousin marriage
When the US Department of Defence set up an interrogation unit at Guantanamo Bay after 9/11, it conducted a detailed study on the suspected terrorists it held. Agents wanted to understand the links between them, the way they had worked together, the better to infiltrate their wider networks. They found nothing. Diddly squat. They conducted audits, led themselves on a merry dance, but achieved zilch. • 'Wrongly prosecuted' grooming gang victims denied compensation Then they hired someone who understood the culture of the people they'd apprehended; someone steeped in Arabic mores. She instantly spotted a pattern in the names of the suspects. A startlingly high proportion were from two clans: the Qahtani and the Utaybi. When she mentioned this to her DoD colleagues, their first question was: what the hell is a clan? Only after she explained the significance of these social institutions, the subtle pattern of names that indicate clan affiliations and the codes of honour and secrecy that make them powerful vehicles for group action did they see the point. The agents were then able to infiltrate the networks and prevent future atrocities. Why am I telling you this? Well, because I read Baroness Casey of Blackstock's report on the rape gangs scandal with rising levels of frustration — indeed much the same emotion with which I read her 2016 report on social integration. I don't doubt Casey's work rate or integrity. But I think that, somewhat like the DoD at Guantanamo, she couldn't see what was before her eyes because she lacked the appropriate analytical lens. • 'Whitehall tried to block Rotherham grooming scandal exposé' You see, to understand many of the most urgent failures of integration, you need to understand the clan. These groups are held together not just by ideology or religion; they are cemented by cousin marriage, a common practice in Arabic cultures and, in the UK, many Pakistani immigrant communities, particularly those hailing from Kashmir. By marrying within small, tightknit groups, they ensure everything is kept within the baradari, or brotherhood — property, secrets, loyalty — binding clan members closer together while sequestering them from wider society. In her 2016 report Casey rightly talked about the failure to speak English, honour beatings and the like, but she missed the point that many of these problems are a function of marriage practices that isolate communities. The academic Patrick Nash of the Pharos Foundation has written of baradari life 'concentrated in small geographical areas spread across a few streets or nearby neighbourhoods where there is little need or opportunity to have much to do with wider society or practise the English language'. To write a report on failures of integration without seeing the link with cousin marriage is, I suggest, like writing on the power grid without noting the significance of electricity. • How the grooming gang report detailed abusers' ethnicity Casey's report on the rape gang scandal was flawed for the same reason. It was a strange experience to read her words as she edged ever closer to grasping the point without quite getting there. She noted that the problem is disproportionately concentrated among British Pakistanis. She even noted that 'two thirds of suspects offended within groups' that were 'based on pre-existing relationships — mainly brothers and cousins'. But then, stunningly, she suggested that these links were 'unsophisticated' and 'informal'. Anyone who studies these things — one thinks of Michael Muthukrishna at LSE — could have told her that this is the unmistakable pattern of clan-based crime: groups whose links are anything but informal and unsophisticated. Charlie Peters, who has investigated this problem for GB News, told me: 'The deeper you probe, the more you see the presence of clans. We know that such communities are more likely to see others as outsiders, of less moral value and, when it comes to young white girls, fair game. The perpetrators also knew that they could commit crimes without getting dobbed in since loyalty is owed to the clan but not victims. In some cases, abusers were aided by relatives in authority.' Nash put it this way: 'Cousin marriage sustains close-kin networks which incentivise clan members both to dehumanise out-group victims and to suppress knowledge of criminal activity to preserve family honour.' • Grooming gangs 'still at large, and the victims aren't believed' A couple of examples. Last year, Shaha Amran Miah, 48, Shaha Alman Miah, 47, and Shaha Joman Miah, 38, were convicted at Preston crown court of horrific abuse perpetrated in Barrow-in-Furness and Leeds. Yes, these were Pakistani men, but they were also brothers within an overarching baradari. In Rotherham in 2016, Arshid, Basharat and Bannaras Hussain groomed and raped children for nearly 20 years while Qurban Ali was found guilty of conspiracy to rape. Three of these men are brothers and Ali is their uncle. I have long advocated a ban on cousin marriage but should perhaps say that I've never regarded it as a panacea. Improving integration requires so much more: ending mass uncontrolled immigration, amending legal frameworks to stop the boats, deporting foreign criminals, not to mention other policies supported by large majorities but serially ducked by politicians. A ban on consanguinity would, though, be of huge value. American states with bans tend to be more prosperous and faster-growing. Nations with bans are richer and more integrated, with less corruption and lower rates of crime. A ban would also reduce the prevalence of the congenital diseases causing untold suffering in Kashmiri immigrant communities from Bradford to Luton. The good news is that Kemi Badenoch has adopted this as Tory policy after campaigning by her colleague Richard Holden, and a poll for YouGov last month showed that 77 per cent of the British people are in favour of a ban (only 9 per cent oppose it). But here's what astounds me: Labour remains against prohibition, despite (I am told) having read the evidence. Why? How? Permit me to suggest that I glimpse through the façade of prevarication a party still terrified of criticising any cultural practice out of fear of appearing racist. Isn't that why it was mute for so long on female genital mutilation and honour beatings and still can't bring itself to describe the burqa as a pernicious symbol of institutional misogyny? In other words, the reason the grooming scandal was not confronted for so long by both main parties (not to mention the police and social services) — namely, the fear of seeming bigoted for investigating ethnic minorities, even while they were gang-raping young girls — is still alive and well in the British government. As the son of a Pakistani immigrant who integrated into this nation (not least by marrying my mum) and came to love it, I find this sickening. One can perhaps forgive Casey for missing the significance of cousin marriage, given that it is a custom with which she is unfamiliar (although, frankly, she should have done her homework), but there can be no excuse for politicians who put cultural sensitivities before basic decency. So I say to Starmer, Hermer, Cooper et al: examine your consciences. Did you really go into politics to be apologists for the worst kind of moral relativism, to acquiesce in the nihilistic pretence that all cultural practices are of equal value, when they emphatically are not? If not, find your backbone, confront the Muslim bloc vote and ban cousin marriage. The alternative is betrayal of the most heinous kind. For here's a thought to focus minds: girls today, even as you read these words, are being abused by ethnic clans operating in this country. Fail to act now, and this is on you.
Daily Mail
3 hours ago
- Daily Mail
Minnesota shooting suspect was a 'prepper' who made a 'bailout plan'
The wife of the suspect charged with killing a Minnesota politician and attempting to assassinate another confessed the couple are 'doomsday preppers' and her husband had given her a 'bailout plan.' Vance Boelter, 57, is accused of fatally shooting former Democratic House Speaker Melissa Hortman and her husband, Mark, in their home in the early morning hours of June 14 in the northern Minneapolis suburbs. He also allegedly shot and wounded another Democrat, Sen. John Hoffman, and his wife, Yvette, who lived a few miles away. While Boelter was on the run, his wife was pulled over with a trove of suspicious items in her car. Jenny Boelter, 51, was stopped by authorities at a convenience store while driving a car with the couple's children inside and found with a weapon, ammunition, cash and passports. According to an FBI affidavit obtained by WCCO, Boelter's wife told the investigator they were 'preppers,' meaning they 'prepare for major or catastrophic incidents.' She said her husband gave her a 'bailout plan,' with instructions to go to her mother's home in southwestern Wisconsin, which she initiated after receiving a text from her husband that 'they needed to get out of the house and people with guns may be showing up to the house.' The affidavit also stated that Boelter was driven to a bank in Robbinsdale, Minnesota, by an unnamed person and withdrew all $2,200 he had in a bank account in his name. The driver, listed in court documents as 'Witness 1,' is the same person investigators said sold Boelter an electric bike and a Buick sedan, which were found during the 43-hour manhunt last weekend. Boelter surrendered Sunday night after what authorities have called the largest search in Minnesota history. He has been charged with six federal crimes, including murder, stalking and firearms offense, as two murder and two attempted murder charges at the state level. Boelter has not entered any pleas and could face the death penalty if convicted on the federal charges. Meanwhile, Boelter's wife has remained in hiding - as the accused assassin's defiant family were tight-lipped concerning her whereabouts, telling a reporter to 'piss off.' Shaken mom-of-five, Jenny rang pals only to say she was in a 'safe' location but wouldn't reveal where she was. She fled the family's bucolic farmhouse home in Green Isle, Minnesota, the morning of June 14 after Boelter hinted that he had done something monstrous in a 6.18am text. 'Dad went to war last night,' wrote of her 57-year-old husband. 'There's gonna be some people coming to the house armed and trigger happy and I don't want you guys around.' As news broke that Boelter had allegedly gunned down two lawmakers and their spouses in Minneapolis, Jenny was pulled over driving through Onamia, 90 miles north. She had their youngest children in the car along with their passports, $10,000 in cash and two handguns, according to federal court filings. Jenny, the president of the couple's private security firm, consented to a voluntary search of her electronic devices but wasn't arrested during the 10am traffic stop. There's nothing in her husband's charging documents to suggest she had advance knowledge of his alleged plot to slaughter dozens of Democrat lawmakers and pro-abortion activists. Jenny has not commented publicly since Boelter was captured Sunday evening and charged with multiple counts of murder and stalking. Her brother Jason Doskocil, 54, had a blunt message for when we asked about her whereabouts.
Daily Mail
3 hours ago
- Daily Mail
Mahmoud Khalil gets incredible news three months after ICE threw Columbia activist in jail
A pro-Palestine activist and Columbia University graduate student was ordered freed by a judge three months after ICE took him into custody over claims he is a Hamas supporter. Mahmoud Khalil, 30, must be freed on bail, a New Jersey federal judge ruled on Friday in a major victory for the protestor. A lawful resident in the US, Khalil was taken into custody on March 8, 2025, as the Trump administration cracked down on pro-Palestine demonstrations on college campuses. Khalil was one of the primary organizers of protests that took over Columbia as the Israel - Hamas conflict was ignited. In the ruling Friday, Judge Michael E. Farbiaz that none of the Trump administration's allegations against Khalil justified his continued detention, and sided with Khalil's argument that he was locked up as an unlawful retaliation for his activism. In his ruling on Friday, Farbiarz said: 'There is at least something to the underlying claim that there is an effort to use the immigration charge here to punish Mr. Khalil - And of course that would be unconstitutional.' Khalil has not been charged with a crime, but the judge's order to free him comes as the Trump White House continues efforts to deport him back to Algeria, where he is a citizen. When he was detained earlier this year, Khalil's case gained national attention as he was the first pro-Palestinian protester to be arrested by the Trump administration in its crackdown on college campuses. Several protests he organized and led at Columbia turned violent, with one seeing 112 students arrested when they stormed a campus building and occupied it as NYPD officers tried to shut their demonstration down. His arrest sparked protests across the country as critics accused the Trump administration of unlawfully arresting a legal resident without charging him with a crime in violation of his free speech. He was detained under the Cold War–era Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952, which states that non-US citizens can be deported if they are antagonistic against US foreign policy. Secretary of State Marco Rubio accused Khalil of spreading anti-Semitism, and White House press secretary, Karoline Leavitt, said he was 'siding with terrorists.' But in the three months that Khalil has been detained, the Justice Department hasn't disclosed any substantive connection between Khalil and Hamas, which attacked Israel on October 7, 2023, and killed around 1,200 civilians. In their successful filing to free Khalil this week, the graduate student's attorneys argued that he was not spreading anti-Semitism when he campaigned for Palestine in its war with Israel. They cited past quotes from him such as comments he made to CNN during a campus protest, where he said that 'he liberation of the Palestinian people and the Jewish people are intertwined and go hand by hand, and you cannot achieve one without the other.' Judge Farbiarz had previously ruled that the foreign policy law was not enough to justify Khalil's detention, and his ruling on Friday shot down further allegations from the Trump administration that Khalil made paperwork errors when applying for citizenship last year. A number of other pro-Palestine protestors have been arrested and freed in the time that Khalil was detained. Following Friday's ruling, Khalil's attorneys say he will be able to return to New York to be with his wife and baby son, both of whom are US citizens. 'Today's ruling underscores a vital First Amendment principle: The government cannot abuse immigration law to punish speech it disavows,' Noor Zafar, one of Khalil's attorneys, said.
