Law&Crime Sidebar - Teacher Who Got Pregnant with Student's Baby Locked Up

Episode Date: February 13, 2026

Former New Jersey teacher Julie Rizzitello has been sentenced to prison for sexually assaulting two students she groomed over several years—including one who was just a freshman. During sentencing, a judge revealed Rizzitello became pregnant with a victim's child and terminated the pregnancy—then told the teen it happened on his birthday. Law&Crime's Jesse Weber breaks down the disturbing new details.PLEASE SUPPORT THE SHOW:PROOF Wallets are obsessively engineered to protect your cards, your pockets, and your peace of mind for life, or we replace it free. Use code SIDEBAR at https://go.carryproof.com/side-bar for 20% OFF your entire order today.HOST:Jesse Weber: https://twitter.com/jessecordweberLAW&CRIME SIDEBAR PRODUCTION:YouTube Management - Bobby SzokeVideo Editing - Michael Deininger, Christina O'Shea, Alex Ciccarone, & Jay CruzScript Writing & Producing - Savannah Williamson & Juliana BattagliaGuest Booking - Alyssa Fisher & Diane KayeSocial Media Management - Vanessa BeinSTAY UP-TO-DATE WITH THE LAW&CRIME NETWORK:Watch Law&Crime Network on YouTubeTV: https://bit.ly/3td2e3yWhere To Watch Law&Crime Network: https://bit.ly/3akxLK5Sign Up For Law&Crime's Daily Newsletter: https://bit.ly/LawandCrimeNewsletterRead Fascinating Articles From Law&Crime Network: https://bit.ly/3td2IqoLAW&CRIME NETWORK SOCIAL MEDIA:Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/lawandcrimeTwitter: https://twitter.com/LawCrimeNetworkFacebook: https://www.facebook.com/lawandcrimeTwitch: https://www.twitch.tv/lawandcrimenetworkTikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@lawandcrimeSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

This is a sick and twisted case. Julie Rizzatello, a former English teacher at Wall High School, groomed and sexually assaulted two students. One was just a freshman. And even worse, she apparently got pregnant by one of them and then terminated the pregnancy and told him that this all happened when they had unprotected sex on his birthday. So now a judge is officially handed down her sentence and we are going to break down exactly what happened inside that courtroom.

Welcome to Sidebar, presented by law and crime. I'm Jesse Weber. All right, quick 180 before I go into all this. I know I always talk about sponsors, sponsors, but when I'm passionate about one, I got to tell you, proof wallets. I started hearing all about these wallets. People are like, this is the best wallet I've ever had.

I'm here to tell you, the hype is real. First of all, you know what I love? Proof wallets, it is a veteran-owned company, and it's built by craftsmen who take pride in what they make. It's clear, look how well these are designed. Also, super secure. Not only are they RFID blocking, but they also hold up to 25 cards without feeling bulky or like anything's going to fall out.

But again, the craftsmanship is just obvious. But you know what really separates proof is how they treat their customers? Because did your wallet get damaged? Did it get stolen? They will replace it for free. And you can even customize it with images and text and logos, anything you want. So go to go.com slash sidebar. Order yours today.

Use code sidebar for 20% off your entire order today that is, code sidebar for 20% off. Now, this is a case that we have been following for a long time here on law and crime. And today, it ends with a sentence that reflects just how disturbing the details truly were. A former English teacher at Wall High School, Julie Rizzatello, somebody who was entrusted with shaping the young minds of our future, is now headed to prison. Prosecutors described it as textbook grooming, a sexual relationship with a student, nude photos, witness tampering, and then I got to say, one of the most shocking revelations of all,

after encouraging a teenage student to have unprotected sex on his birthday, she told him, again, like I mentioned, she was pregnant and then later terminated that pregnancy. When we talk about the harm that is inflicted upon the victims in cases like this, I think it kind of gives you an idea, right? We'll talk more about it. But I will tell you, these are details that were really illustrated, painted out in court that I think lay out just how disturbing what we're talking about really. is. And now you have a judge who is handed down her sentence. What was the sentence? What was the

prison time? Oh, we'll talk about that. But I want to break it all down, and I have to start from the beginning, okay? Julie Rizzatello, English teacher, Wall High School. It's right on the Jersey Shore. She had been there since 2013. Familiar face in the hallways, again, someone parents trusted with their kids, but then you go to the spring of 2024. And school officials learned of allegations after a student discussed the relationship with peers, with friends. A student have been talking to his friends about something happening between him and the teacher. Those rumors eventually got back to the district's human resources department. And to their credit, they did exactly what they were supposed to do.

They reported it immediately. They called the police. That call triggered an investigation. And on July 3rd, 2024, Rizotella was arrested. Now, at first, according to an affidavit of probable cause that was obtained by NJ.com, prosecutor said that she had been involved in a sexual relationship with a student who had just turned 18 in 2024. They alleged she had sex with him multiple times between April and June of that year, including in his car and Brick Township in May 14th. And investigators also said that she sent him nude photos and that the two had, quote, numerous communications that were sexual in nature.

And just before her arrest, according to court documents, she allegedly asked him to delete those messages. See where that witness tampering charge comes in? Now, the day after her arrest, Wall Township School Superintendent Tracy Hamer, sent a letter to parents. And in it she wrote, quote, We recognize these matters have an impact on the entire school community, especially our students. I ask that you be mindful of our students' well-being during this difficult time. If you believe your child or if you know of a child that is in need of support, please consider reviewing the mental health resources available on our website.

And she also urged anybody with information to contact the authorities. Now, here is where the story really starts to unravel. Days, days after her arrest and after this all hit the news, another former student came forward. This one was from years earlier back in 2017. He tells authorities that Rizotelo had been involved with him too when he was just a freshman. According to an affidavit of probable cause, that relationship involved intercourse at her home in brick township between November 2017 and January 2018. Pictures, text messages apparently corroborated his statement. So suddenly this wasn't just a, you know, one-time lapse in judgment as if that would be

excused. It was a pattern. Two victims years apart, both of them students? So what ends up happening? Well, Rizzotelo resigned from the school. She spent some time in jail. She was eventually released to home monitoring as the case played out. And then this past August, probably because she realized this wouldn't be great at trial considering the evidence. She stood in court and officially pleaded guilty to two counts of second-degree sexual assault. She admitted to it all. And that brings us to what just happened now. Sentencing. What we heard in that courtroom that was reported by Jersey Shore Online and the co-star went far beyond what any of us knew before. I want to start with the first victim, okay, the one from 2017. Again, as I mentioned, a freshman when Rizzatello began grooming him.

And according to what Judge Jill O'Malley read from that pre-sentencing report that has prepared in anticipation of sentencing. There's interviews, there's evidence, there's things to consider factors for the judge to consider when issuing a sentence. And this is detailed by Jersey Shore Online and the co-star. Risitello pulls him into her classroom one day to tell him she had a dream about having sex with him. And this is where it gets even more personal. On this student's birthday in January of 2018, Rizotelo encouraged him to have unprotected sex with her at her home. And then weeks later, she called him over, took a pregnancy test, told him she got pregnant, and then she got an abortion, told him that all this was lined up with his birthday. So the victim

submitted a written statement that was read aloud in court. And in it, according to the co-star, he wrote, quote, I still think about how this woman was the one person I trusted with every detail in my life. She is actually a sexual predator. At one point, I thought I was a special part of her life. Again, we're to talk about this a little bit more. Just think of about the impact something like this has on a young man. He described dropping out of college because he couldn't concentrate, said how he struggles to form normal relationships with women his own age. Julie found someone, me, who she grew close to and could control,

someone who dropped any task at any moment just for her, a boy who had a tough life. I wish it had not happened this way. I wish it had not happened at all. Jersey Shore Online quotes the judge saying, This is the psychological impact of a child who's a student of yours. Not only does he have to deal with the fact that he's groomed throughout his entire high school years that he was preyed upon by his teacher who he loved and trusted, that he was sexually abused by this teacher.

But now he's struggling to come to terms with the fact that this individual had an abortion and he wasn't comfortable with it. This is the psychological impact, the devastation. And then there was the second victim, identified as CJ. And he was this junior when Rizzatelo turned her attention. to him in 2024. Now, while he was 18 when apparently this sexual contact began, the judge made clear that the grooming started earlier. Quote, make no mistake about it, the judge said. He was not an adult. Her relationship with CJ was not based on affection and love. It was based on manipulation and control. She did not recommit to a law-abiding life. Rather,

she found another victim. And as the judge laid out all of this, Rizotelo was apparently, reportedly, sitting there in court, shaking her head. I don't have to tell you that's a big no-no. According to the co-star, the judge stopped mid-sentence and said, stop shaking your head. These are the facts. When it was Rizzotelo's turn to speak, she addressed the court directly. She apologized to her family, her friends, her two children.

She talked about therapy, church attendance, personal growth. She said, I will never make a mistake again. I will be right by my children forever. Problem is Judge O'Malley wasn't moved. She pointed out that in her entire statement, Rizzatello never once mentioned the victims by name. Is that because maybe there's a legal issue there? I'll talk about it.

Quote, you didn't mention the names BS or CJ. Not once did you mention the victims. You apologize to your family, your friends, the community, and you didn't apologize to the victims. I believe that a remorse is genuine, but a remorse is misplaced. It's for herself. It's for her family.

It's for her kids. So after the hearing, Monmouth County prosecutor, Raymond Santiago, issued a statement, and it really pulled no punches. He said, quote, these crimes were not isolated incidents constituting moments of poor judgment. They were textbook cases of grooming involving a defendant who repeatedly leveraged tactics of isolation, manipulation, and control for the sake of her own selfish purposes. He went on to say the egregious nature of the conduct was further compounded by the plain fact

that the emotional and psychological harm she inflicted came at the expense of two of the very same young minds she had been entrusted to develop and nurture. Wall Township Police Chief, Sean O'Halloran, also weighed in, commending the victims for coming forward. He said, quote, the strength and integrity shown by the victims and the members of our community who brought this matter to light were instrumental in ensuring justice was served. Their actions reflect the values of a community that refuses to remain silent in the face of wrongdoing. So now the question is, what's her punishment, right? What did Rizzatello get? Judge O'Malley, in the end, sentenced her to 10 years in New Jersey state prison.

And she's going to have to register as a sex offender under Megan's law. We'll talk about that when she's released. She's also going to be on parole supervision for the rest of her life. She is also permanently barred from ever holding public office or teaching again. She also cannot contact the victims in any way. There's going to be protective orders put in place. And look, her defense attorney had asked for just five years, citing her lack of prior criminal record, the impact of her children.

Now, the judge wasn't persuaded by that, although I will say for each of the charges that she pled guilty to, there was 10 years. So it could have been maybe 20 years, right? Stacked them together serving 10 years, both charges concurrently. I want to talk about that too. But when it came to mitigating evidence, it didn't really seem the judge was persuaded, pointing to the vulnerability of the victims, the breach of trust, the fact that after the first victim, she simply found another. And that's what I want to talk about now. Okay, time to talk about this with Mike Corbinix, criminal defense attorney, hasn't been on the show.

in quite some time. I don't know why. He's probably super busy. Maybe he doesn't like me. I don't know. Who knows? Who knows what the reason is? But we have Mike. No, super busy's right. Yeah, super busy, super busy. Mike, I want to start just with something that's on my head with this. Were you surprised at the sentence, what do I mean? 10 years is a long time. It's a long time. But when she was, she could have faced, it was 10 years on each count that she pled guilty to to run the sentences concurrently, meaning at the same time. 10 years for what she did. What do you think? I was a little surprised at that.

I was a little surprised at that. And I was a former actually way back when when I was a prosecutor in Hudson County, I was in the sex crimes unit. So I was used to this kind of thing. And the very fact that this was her first offense and that it sort of was a situation where she had two different victims, but it was all within the same realm of what she was doing. I was very surprised that at a second degree for someone with no prior convictions,

that that range is five to ten years. And to give the maximum of ten years, I was very surprised seeing that the fact that she didn't have any prior convictions of the... Well, I mean, the judge could have gone even more. I mean, again, like, if it was ten years on each charge, the judge could have even got any more. And the judge during the course of the sentencing wasn't happy with her. Didn't like that she was shaking her head. He goes, these are the facts. At one point, the judge says, I don't like to be interrupted.

Don't do it. Stop shaking your head. These are the facts. Talked about a grooming campaign. I was thinking maybe it would have gone above 10 years. Well, I would obviously could have been consecutive because it was two different victims here. But the very fact that it was sort of out of the same situation and the same area in which she was working. and she had no priors.

I could see why they would run it concurrent rather than consecutive. And it wasn't a violent offense as well. And even though they were young kids and the law gets that way, they were obviously consenting to what was occurring. Well, Judge O'Malley said this is grooming. It is traditional grooming that I see every week here in this courthouse. This is the behavior of a standard sexual predator. You're no different.

What were your thoughts? I mean, because again, this is not the first case that I've covered of a teacher, an educator, an administrator who was accused or convicted or pled guilty to the sexual abuse of children or students, whether they're male or female. And this is, it appears to have the hallmarks of a characteristic grooming campaign, even the way that she did it. Yeah, no, I mean, it was, it's a horrible offense, especially the fact. that it's someone who's a teacher who's supervising these children. But also, though, and maybe I'm just sounding too much like a criminal defense attorney in this matter, but it is a, she had no prior conviction. She was very voluntary from what I saw with, you know, giving, giving her plea here and not challenging any of the allegations against her, although there probably wasn't any challenge there, but usually you would think that someone who has got no prior convictions,

especially at that age, you would give a sentence maybe in the middle between the five to 10, because once they're off, they're going to be on supervised release. And if they violate again, then you had to put them back. So at least you're trying to put them on a rehabilitation sort of situation where they're going to put their lives forward and move correctly. But this was a horrible kind of crime, but that's a lot of time in prison for someone in this kind of offense, I think, with no prior to highlight. I want to highlight there was something there where it seemed. People might look at this and say, wait, what's the harm?

I don't get the harm. And the judge was clear about that. The judge referenced the section of the pre-sentencing investigation report. By the way, before we get it, a PSI, how significant is that in terms of a sentence, how important is preparing that pre-sentence investigative report? And what is that report? Well, I think it's very important. And I think you're making a very good point here is because a lot of times what's there in that report is the victim statement as to how they feel and how they were treated and what they think should be done.

And that has a lot of effect on the judge because if someone said, like, I know she violated the law, but I was going along with it anyway, that would seem to give the judge a little bit more of a reduction kind of. of situation. But if the victim says I was totally forced to do what I did, this was horrible, I had no consent to this, I didn't want to be involved in this regardless of anything. So I think that has a strong view on the judge. And I think you're making a good point about that, because that's a huge influence. So Judge O'Malley said there was a paragraph of the PSI that I had to read more than once. And it was about this idea. And I think what makes this an aggravating case indifference is how this defendant encouraged this student to have sex without protection and that she got pregnant and then she ended the pregnancy. And Judge O'Malley said, this is the psychological

impact of a child who's a student of yours. Not only does he have to deal with the fact that he's groomed throughout his entire high school years that he was preyed upon by his teacher who he loved and trusted. But now he's struggling to come to terms with the fact that this individual had an abortion and wasn't comfortable with it, this is the psychological impact, the devastation. There is something to that I think we have to address. You're talking about someone so young, formidable years, this is going to have an impact. You have to imagine on the rest of his life. I mean, talk to me about sometimes people don't recognize what the harm is here, right? And particularly, I hate to say it, sometimes it depends upon who the victim is.

if they're male or female, what the teacher looks like. There's a bias. There's a stigma. It's different. But this is a big impact. There is tremendous harm here. Absolutely. I mean, you have someone who's this young and you're telling them now he's going to be a father

and he's still trying to put his life forward. And the very fact that someone who's a teacher who he probably trusted because she was a teacher and she had so much influence on her and that's why it's such a high level. level crime because you're taking advantage so much of someone who is not yet fully mature or aware of what's going on. This is just horrible. And it puts, I can't imagine what this young man's going through for the rest of his life having this sort of incident at such a young age and how he's ever going to be comfortable in any future relationships. And that's probably why the judge was so hard on the sentencing here because the penalty was so strong because the penalty was so strong

because the influence on the victims was so strong. And it's something the victims, like you pointed out, is never going to forget. And by the way, the judge even said, with respect to one victim, although the sexual episodes, the intercourse occurred after he had turned 18, the judge said, make no mistake about it. He was not an adult. Really kind of criticized the defense's narrative that this was a relationship based on love or affection. Quote, your relationship with CJ was not based on affection and love. It was based on manipulation and control.

You had a victim impact statement for this other victim that was read into the record by the assistant prosecutor. And it was interesting because this victim impact statement said, I do not think Julie is evil, but I do believe she needs serious mental help. And the judge said, no kid should have the feeling of sickening anxiety and panic attacks while just trying to get through school because it was indicated that this individual had to, you know, was dropping out of college, couldn't concentrate. This had this effect on him. He struggles to form normal relationships. And the judge said he describes how he was falling in love.

He was a child. I mean, that, again, the idea of what was persuading the judge's sentence here. Absolutely. And I mean, and what persuaded the judge, too, is the very fact of the way New Jersey writes that statute with the, the age range of the victims here. And it points out that the victims in this age range still aren't fully mature at this point in time. They're not really aware of what they're getting themselves into.

And when you have a teacher who they trust and feel like this is my teacher, so I'm going to follow what my teacher says, puts them in a horrible situation. And I think that's why the judge really showed that this was more than just a, kind of rape, for lack of a better term, physical. This was a mental thing where you just took such advantage of your students that they had no control over what you were telling them,

and they just thought what you said was right, and it wasn't right, because it has ruined their lives. The defense had been asking for five years. Again, she was sentenced to 10. I wonder if one of the reasons, one of the aggravating factors is that, and I think the judge said this is that after the first relationship ended, you had several years go by, and then she gets into the second relationship, right? She abuses this other victim. And the judge said, she did not recommit to a law-abiding life. Rather, she found another victim. You think that's one of the aggravating factors? I can't let you out earlier than, you know, earlier than 10 years. You might reoffend. Well, I think that's a very big aggravating factor. And also, too, is, you know, when you're

using these factors in sentencing, you don't need to proofs beyond a reasonable doubt for the judge. And I'm sure the judge had some feeling as like, are these the only two people who reported what she was doing or was she doing this to others? And I think that's something that would have a big influence on it. And the very fact that you went from one incident where you made the mistake and committed a crime, and then you went and committed another crime, it shows you really weren't making a mistake, it's you had an attention to take advantage of the people you were responsible for. And I think that's what really influenced the judge. I thought it was interesting. She made a statement herself. She goes, I will never make a mistake again. I will be right by my

children forever. And the judge, you know, acknowledged what she said, but she goes, you didn't mention once the name's BS or CJ. Not once did you mention the victims. I believe that her remorse is genuine, but her remorse is misplaced. It's for herself. It's for her family. It's for her kids. I've seen that so many times in sentencing, you know, where – and it's interesting because I don't know what the legal rule is here. Maybe you can clarify for me. If you have a defendant who's being sentenced and goes out on the record and goes, I'm so sorry for what I did to them. I'm so sorry for the harm that I caused them. I was wrong.

But does that affect her appeal if she makes an admission like that during sentencing? So I do wonder whether or not you're kind of in a tough place. A judge will say you didn't once acknowledge what you did. but on the other hand, if she has an appeal and a right to an appeal, if she makes an admission about what she did, won't that affect her chances of appeal? I don't know. You tell me. Well, it could affect her chances of the appeal, but still, though, if the appeal is based on a legal kind of misapplication, then the admission really has nothing to do with it because it's the point where you got to where you had to make the admission. you know what I'm saying? So in other words, you're saying an appeal that's made like there was a problem in jury selection

or there was a piece of evidence that was allowed in that shouldn't have been allowed in or there was a judge's ruling that biased the jury. You're saying like you can still make a successful appeal on those legal grounds. There was a mistake that the trial court made. It doesn't matter what she said in sentencing and admitted. That's not the issue. Correct. Correct. Because you've got to go one step at a time.

Right. I want to ask you about this. So when she gets out. She asked you, by the way, I don't know in New Jersey, is there early release? Well, yeah, I mean, she's not going to do it all, all every day of 10 years. Yeah, she gets 17 days of jail credit, but I didn't know if she gets like early release, if she has to serve like 85% or anything like that. It's usually about a third.

85% is usually in the federal system. You hear that more. Okay. But there's so many different factors once you get in prison of, you know, how you go forward. If, you know, you're taking classes, if you're showing that you're making an improvement, you can get more credits than someone else. And as long as you have no violations while you're in there. By the way, she has to serve her time in a regular state prison facility, not the adult diagnostic and treatment center. What does that mean for her? What is that life like?

Well, it's, I'm a little surprised at that, especially for someone with no prior convictions, because I would think you would rather have someone who is. got to do time, be in a situation where they could be in a program that's more helpful to putting their life on track rather than sitting in a prison where you're just getting a penalty and you're sitting in the prison where you're just going in and out of yourself. And I think that's a little bit, I'm not really clear on why the judge would do that. Well, what, can you emphasize what that is, the adult diagnostic and treatment center if you know? Yeah, it's basically where you're getting mental health treatment and you're, you're,

in a place where you're working with people who are helping you with your mental health problem, so you do not recommit another crime with sexual abuse. And I just was very surprised that the judge would take a stance on that and not just let it go to the prison system and see what they think is best for that person, because they still have that same sentencing. So I don't see what the difference is of where they spend it, if they could be spending it. in a place that helps improve their life for when they get out because she's not spending the rest of her life in prison. Yeah, when she gets out, she has to register under Megan's law and be subject to parole

supervision for life. Can you tell us what that is, Megan's Law? That's basically saying that you're a sexual offender, and anytime you apply for a job or anything, everybody will see that you have a sexual offense that you've committed prior to it, and it will affect your life going forward, and it could keep you out of certain places that won't allow people who are committed who have committed sexual offenses. And she also has to have restraining orders put in place, prohibiting any contact with either of the victims in this case. If she violates any of that, what happens?

That's a violation of her parole and she could be imprisoned once again. And the violations of those are not proof beyond the reasonable doubt. It's just a preponderance of the evidence. Lower standard, lower standard. much longer standard. Mike Corbinix, thank you so much for taking the time. I really appreciate it. Thank you.

It's always great being on with you. And that's all we have for you right now here on Sidebar, everybody. Thank you so much for joining us. And as always, please subscribe on YouTube, Apple Podcast, Spotify, wherever you should get your podcast.

You can also check us out on NBC's Peacock. We've got Sidebar episodes up there too. If you want to follow me, ex-instagram, my News Nation show, Jesse Weber Live, Monday through Friday, 11 p.m. Eastern. I'll see you next time.