A TEACHING assistant who embarked on an affair with a 16-year-old pupil as her marriage collapsed has been handed a suspended sentence by a judge who heard how her life has been ruined.

Helen Turnbull, 35, lost her job and contact with her two children after she admitted one count of sexual activity with a child by a person in a position of trust.

This related to kissing a pupil from the secondary school where she was a literacy assistant, in secret meetings in her Mini convertible.

She sobbed in the dock at Teesside Crown Court when a jury cleared her of three further counts relating to allegations she had sex with him, performed a sex act on him and that she had oral sex.

Judge Peter Armstrong gave her a four month jail sentence suspended for two years, ordered her to carry out 200 hours unpaid work and imposed a restraining order to keep her away from the boy.

Earlier, the judge told the jury that they must acquit her even if they think it "probably did happen".

Before sending them out to start their deliberations, Judge Armstrong told the panel they must find Turnbull not guilty unless they are sure she had sex with the boy.

During the eight-day trial the court has heard the prosecution allege the married mother-of-two groomed the schoolboy with hugs and sweets, then met him in secret and had sex with him in her Mini convertible parked up in an industrial estate.

The 35-year-old has admitted kissing him, sending him a photo of herself in her underwear and sexting him.

But Ms Turnbull, from Haswell, County Durham, denied their brief relationship went any further.

She has admitted one count of sexual activity with a child by a person in a position of trust, relating to the kissing, but denies three further counts relating to allegations they had sex, that she performed a sex act on him and oral sex.

She has told the jury that the lewd messages were "all talk" and that sex never happened.

Summing up the case, Judge Armstrong said the defence case was that the boy had told a friend he and the literacy assistant had had sex, when they had merely kissed.

The judge told the jury the defence suggested he lied and kept it up to "look cool in front of his mates".

He said it was for the prosecution to prove that the offences happened, not for the defence to prove they did not.

He told the jury: "If you are not sure one way or the other, it means that you must acquit, even if you think it might have happened, or it probably did happen.

"Unless you can be sure, you must acquit."

He then sent the jury out to start deliberating.