sejintenej wrote:A certain four letter word public school somewhere arount 1900; petrol was poured over a pupil's back and then lit.
Great thanks for the historical perspective. Nonetheless, I consider that your attempt to trivialize the current allegations by comparison between events that occurred fairly recently 90s with some story from the 1850s, as highly insensitive
The current allegations are still having effects on the victims, the perpetrators are still alive, and those who were in charge of CH at the time must be held accountable for a failure to protect children. The fact that the perpetrators were allowed to go and work elsewhere is a disgrace. Christ's Hospital has failed in its duty to protect children.
Personally I can remember several creepy teachers, along with many others who were just bullies. Many of which I am sure would now not likely to be cleared to work with children. I bet these 9 cases are just the tip of the iceberg. Jeez, I wonder if they had any system of insuring that the teachers who worked there were suitable characters to work with children?
I think that trying to frame this in a historical context is not useful. Instead, CH should take this as a wake-up call. Children living away from home are a highly vulnerable group. There needs to be a full official recognition that the school failed to adequately protect children in the 90s. If no official apologies are forthcoming then it can be safe to assume that nothing has been learned, and you would be most unwise to send your children there.