Unofficial Christ's Hospital Forum

If you utilise the search facility and type in her name, you will find a great deal of references to her failing.

Having met JR, I take some of his views with a pinch of salt.

Now that is relevant as it is JR.

But you next ask if he ever clipped anyone around the ear himself or administered the cane personally.

It is precisely the myopia that you talk about that has left you unable to see through Vilified.

It is about as relevant as saying that teachers at CH have been convicted of sexual abuse so you must be an abuser Howard. And we know that isn't right.

What has the conduct of others got to do with JR?

In the 1970s the junior houses had staff bedrooms next to each dormitory. There was also the flat at the back.

These provided for the tutors.

You left because you committed a criminal offence. You were lucky that you had it covered up by Newsome as it otherwise could have been used as bad character evidence at your crown court trial.

Vilified wrote: ↑Wed Jul 10, 2019 8:18 pm

DazedandConfused wrote: ↑Wed Jul 10, 2019 7:14 pm

Agreed. Your use of the term ‘special needs’ as an insult is pretty bl**dy offensive.

Yes, that was unacceptable.
[/quote]

So why did you do it? Can't you control yourself?

Thanks for mentioning the Guidelines. As you will have seen, your assault on the pupil merits custody, so can we stop trivialising it. You may not have intended the level of injury you caused, but you sure as hell intended to assault the lad. I am not trivialising it. I can see that a half-decent c...

Thanks for mentioning the Guidelines. As you will have seen, your assault on the pupil merits custody, so can we stop trivialising it.

You may not have intended the level of injury you caused, but you sure as hell intended to assault the lad.

I await Richard's legal viewpoint with interest. The deliberate infliction of force to a pupil is an assault. End of. Legitimate discipline in the 1970s included corporal punishment, ie the cane or the slipper. Whacking a pupil around the head was an assault. There was no justification for doing so.

Presumably the boy needed treatment for his perforated ear drum and so reported to the sicker.

The injunction application would have made interesting reading. Had it ever materialised.

This is intended to refer to me.

There was someone present throughout the whole trial. No one else was.

Fortunately I can say that all that I have reported is both legally and factually accurate.

Well Vilified has put one thing to bed. When teaching staff transgressed, they were moved on with glowing references. We know that Karim was moved on for sexual misconduct which eventually got him 10 years, while Vilified was moved on for an assault which in the modern day and age would have startin...