It's time for Sillett, Cairncross and Poulton to comment.

This section was setup in August 2018 in order to move the existing related discussions from other sections into this new section to group them together, and separate from the other CH-related topics.

Moderator: Moderators

richardb
Forum Moderator
Posts: 872
Joined: Fri Mar 25, 2005 2:23 pm
Real Name: Richard Bloomfield
Location: Tyne and Wear
Has thanked: 539 times
Been thanked: 446 times

Re: It's time for Sillett, Cairncross and Poulton to comment.

Post by richardb »

I have never known a child witness in a sex case be identified in the media. That has never changed and never will.
Nuances in legislation that we had to take on board 25 years ago don't change that.

wurzel
Deputy Grecian
Posts: 382
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2007 1:59 pm
Real Name: Ian
Location: Reading
Has thanked: 7 times
Been thanked: 25 times

Re: It's time for Sillett, Cairncross and Poulton to comment.

Post by wurzel »

richardb wrote:
Fri Aug 17, 2018 4:43 pm
wurzel wrote:
Fri Aug 17, 2018 4:38 pm
REPLYING TO RichardB

it is not of marginal significance if the whole thrust of the 92 amendment was to provide anonymity for sexual abuse sufferers where the abuse did not go as far as what was classed as rape then - especially if the advice cairncross is said to have given was made before that amendment came into effect (or before she would likely have been aware of it) as it totally changes the likelihood as to whether the advice might have done to protect the school or as a genuine fear for the effect of press reporting on the victim

You are very good at picking up what you believe are nuances in others posts but very slow to recognise where you may have missed the implications of some historical difference from today in your own assumptions
All the victims would have had anonymity as children.

The 1976 Act is irrelevant.
Tell me if I am wrong (you are the lawyer) but I believed for the purposes of these acts the defining age at the time was 16 not 18 for reporting purposes thus it is relevant

richardb
Forum Moderator
Posts: 872
Joined: Fri Mar 25, 2005 2:23 pm
Real Name: Richard Bloomfield
Location: Tyne and Wear
Has thanked: 539 times
Been thanked: 446 times

Re: It's time for Sillett, Cairncross and Poulton to comment.

Post by richardb »

wurzel wrote:
Fri Aug 17, 2018 4:53 pm
richardb wrote:
Fri Aug 17, 2018 4:43 pm
wurzel wrote:
Fri Aug 17, 2018 4:38 pm
REPLYING TO RichardB

it is not of marginal significance if the whole thrust of the 92 amendment was to provide anonymity for sexual abuse sufferers where the abuse did not go as far as what was classed as rape then - especially if the advice cairncross is said to have given was made before that amendment came into effect (or before she would likely have been aware of it) as it totally changes the likelihood as to whether the advice might have done to protect the school or as a genuine fear for the effect of press reporting on the victim

You are very good at picking up what you believe are nuances in others posts but very slow to recognise where you may have missed the implications of some historical difference from today in your own assumptions
All the victims would have had anonymity as children.

The 1976 Act is irrelevant.
Tell me if I am wrong (you are the lawyer) but I believed for the purposes of these acts the defining age at the time was 16 not 18 for reporting purposes thus it is relevant
18. Age of majority.

wurzel
Deputy Grecian
Posts: 382
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2007 1:59 pm
Real Name: Ian
Location: Reading
Has thanked: 7 times
Been thanked: 25 times

Re: It's time for Sillett, Cairncross and Poulton to comment.

Post by wurzel »

richardb wrote:
Fri Aug 17, 2018 4:56 pm
wurzel wrote:
Fri Aug 17, 2018 4:53 pm
richardb wrote:
Fri Aug 17, 2018 4:43 pm


All the victims would have had anonymity as children.

The 1976 Act is irrelevant.
Tell me if I am wrong (you are the lawyer) but I believed for the purposes of these acts the defining age at the time was 16 not 18 for reporting purposes thus it is relevant
18. Age of majority.
Apologies then I had always thought in these type of cases it was age of consent related - unlike some on here I am willing to acknowledge where I am wrong. I remember all the hoohah around Mandy Smith etc which was when we were at school

User avatar
Mid A 15
Button Grecian
Posts: 3126
Joined: Thu May 19, 2005 1:38 pm
Real Name: Claude Rains
Location: The Patio Of England (Kent)
Has thanked: 128 times
Been thanked: 96 times

Re: It's time for Sillett, Cairncross and Poulton to comment.

Post by Mid A 15 »

For what it is worth I cannot see anything wrong in anything Wurzel has posted.

There has been an element of conflating historic issues on various threads, particularly with regard to Sillett, and I think all Wurzel is essentially requesting is a bit of clarity of thought.

I certainly don't gain the impression that he is seeking to defend or justify any wrongdoings beyond setting them in an historical context.
These users thanked the author Mid A 15 for the post (total 3):
Jim Rayner (Fri Aug 17, 2018 6:03 pm) • Wuppertal (Mon Aug 20, 2018 9:37 am) • Otter (Mon Aug 27, 2018 12:29 pm)
Rating: 17.65%
Ma A, Mid A 65 -72

User avatar
jtaylor
Forum Administrator
Posts: 1846
Joined: Sat Jun 05, 2004 12:32 am
Real Name: Julian Taylor
Location: Wantage, OXON
Has thanked: 60 times
Been thanked: 332 times
Contact:

Re: It's time for Sillett, Cairncross and Poulton to comment.

Post by jtaylor »

I've unilaterally moderated this topic, removing a number of posts.

The three of us as moderators use our best judgement, and try to contain our own frustrations and anger (believe me, it's tough sometimes!) - sometimes we don't succeed, for which I give you my apologies.

There are many times where I've written a post, an email reply, and then sat on it for half an hour - usually then deleting or heavily editing it before I've posted it! I have also had to show HUGE restrains to refrain from publicising many of the private correspondence I've had from a few members and non-members alike, largely for their own benefit in many cases - if their words were published un-edited, it wouldn't do them any favours!
Moderating this forum, particularly now, is tough; we're all doing it as volunteers, and believe me when I say I have better things to do than than having to carefully read and moderate topics on here on a Friday evening, and to try my best to remain fair and impartial. Thus, I'm not passing any judgement here, simply removing the posts.

So can I please encourage EVERYONE to refrain from open slanging matches; and to anyone who feels this isn't a well-moderated forum, my apologies - there's only three of us, we're doing our best in what most have acknowledged are somewhat difficult and stressful circumstances... so forgive us if we're not perfect!

So now........
:backtotopic:

Julian
These users thanked the author jtaylor for the post (total 7):
Scazza (Fri Aug 17, 2018 8:17 pm) • Katharine (Fri Aug 17, 2018 8:34 pm) • Mid A 15 (Fri Aug 17, 2018 8:43 pm) • Jim Rayner (Fri Aug 17, 2018 8:55 pm) • Observer (Fri Aug 17, 2018 9:11 pm) • marty (Fri Aug 17, 2018 9:40 pm) • sejintenej (Sat Aug 18, 2018 10:15 am)
Rating: 41.18%
Julian Taylor-Gadd
Leigh Hunt 1985-1992
Image
Founder of The Unofficial CH Forum
http://www.grovegeeks.co.uk - IT Support and website design for home, small businesses and charities.

Observer
3rd Former
Posts: 26
Joined: Thu Jul 05, 2018 4:39 pm
Real Name: SM
Has thanked: 40 times
Been thanked: 32 times

Re: It's time for Sillett, Cairncross and Poulton to comment.

Post by Observer »

Julian

You are doing a brilliant job.

I won't be alone in wanting to acknowledge what an important service this forum serves for those of us who have spent our lives privately trying to work out what a CH education was all about. That it is independent of the school and largely populated by independently minded men and women is especially important and allows for some pretty raw soul searching yet with a mostly civilised and measured level of discourse.

As an historic archive of perhaps the oddest school in the country the 132512 posts that you have curated in total, form a social record that could form the basis of a major piece of social research for some future academic. Fascinating, cathartic and yes - It is very precious. Please keep it going.

So thank you for persevering with what may seem like a thankless and time consuming vocation. You will never know just how many Old Blues you may have helped over the years - including this one.
These users thanked the author Observer for the post (total 11):
richardb (Fri Aug 17, 2018 9:11 pm) • jtaylor (Fri Aug 17, 2018 9:14 pm) • J.R. (Fri Aug 17, 2018 9:32 pm) • Jim Rayner (Fri Aug 17, 2018 9:36 pm) • marty (Fri Aug 17, 2018 9:40 pm) • Katharine (Fri Aug 17, 2018 10:08 pm) • Mid A 15 (Fri Aug 17, 2018 10:12 pm) • ZeroDeConduite (Fri Aug 17, 2018 10:19 pm) • postwarblue (Sat Aug 18, 2018 8:22 am) • sejintenej (Sat Aug 18, 2018 10:14 am) and one more user
Rating: 64.71%

Pe.A
Deputy Grecian
Posts: 221
Joined: Thu Apr 04, 2019 4:05 pm
Real Name: RTroni
Has thanked: 108 times
Been thanked: 38 times

Re: It's time for Sillett, Cairncross and Poulton to comment.

Post by Pe.A »

graham wrote:
Fri Aug 17, 2018 4:36 pm
wurzel wrote:
Fri Aug 17, 2018 4:20 pm
graham wrote:
Fri Aug 17, 2018 4:14 pm


The law may have different prior to the early 1990's but history tends not to judge individuals by the standards of their time.
It does, actually...

Post Reply