Response from the Head Master

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

Otter
GE (Great Erasmus)
Posts: 182
Joined: Mon Aug 20, 2018 5:17 pm
Real Name: Stephen O'Rourke
Location: East Anglia

Re: Response from the Head Master

Post by Otter »

MrEd wrote: Mon Jul 29, 2019 9:21 am
There have been cases (including death penalty cases) in the US where DNA has cemented a guilty verdict, only for it to have later been found to be incorrectly identified/contaminated/planted. DNA is not gospel.
FWIW, I was a geneticist in the University where DNA fingerprinting was invented, and to quote Sir Alec Jeffreys 'DNA creates associations', in that it links the person arising from that DNA to the DNA found at a location. There are various levels of sensitivity and the tests have been refined and improved over the years to provide an astonishing level of accuracy, but there are limits. Some tests are so sensitive that they are liable to cross-contamination, picking up DNA from skin or hair shed naturally or from innocent contact. Finding someone's DNA in their own home would hardly advance a case, but where a bodily fluid is found on or in a victim, or at a crime scene, and the DNA's person and the scene/victim (or victim's DNA on the suspect) are, according to the uncontested prosecution position, not otherwise connected, it makes it rather hard to maintain an alibi or other explanation for the finding, unless of course you have other evidence to indicate that even if the DNA test is accurate, it is not probative of anything.

e.g. if a bent copper gets blood from an alleged drunk driver to test the blood/alcohol level, and splashes a bit on the clothing of a murder victim, then you have an 'association' between the alleged drunk driver and the deceased, who has no explanation for how his DNA was found on the victim other than a supposition that it was planted, but perhaps an alibi that he was in the nick at the time after being caught drunk driving, so bent copper has to be careful and the defence watchful.

And there is the prosecutor's fallacy, e.g. if DNA shows that only 10 people on Earth have the DNA at the crime scene, and Joe Bloggs has that DNA, the chance is not 10/7,000,000,000 or one in seven hundred million that he was not there, but it is one in ten.
That is a fascinating insight, thanks!
robert totterdell
GE (Great Erasmus)
Posts: 139
Joined: Mon Jun 25, 2018 4:58 pm
Real Name: Mr Robert G S Totterdell

Re: Response from the Head Master

Post by robert totterdell »

Trying to follow all of the threads - firstly all victims of sexual abuse can remain anonymous UNLESS they choose to break that - in my case I did and just as well or you lot wouldn't be having the debate that you are!

To break anonymity has severe consequential issues. Your name is out there as well as the perpetrator and this can be used against you.

My reason for doing it was quite simple - no one else was going to do it and the school - CH - was simply going to get away with what they allowed to happen. Someone had to say something - of course I could have spoken up under Anon but that is not quite right.

On the compensation front - well if you chose to bring a Civil case against CH's Insurers it is your right and you are able to claim for 'therapy' in what ever form.

The problem is that when you make a Civil claim it takes quite a long time to go through the system. Most 'victims' have the most difficulties when they first come forward - there is no real support.

I think the real issue on this, is despite what CH have written publicly about supporting the victims, they have done absolutely nothing. I and another got direct letters from them as we wrote to them. The others got nothing until I started to intervene. There was no attempt to support anyone.

They offer support but what do they mean? Will they pay now for 'therapy'? Would they consider helping towards a weeks 'retreat'? Or should the victims just make a formal request to the BSB (Benevolent Society of Blues). For that matter do the victims even know that the BSB exists?

So I am going to ask a simple question: why didn't the school provide a victims liaison contact? Not the HM or the BM, just a person to whom victims could communicate with if necessary on a daily basis. To offer advice, real support and help.

I guess the question is when will the school stand up to the marc?

To date they have failed in what they have done - I think they need to reconsider their approach to what has happened.

Rob
richardb
Forum Moderator
Posts: 886
Joined: Fri Mar 25, 2005 2:23 pm
Real Name: Richard Bloomfield
Location: Tyne and Wear

Re: Response from the Head Master

Post by richardb »

Rob, don't give up the fight. You are doing a magnificent job.

The school has failed you all and continues to do so.
User avatar
J.R.
Forum Moderator
Posts: 15835
Joined: Wed Mar 09, 2005 4:53 pm
Real Name: John Rutley
Location: Dorking, Surrey

Re: Response from the Head Master

Post by J.R. »

richardb wrote: Mon Jul 29, 2019 11:57 pm Rob, don't give up the fight. You are doing a magnificent job.

The school has failed you all and continues to do so.

Hear Hear.
John Rutley. Prep B & Coleridge B. 1958-1963.
Avon
Deputy Grecian
Posts: 381
Joined: Fri Feb 03, 2012 10:39 pm
Real Name: Ed Bell

Re: Response from the Head Master

Post by Avon »

robert totterdell wrote: Mon Jul 29, 2019 11:14 pm ...Or should the victims just make a formal request to the BSB (Benevolent Society of Blues). For that matter do the victims even know that the BSB exists?
A horrifying prospect that the BSB may have to change its mission to be supporting victims of, er, the school itself. Way to go Horsham..
Post Reply