Jesus wept.sejintenej wrote: ↑Sun Sep 23, 2018 5:19 pmFrom Rob's last meeting nd those to come I think it is clear that at, least, the school is not denying them. I wonder if they even know the full extent - there seem to be more known cases to come to court.HarryH has given us access to the latest set of procedures intended to prevent any furure such failures. I have seen one typo pointed out and I have slight reservations about a few more but I think it is clear that the school has learned lessons from the past and is determined to avoid them in the future.
perhaps they could make a firm commitment to explaining the lessons learned, once proceedings are complete. I don't think that is the reason behind the silence, though, and understanding the lack of checks and controls at CH would be useful context for any jury.
Ref rigour. Perhaps the school could provide more information about the doing, not just the written policies. eg: examples of recent welfare issues and how they were resolved. That is far stronger evidence than just pointing to a stack of dusty policies.
I very much doubt if thatr is possible. In any case the written details include the names of the "victim", the "assailant" (if that is the correct word) and everyone involved in the investigation.. In court the name and any identifiers of the rape victim is hidden from all except the prosecution, the defendant and the judge - should this not be the case for close to similar cases in the school?
Victims and other old blues deserve an explanation of what went wrong, don't they?
Victims on a case by case basis - yes. There are many victims whose names are hidden form the general population - they should be dealt with privately between them and the school - not in public.
In those days rape of a woman was technically a crime but virtually never prosecuted because to be namd in court was the end of any reasonable life for the victim - she would be thrown out of her family, probably her town and branded a harlot even if it ws not her fault.Neither do I buy the other often quoted argument that 'things were different then'. Staff going back to the 50's presumably understood the rape of a woman was illegal. Why would the rape of a child be different?
- not denying something - silence - is very different to being open, frank and honest about mistakes.
- it is difficult to know if the school has learned lessons from the past without them explaining what those mistakes were!
- "the school is a very different place now" argument, yet again. It is great news but doesn't resolve or excuse historic issues. Fwiw, Howard didn't give us access to anything, he posted a link to CHs policies, which are, in any case, statutory requirements.
- I mentioned welfare issues. eg: Bullying, self harm, mental health, exam stress. The school could very easily and tactfully explain what is being done to resolve any such problems that arise. Evidence that they are getting the 'little' things right would provide assurance that there is a route for pupils voices to be heard if more traumatic issues arose.
- we'll have to disagree that only victims deserve an explanation. I think we were all put at risk. There but by the grace of God....
- your last para left me incredulous. A woman who was raped.... even if it was not her fault. Really? In any event, the point I was making was about morality as early as the 1950's, not justice at that time. There would have been significant stigma for any perpetrator as well as their victim and I couldn't imagine staff accepting someone who was violent, or sexually violent, against women. Yet when those crimes were against children, it seems to have been a tacitly accepted part of the public school system. In other situations adults would have battered abusers and ran them out of town. Public schools were either full of weaklings incapable of taking that on, or it was ignored as simply par for the course.
As for Jurys, I have no personal experience. As ever, criticism is not much help without suggestions on how to improve on trial by your peers, flawed as it can be.