Unofficial Christ's Hospital Forum

DazedandConfused wrote: ↑Sun Jul 14, 2019 6:03 pm What it omitted is less likely to be Googled

Well, let’s help google along a bit. Elizabeth Cairncross allegedly negligent deputy head of Christ’s Hospital School during mass child abuse scandal of 1980s and 1990s and former head of Wells Cathedral School, now on board of Governors of Salisbury Cathedral School. Church of England looking after itself again eh? This stinks.

This is disgusting.

Either someone has been incredibly negligent with basic background checks (who doesn’t google nowadays?), or it is, as Avon suggested, mates looking after themselves.

A nudge in the direction of Salisbury/Wiltshire local media wouldn’t go amiss. Or contacting the school.

Genuinely had one of those moments when you don’t realise you’ve been pressing down really hard on your teeth. I remember her well as a very cold and harsh deputy head who wouldn’t know pastoral care or a manner with vulnerable children if it hit her in the face.

So why don't we agree. A total lack of communication or response is an admition of guilt .

Avon wrote: ↑Sun Jul 14, 2019 6:31 pm

DazedandConfused wrote: ↑Sun Jul 14, 2019 6:03 pm What it omitted is less likely to be Googled

Well, let’s help google along a bit. Elizabeth Cairncross allegedly negligent deputy head of Christ’s Hospital School during mass child abuse scandal of 1980s and 1990s and former head of Wells Cathedral School, now on board of Governors of Salisbury Cathedral School. Church of England looking after itself again eh? This stinks.

Tweeted this to increase visibility

Here's her twitter account.

https://twitter.com/iizabethc?lang=en-gb

LHA wrote: ↑Mon Jul 15, 2019 7:12 am Here's her twitter account.

https://twitter.com/iizabethc?lang=en-gb

I don't think I'll bother looking at it.

JR says: "So why don't we agree. A total lack of communication or response is an admition of guilt ."

Well, I for one do NOT agree with that statement. That does not mean that I support Ms Cairncross. In fact, to the best of my knowledge I have never met her and I certainly have not communicated with her in any way. Nor do I know in any detail what she is alleged to have done or not done. What I do not agree with is the statement that her failure to correspond with an unofficial forum is, ipso facto, an admission of guilt. As far as I know, there is no legal requirement to reply to an email, nor does an alumni forum constitute a court of law.

Although these events took place well after the time I was at C.H. I appreciate that there are many very emotional issues involved and that some former pupils are scarred for life and seeking retribution. Nevertheless, I suggest that there is a need to temper one's language and to allow the police and other inquiries to proceed. Then, if they consider that someone should be charged with an offence of either commission or omission, then so be it, charges will be laid and the case be heard in court. In summary, I do not believe that this forum is the place for deciding guilt.

David

Foureyes' post echoes my own concerns about overzealousness on the forum.

WiltshireChap wrote: ↑Sun Jul 14, 2019 3:30 pm I note on the forum many references to Elizabeth Cairncross. In the last few weeks she was appointed as Chair of Governors at Salisbury Cathedral School. I have not managed to establish why her name pops up repeatedly on the forum despite trawling through a lot of threads. Can anybody point me to a post which explains the reasons for this?

As previously mentioned, I've been catching up with all of this. I've never heard of Cairncross before, and looking through previous posts all I can find is that she's said to be cold and unapproachable and was in a position of authority when a lot of the abuse was happening. Hardly a glowing reference, but is there any evidence of actual wrongdoing?

I agree that people should not be tried by online forum, and that there should not be presumed guilt, but rather innocence unless proven guilty. I have a close relative who was a victim (later cleared) of a miscarriage of justice, so appreciate this point as much as anyone.

But even if there’s no proven criminal wrongdoing, I believe there is moral and ethical wrongdoing through failing in her duty to protect and to act upon reports of abuse.

It should never be up to us to declare someone legally guilty or not guilty, but we have the freedom of opinion to judge someone as a bad person and to believe them unfit to hold such a position. Her omissions are a matter of court record.

Otter wrote: ↑Mon Jul 15, 2019 8:47 pm I agree that people should not be tried by online forum, and that there should not be presumed guilt, but rather innocence unless proven guilty. I have a close relative who was a victim (later cleared) of a miscarriage of justice, so appreciate this point as much as anyone.

But even if there’s no proven criminal wrongdoing, I believe there is moral and ethical wrongdoing through failing in her duty to protect and to act upon reports of abuse.

It should never be up to us to declare someone legally guilty or not guilty, but we have the freedom of opinion to judge someone as a bad person and to believe them unfit to hold such a position. Her omissions are a matter of court record.

Otter you are the voice of reason, as ever. I agree with everything you’ve said- particularly about her omissions being a matter of court record and a clear indication of moral failing.

Lest it be thought we are talking in riddles, she was shown to be wanting in the exercise of her duties during Karim's trial.

richardb wrote: ↑Mon Jul 15, 2019 11:44 pm Lest it be thought we are talking in riddles, she was shown to be wanting in the exercise of her duties during Karim's trial.

Thank you, richard, that's exactly the sort of specific info Wiltshirechap (I presume) and I were asking for.

Did Sillett get a similar mention?

This is the sort of thing being talked about:

https://www.shropshirestar.com/news/uk- ... legations/

dsm wrote: ↑Tue Jul 16, 2019 7:09 am Did Sillett get a similar mention?

Pretty much.