Page 3 of 4

Re: Allegations of abuse in today's news

Posted: Sun Nov 13, 2016 7:50 am
by Avon
rockfreak wrote: And Avon, whether you agree with me or not, I don't think that anyone could be in any doubt about what I'm on about.
Er, apart from me, who posted basically along the lines of 'what are you on about?'
rockfreak wrote: But I understand that any effort to provide logic, evidence and reason have always taken second place to sophistry, supercilious comments and sneering in the English public school education. David Cameron and co. are perfect examples of this.
Keep going with those attempts to provide logic, evidence and reason. It looks like newspaper editors remove all that stuff when they print your letters.

Re: Allegations of abuse in today's news

Posted: Sun Nov 13, 2016 9:27 am
by jtaylor
RusticationPhil wrote:Cheers. I don't think the link in question actually provided any names though nor any direct links? Certainly I though the ch counnections were subtler than the other link to be honest.....
Thanks for flagging a potential connection - I've therefore removed the other link.

Re: Allegations of abuse in today's news

Posted: Sun Nov 13, 2016 11:41 am
by michael scuffil
Plus ca change...

CH has been publicly involved in sexual scandals before (in 1815 in fact). Look up the curious case of General Sir Eyre Coote. And how the establishment (or many of them) came rushing to defend him, although he'd been caught in flagrante by a matron. (No staff involved, he paid boys for their services, but apparently was able to walk straight off the street into a ward.) In the end, he was stripped of his knighthood for conduct unbecoming.

Re: Allegations of abuse in today's news

Posted: Sun Nov 13, 2016 1:09 pm
by RusticationPhil
michael scuffil wrote:Plus ca change...

CH has been publicly involved in sexual scandals before (in 1815 in fact). Look up the curious case of General Sir Eyre Coote. And how the establishment (or many of them) came rushing to defend him, although he'd been caught in flagrante by a matron. (No staff involved, he paid boys for their services, but apparently was able to walk straight off the street into a ward.) In the end, he was stripped of his knighthood for conduct unbecoming.
Yes boarding school institutions attract creeps. And the management, ignore it as much as they can, until they ask the creeps to leave. Then they just move to another school and ruin more lives. Institutionally facililitated pedophilia.
Just like at the BBC and in the catholic church, the people who tried to sweep it under the carpet get off Scott free.

Re: Allegations of abuse in today's news

Posted: Mon Nov 14, 2016 9:13 am
by postwarblue
Harrow in the 1850s when one of my great grandfathers was there is described in 'John Addington Symonds, Memoirs' (1889; ed. Phyllis Grosskurth, pub. Hutchinson 1984). What was going on at Harrow leaves anything about CH standing.

Re: Allegations of abuse in today's news

Posted: Mon Nov 14, 2016 11:23 am
by sejintenej
A certain four letter word public school somewhere arount 1900; petrol was poured over a pupil's back and then lit.

Re: Allegations of abuse in today's news

Posted: Mon Nov 14, 2016 5:29 pm
by RusticationPhil
sejintenej wrote:A certain four letter word public school somewhere arount 1900; petrol was poured over a pupil's back and then lit.
Great thanks for the historical perspective. Nonetheless, I consider that your attempt to trivialize the current allegations by comparison between events that occurred fairly recently 90s with some story from the 1850s, as highly insensitive

The current allegations are still having effects on the victims, the perpetrators are still alive, and those who were in charge of CH at the time must be held accountable for a failure to protect children. The fact that the perpetrators were allowed to go and work elsewhere is a disgrace. Christ's Hospital has failed in its duty to protect children.

Personally I can remember several creepy teachers, along with many others who were just bullies. Many of which I am sure would now not likely to be cleared to work with children. I bet these 9 cases are just the tip of the iceberg. Jeez, I wonder if they had any system of insuring that the teachers who worked there were suitable characters to work with children?

I think that trying to frame this in a historical context is not useful. Instead, CH should take this as a wake-up call. Children living away from home are a highly vulnerable group. There needs to be a full official recognition that the school failed to adequately protect children in the 90s. If no official apologies are forthcoming then it can be safe to assume that nothing has been learned, and you would be most unwise to send your children there.

Re: Allegations of abuse in today's news

Posted: Mon Nov 14, 2016 6:33 pm
by RusticationPhil
uh oh the Oprichnik have moderated my posts again.

Why cant I name the headmaster/deputy head and people in charge of CH during the 90s? I don't see why it is controversial to name the headmaster. I didn't accuse them of abuse, I just said that they failed in their duty to protect children during their reign.

Re: Allegations of abuse in today's news

Posted: Mon Nov 14, 2016 7:10 pm
by sejintenej
RusticationPhil wrote: The current allegations are still having effects on the victims, the perpetrators are still alive, and those who were in charge of CH at the time must be held accountable for a failure to protect children. The fact that the perpetrators were allowed to go and work elsewhere is a disgrace. Christ's Hospital has failed in its duty to protect children.
I didn't hear that you had been sworn in as a juror and had heard the evidence. I didn't hear that a jury of 12 good men and true had debated and found the people guilty. I didn't even know that there had been a trial so how do you know they did what some trash mag says?
You have found them guilty without hearing the evidence and your penultimate sentence is a disgrace. It is a parallel to your boss calling you in, saying that you had nicked the tea money and assaulted the office virgin and sacking you without giving you the opportunity to put your case.

These problems do SEEM to occur in all sorts of schools (it gets far more violent and deadly in state schools) but unless the facts are proven we cannot claim that they really do exist without a shadow of a doubt. If you want to contest the word deadly just remember the teachers knifed and otherwise injured weekly by pupils and the pupil kiled not a mile from where I sit who died at his school about 15 years ago.

Re: Allegations of abuse in today's news

Posted: Mon Nov 14, 2016 7:51 pm
by RusticationPhil
To be honest I have zero faith that they will be found guilty. In sexual assault cases it usually come down to word against word. Rape conviction is about 5% of rapes reported. Only about 15% of violent sexual assaults are even reported to the police. In most case not guilty means they probably did it, we just don't have the evidence. The most I can hope for is that there is a lot of high profile media coverage shaming the perpetrators and the school management team.

However, guilty or not, guilty, these allegations were deemed to be creditable enough (by the un-named CH higher management team during the early 90s, who actually DID act as judge and jury) to result in removal of the anonymous parties from the school. Yet these people often went on to teach/serve elsewhere, is a horrendous failure of the system. Moreover the fact that such a high number of incidents have been reported over such as short time period (which are likely the tip of the iceberg), strongly suggests an institution that failed in its duty to protect children entrusted to it care.

A good start for CH would be to acknowledge its huge and systematic failures in this regard, and then, at the very least to generate and publicize a mandatory reporting procedure.

Even then I would NEVER trust CH with my kids.

Re: Allegations of abuse in today's news

Posted: Mon Nov 14, 2016 7:54 pm
by jtaylor
RusticationPhil wrote:uh oh the Oprichnik have moderated my posts again.

Why cant I name the headmaster/deputy head and people in charge of CH during the 90s? I don't see why it is controversial to name the headmaster. I didn't accuse them of abuse, I just said that they failed in their duty to protect children during their reign.
I've explained clearly on here and in a private email to you why you shouldn't be making accusations of a lack of care particularly against named people, and that if you continue to ignore my requests and the acceptable use policy which you agreed, the consequential actions are clear.

Re: Allegations of abuse in today's news

Posted: Tue Nov 15, 2016 12:23 pm
by michael scuffil
In most case not guilty means they probably did it, we just don't have the evidence.

You have not the slightest evidence for saying this. There are enough grudge-bearers and pure fantasists in the world, as we have seen from Operation Midland and one or two high-profile cases in Germany.

In Germany, these cases would be 'spent'. The highly publicized case of the 'progressive' Odenwald boarding school resulted in no prosecutions as a result, but the perpetrators issued no denial. In fact one, the headmaster, even apologized. But what would a prosecution have achieved? It would doubtless have been defended, and the victims would not even have got an apology.
Trying to prove cases after 30 years is quite impossible. Any of us could say: 'My housemaster XYZ, now aged 85, [whom I have always loathed for other reasons] committed such-and-such an act against me in 1960.'

Re: Allegations of abuse in today's news

Posted: Tue Nov 15, 2016 6:07 pm
by sejintenej
michael scuffil wrote:In most case not guilty means they probably did it, we just don't have the evidence.

You have not the slightest evidence for saying this. There are enough grudge-bearers and pure fantasists in the world, as we have seen from Operation Midland and one or two high-profile cases in Germany.
.'
Within the UK, the USA and possibly Germany there have been cases where people found guilty are subsequently found not guilty, in some cases it was DNA and other modern science which proved their innocence. In one case that I know of the innocent prisoner was executed before being found innocent.

Extreme care MUST be taken not to prejudge a case, especially when all the evidence is not available. Indeed, it is now suggested that DNA evidence shows that Dr Crippen did not murder his wife!

Re: Allegations of abuse in today's news

Posted: Tue Nov 15, 2016 8:03 pm
by RusticationPhil
I think the moderators of this forum have a duty to hand over everything that has been written on the CH forum to the Sussex police. Yes quite a bit of the stuff on this site is freely available, however there are quite a few "scandal" threads that have been deleted and plenty of thread moderation.

One example might be the "School for scandal or scandal school" thread. Do you guys keep copies of the deleted threads? While they might not be admissible in the court, they may well prove useful background information for the police.

Re: Allegations of abuse in today's news

Posted: Tue Nov 15, 2016 8:30 pm
by jtaylor
Anyone who has posted content on this site is free and able to supply this information directly themselves to the Police if they wish. The site is heavily indexed by Google too, and free to read without registration. Any readers are also free to share the content of the site with others. Little is moderated, and only where post name individuals inappropriately, and/or against the accepted policy of the forum (as you have done, directly and indirectly, despite my explanations and warnings).

The CH Forum is not the place for this type of discussion, and anyone with information should be giving it directly to the police. All are also free to contact the police directly about any content on this site, if they really feel it will help rather than hinder their inquiries - I would suggest that a blanket delivery of freely available google-able content would be less than appreciated.

You seem unable to appreciate this despite numerous communications and responses to your posts, and my and J.R.'s next inevitable step will be that you are banned from the site, for breaching the policy you agreed to when you signed up.