Husband & Dobbie - VERDICTS

[Golfer]

Safeguarding is such that the ring fence is now an exclusion zone. I now need to get a national ID check just to visit my grandson on the CH site. And the CH staff can't get their mail delivered to their doors because this would be a security risk !!!!

[Golfer]

And if you try to get out you are on camera.
Imagine!

[LHA]

interesting - but one of that would have bothered Husband and Dobbie one iota, they lived on site!

[scrub]

Things have changed a lot since my time there then. The only security I remember was a night-watchman who, as long as you didn't try to run when he saw you, was usually happy to have a chat and would remind you to check the doors were locked when you went back to house.
Probably should have gotten into some kind of trouble for that now I think about it, but as I wasn't causing trouble or acting like a complete idiot I don't think my late night wanders/bike rides were the biggest problem he had to keep an eye on.

[Trex78]

I've been dipping into this forum from afar, but felt compelled tonight to register.

I joined LHA when it became a girls house and just wanted to say that Tim and Vikki Askew were outstanding house parents, who genuinely cared and gave so much of their free time to us girls. Vikki was also my tutor and spent a lot of time listening to me, employing what I now know to be counselling skills, after my mum became terminally ill when I was doing my A'levels. I'll be forever grateful to them and to Mrs Simms for the compassion they showed me. I'm very sad to hear Vikki's no longer with us.

I feel confident from my first hand experience of being in their care (and knowing some of the issues my peers were facing) that safeguarding was carried out appropriately and was a priority in my boarding house.

I'm sad and horrified about the experiences that some of my contemporaries at CH had, and how their teachers and house masters responded to this. Their courage in coming forward is amazing.

As a volunteer at my local RaSACC (rape and sexual abuse crisis centre), I would encourage anyone who wants to talk about how the recent trials or any other experiences of abuse has affected them to call their local centre. They don't offer support just to survivors, but also to family, friends or anyone else affected by rape or sexual abuse. RaSACC's offer non-judgemental, anonymous and impartial listening by specially trained volunteers. They can also signpost to more specialist services and counselling if needed. Numbers can be readily found via internet.

[Golfer]

LHA is not wrong in his last comment. The point is that the transformation of the ring fence into a "ring of steel" is symptomatic of the wider safeguarding revolution that will have taken place at CH, as at all schools.
I'll give some examples from my current school which will hopefully reassure readers of this forum.
1) All staff have had to take a safeguarding exam and there is regular safeguarding training.
2) At the last inpection I and 3 other members of staff were selected at random by the inspectors and grilled for an hour about safeguarding at the school.
3) At each teacher's bi-annual appraisal three other members of staff are asked about their attitude to safeguarding and how well they put it into practice.

[Golfer]

And
4) The same inspector would interview a group of random children so that they had the opportunity to share any concerns and also so that the inspector could compare what they said about safeguarding with what the staff had said.

[DazedandConfused]

It’s good to hear that safeguarding is now so comprehensive and I had no real doubt that it wouldn’t be, or that the current CH pupils are at much less of a risk that they were.

I still cannot get over how let down the victims were by some (not all) members of staff. I have always been a huge advocate for the school, have praised it and explained it’s ethos to anyone who would listen. To know what was happening during my time there and how poorly the victims were treated has done irreparable damage to my feeling towards the school. I am no longer proud to be an Old Blue.

[Jim Rayner]

LHA is not wrong in his last comment. The point is that the transformation of the ring fence into a "ring of steel" is symptomatic of the wider safeguarding revolution that will have taken place at CH, as at all schools.
I'll give some examples from my current school which will hopefully reassure readers of this forum.
1) All staff have had to take a safeguarding exam and there is regular safeguarding training.
2) At the last inpection I and 3 other members of staff were selected at random by the inspectors and grilled for an hour about safeguarding at the school.
3) At each teacher's bi-annual appraisal three other members of staff are asked about their attitude to safeguarding and how well they put it into practice.

I welcome the fact that safeguarding is now taken so much more seriously; of course I do. But for me, at least, telling us about the current regime misses the point. That's why the Headmaster's statement to Old Blues is profoundly unsatisfactory.

Let me explain.

As a result of these court cases and convictions we now know that during the period from 1969 (Burr's earliest admitted offence) until 2001 (Dobbie's last known offence) at least 5 staff members sexually abused pupils.

There is every reason to believe that these were not the only offences that occurred and that they were not confined to this 32 year period. An email to me from Sussex Police earlier this year starts like this:

I am a Detective from Sussex Police and for some time have been investigating allegations of sexual abuse that are reported to have occurred at Christ’s Hospital (1940’s onwards).

Although they haven't said so I think it's reasonable to assume that more offences took place but haven't been prosecuted either because the victims could not face re-living the experience in a courtroom, or contemporaneous evidence is no longer available (after all the school has apparently admitted that nobody knows what happened to some of the records from the Poulton era), or the perpetrators are now dead.

I was in LHA for 3 years between 1967 and 1970 while Webb was a junior housemaster. Webb has admitted that a few years later, and on several occasions, he prowled round the dormitories and molested sleeping boys. Was he doing this in earlier years during the time I was in LHA as well? We don't know, but it's telling that at his first trial he didn't confess to the crimes that he pleaded guilty to in his second.

During my time in LHA there was an event (I'm not going into details, but anyone who was there will know exactly what I mean) which is thrown into a completely different light now we know that Webb and his drinking partner Burr were paedophiles.

It looks like all 5 of these now convicted staff members were eventually rumbled by the school authorities, although the full extent of their crimes may not have been known. But in every case the school was more concerned to protect its own reputation rather than the welfare of children. Staff were allowed to quietly leave, at least one was given a positive reference to take to another school, and victims were advised not to make a fuss. Were others that we don't know about treated in the same way? Probably. I can think of one history teacher (I won't mention his name because as far as I known he's never been convicted, but his nickname was b****r) who suddenly disappeared without explanation in mid-term.

Now we have Friday's statement to Old Blues. https://www.christs-hospital.org.uk/chr ... 202018.pdf

The third paragraph is very curious:
Over the last year or so, we have written to you on a number of occasions to keep you updated on proceedings. The restrictions on what we were able to communicate proved challenging at times: sub judice laws meant that we could only share the facts of each case, rather than the fuller perspective that can be offered now that the trials have concluded.

It promises a 'fuller perspective' but so far as I can see it says no more that we've been told in the previous statements. Basically: these people are beneath contempt, we're very sad this happened, we've taken steps to make sure it can't happen again, and if you have concerns here's how to report them.

What's missing (at least for me) is any acknowledgement that the school itself was at fault for the way it handled cases of sexual abuse over a very long period of time. The school's main concern seems to have been to protect its own reputation at all costs. And that still seems to be priority. Just two weeks ago the school placed an advert for a Press and Social Media Officer https://www.jobstoday.co.uk/job/2358586 ... a-officer/

Required to deliver a Press, PR and content writing service, ensuring the School’s reputation is maintained and enhanced across all media including social and digital platforms.

As somebody else commented, you couldn't make this up.

So yes, I'm reassured that current and future pupils are properly safeguarded. But over a very long period of time boys and girls attending the school were put at risk. We are entitled to know how the school allowed this to happen, why the offenders weren't caught, why they weren't dealt with properly when they were, why creatures like Dobbie were ever recruited and whether the school knows of any other risks we were exposed to that have not come to court.

[DazedandConfused]

Well said Jim.

[DazedandConfused]

I also wonder how current and ex-pupils of Shrewsbury School feel, and whether Dobbie reformed/restrained himself after leaving CH.

[yamaha]

I also wonder how current and ex-pupils of Shrewsbury School feel, and whether Dobbie reformed/restrained himself after leaving CH.

If not, CH should expect to be the target of civil actions by Dobbie's post-CH victims.

[richardb]

Leopards never change their spots, although they may pale for a while.

[DazedandConfused]

Eton must be pretty pissed off with the ‘glowing reference’ CH gave Karim also.

[Mid A 15]

LHA is not wrong in his last comment. The point is that the transformation of the ring fence into a "ring of steel" is symptomatic of the wider safeguarding revolution that will have taken place at CH, as at all schools.
I'll give some examples from my current school which will hopefully reassure readers of this forum.
1) All staff have had to take a safeguarding exam and there is regular safeguarding training.
2) At the last inpection I and 3 other members of staff were selected at random by the inspectors and grilled for an hour about safeguarding at the school.
3) At each teacher's bi-annual appraisal three other members of staff are asked about their attitude to safeguarding and how well they put it into practice.

I welcome the fact that safeguarding is now taken so much more seriously; of course I do. But for me, at least, telling us about the current regime misses the point. That's why the Headmaster's statement to Old Blues is profoundly unsatisfactory.

Let me explain.

As a result of these court cases and convictions we now know that during the period from 1969 (Burr's earliest admitted offence) until 2001 (Dobbie's last known offence) at least 5 staff members sexually abused pupils.

There is every reason to believe that these were not the only offences that occurred and that they were not confined to this 32 year period. An email to me from Sussex Police earlier this year starts like this:

I am a Detective from Sussex Police and for some time have been investigating allegations of sexual abuse that are reported to have occurred at Christ’s Hospital (1940’s onwards).

Although they haven't said so I think it's reasonable to assume that more offences took place but haven't been prosecuted either because the victims could not face re-living the experience in a courtroom, or contemporaneous evidence is no longer available (after all the school has apparently admitted that nobody knows what happened to some of the records from the Poulton era), or the perpetrators are now dead.

I was in LHA for 3 years between 1967 and 1970 while Webb was a junior housemaster. Webb has admitted that a few years later, and on several occasions, he prowled round the dormitories and molested sleeping boys. Was he doing this in earlier years during the time I was in LHA as well? We don't know, but it's telling that at his first trial he didn't confess to the crimes that he pleaded guilty to in his second.

During my time in LHA there was an event (I'm not going into details, but anyone who was there will know exactly what I mean) which is thrown into a completely different light now we know that Webb and his drinking partner Burr were paedophiles.

It looks like all 5 of these now convicted staff members were eventually rumbled by the school authorities, although the full extent of their crimes may not have been known. But in every case the school was more concerned to protect its own reputation rather than the welfare of children. Staff were allowed to quietly leave, at least one was given a positive reference to take to another school, and victims were advised not to make a fuss. Were others that we don't know about treated in the same way? Probably. I can think of one history teacher (I won't mention his name because as far as I known he's never been convicted, but his nickname was b****r) who suddenly disappeared without explanation in mid-term.

Now we have Friday's statement to Old Blues. https://www.christs-hospital.org.uk/chr ... 202018.pdf

The third paragraph is very curious:
Over the last year or so, we have written to you on a number of occasions to keep you updated on proceedings. The restrictions on what we were able to communicate proved challenging at times: sub judice laws meant that we could only share the facts of each case, rather than the fuller perspective that can be offered now that the trials have concluded.

It promises a 'fuller perspective' but so far as I can see it says no more that we've been told in the previous statements. Basically: these people are beneath contempt, we're very sad this happened, we've taken steps to make sure it can't happen again, and if you have concerns here's how to report them.

What's missing (at least for me) is any acknowledgement that the school itself was at fault for the way it handled cases of sexual abuse over a very long period of time. The school's main concern seems to have been to protect its own reputation at all costs. And that still seems to be priority. Just two weeks ago the school placed an advert for a Press and Social Media Officer https://www.jobstoday.co.uk/job/2358586 ... a-officer/

Required to deliver a Press, PR and content writing service, ensuring the School’s reputation is maintained and enhanced across all media including social and digital platforms.

As somebody else commented, you couldn't make this up.

So yes, I'm reassured that current and future pupils are properly safeguarded. But over a very long period of time boys and girls attending the school were put at risk. We are entitled to know how the school allowed this to happen, why the offenders weren't caught, why they weren't dealt with properly when they were, why creatures like Dobbie were ever recruited and whether the school knows of any other risks we were exposed to that have not come to court.

As one that was there, albeit in a different house, good point Jim.