REMOVAL OF CHOBA MEMBERSHIP

[Foureyes]

For information, I have exchanged emails with CHOBA Board concerning the infamous five. I pointed out that it is my understanding from reading the Rules of CHOBA that full membership is granted automatically to: 'Any pupil at the school..' and also to 'Past members of the teaching staff, pastoral staff...' That being so Mr Ajaz Karim, as an Old Blue, is a member as of right, while Messrs Burr, Dobbie, Husband and Webb are members through past service on the teaching staff.'
I then pointed out that "All five have been found guilty, or have pleaded guilty to offences against children at C.H." and that " the rules for expulsion at Para 1 state that "Any CHOBA member who is convicted of an offence against any child (which for these purposes means anyone aged 18 or under) will automatically be expelled with no right of appeal..."

I have now been informed by Mr Middlemas that: "On behalf of the Chairman of CHOBA (Ralph Tait), I can confirm that under the CHOBA Expulsion Procedure all five individuals have had their membership withdrawn."

No big deal and probably among the least of their worries as they sit in their prison cells but it is a step in the right direction.

David

[DazedandConfused]

I didn’t realise Ralph Tait was chairman, he was at CH during the 80s and 90s when many of the offences were committed and I imagine he feels at strongly about what happened as many here.

[J.R.]

I didn’t realise Ralph Tait was chairman, he was at CH during the 80s and 90s when many of the offences were committed and I imagine he feels at strongly about what happened as many here.

I don't know just how close members of the CHOBA board are expected to be to the senior management of CH itself.

However, all this is a great step forward.

We definitely don't want this to escalate into another 'Us And Them' situation.

[robert totterdell]

This for me, and I guess other victims, is a HUGE RELIEF. Thank you.

I think that I am able to state publicly that Husband's family tried to intimidate 'two' of his victims and Dobbie - and I have now confirmed this with the police - has a rather large pedophile network of some dubious repute.

Please, all take this as extremely serious - it has and is continuing to damage peoples lives.

I have, over some 16 months, managed to get a much fuller picture of not just what went on in my time but what followed. Please remember that I knew 4 of the 5 and knew the sixth now charged.

My job is to seek answers from CH and not to deal with the perpetrators themselves although I have requested to meet Mr. Burr under the restorative justice scheme - he can refuse.

I now have some 2000, yes two thousand plus, pages of information concerning the abuse at CH, from all sorts of people from all over the world - courtesy of my original post and the internet.

They do not paint a very good picture but my issue is not with the two Foundations per se but with the authorities in charge over some 32 years (well I can now prove some 49 years - right up to 2014).

Safeguarding will be a key point of my address to the Council as there need to be some considerable changes.
I am trying to keep you all aware but I am under legal restrictions for now (but not long).

Keep with me please, your support has been and is critical.

Thanks

Rob

[CodFlabAndMuck]

This for me, and I guess other victims, is a HUGE RELIEF. Thank you.

I think that I am able to state publicly that Husband's family tried to intimidate 'two' of his victims and Dobbie - and I have now confirmed this with the police - has a rather large pedophile network of some dubious repute.

Please, all take this as extremely serious - it has and is continuing to damage peoples lives.

I have, over some 16 months, managed to get a much fuller picture of not just what went on in my time but what followed. Please remember that I knew 4 of the 5 and knew the sixth now charged.

My job is to seek answers from CH and not to deal with the perpetrators themselves although I have requested to meet Mr. Burr under the restorative justice scheme - he can refuse.

I now have some 2000, yes two thousand plus, pages of information concerning the abuse at CH, from all sorts of people from all over the world - courtesy of my original post and the internet.

They do not paint a very good picture but my issue is not with the two Foundations per se but with the authorities in charge over some 32 years (well I can now prove some 49 years - right up to 2014).

Safeguarding will be a key point of my address to the Council as there need to be some considerable changes.
I am trying to keep you all aware but I am under legal restrictions for now (but not long).

Keep with me please, your support has been and is critical.

Thanks

Rob

Robert, you are draining the swamp almost singlehandedly , and helping an awful lot of people.

Just shows that if there is a 2014 victim then there can be no room for safeguarding complacency at CH, and they still have to prove that current measures are adequate

Are you able to elaborate on whether the 2014 perpetrator is still a serving member of staff, or was until recently?

Also are you at liberty to say what form the intimidation took?

And lastly, are there former members of CH staff in the Dobbie network who havent yet been charged?

[jtaylor]

Safeguarding will be a key point of my address to the Council as there need to be some considerable changes.
I am trying to keep you all aware but I am under legal restrictions for now (but not long).

Keep with me please, your support has been and is critical.

Thanks

Rob

You have our full support in doing whatever's necessary to ensure this can't happen again at CH (or elsewhere) now or in the future.

You have my admiration and respect.

Julian

[bakunin]

I now have some 2000, yes two thousand plus, pages of information concerning the abuse at CH, from all sorts of people from all over the world - courtesy of my original post and the internet.

They do not paint a very good picture but my issue is not with the two Foundations per se but with the authorities in charge over some 32 years (well I can now prove some 49 years - right up to 2014).

Will you be willing to release some of this information when you are no longer under legal restrictions? I am personally very interested in reading all of Poulton, Cairncross and Sillett's answers to the court, beyond the few words that were quoted in the papers. I think it's in the interest of all Old Blues at the time to know exactly how the SMT operated. I feel like their terrible behaviour regarding child abuse may be part of a larger pattern. (Also Dobbie's "network" sounds highly disturbing, urgh...)

I second Julian's admiration and respect!

[CodFlabAndMuck]

Will you be willing to release some of this information when you are no longer under legal restrictions? I am personally very interested in reading all of Poulton, Cairncross and Sillett's answers to the court,

Do we know that Sillett was called to give evidence?

If so, which trial?

[bakunin]

Do we know that Sillett was called to give evidence?

If so, which trial?

You're right, we don't know that. I had misremembered stuff from Karim's trial:

The trial previously heard from an alleged victim who said housemaster Bob Sillett, a senior staff member, implied she would risk being named in the press if the school dealt with Mr Karim "publicly".

She said: "There was the implication that my name might be published."

This just says that a victim mentioned Sillett. It seems fairly likely he would have been called as a witness given that Cairncross and Poulton were, though.

Re-reading that BBC article reminded me of just how terrible Poulton's answers were!

"I did not charge Mr Karim with sexual harassment.

"Had I done so, and had the charge been proved, he would, of course, have lost not only his job but also his chance of getting another one in any school."

Amazing! He actually thinks it's a reasonable answer in court that child abuse should be overlooked because it might inconvenience the abuser! At least that's how I interpret it... At least he's honest (maybe). Is there a more generous reading? I don't see it.

[Avon]

Is the behaviour of Sillett a matter of public record? If so, he should also be removed from CHOBA.

[graham]

Is the behaviour of Sillett a matter of public record? If so, he should also be removed from CHOBA.

If based solely on the quote made above - i.e.

The trial previously heard from an alleged victim who said housemaster Bob Sillett, a senior staff member, implied she would risk being named in the press if the school dealt with Mr Karim "publicly".

She said: "There was the implication that my name might be published."

then I don't think this merits removal from CHOBA - at least without further testimony. In light of Poulton's evidence and the general way in which the SMT was operating at the time, the quote sounds as though Sillet was threatening to go to the press. The alternative is that he was articulating his understanding of the law as it stood at the time (others have discussed this elsewhere and I think the conclusion is that she would not have been in danger of being outed in the press). There's a difference between these two that may not come across well in quotes from the press or even in the recollection of the victim.

I'm not trying to defend Sillet here. Statements made in good faith to victims can often be interpreted in other ways if not thoughtfully considered. The saddest part of this is that CH should have been fully prepared for this. Perhaps they were and the quote was indeed a threat. But it's also possible that they were not appropriately trained, despite the apparent frequency with which these events occurred, and a well intentioned, poorly thought-out statement did more harm than good.

[robert totterdell]

Hi All

Lots of questions as always!

Please remember that I am trying to write a formal address to the Governing Council and am trying to get in as many questions that I have been asked as possible.

However, I need to deal with Mr. Sillett MBE now. 'Bob' Sillett attempted to cover up various accusations made against masters whilst he was a Housemaster at CH. There had already been two complaints against Karim by pupils - in fact, there had been four complaints. Sillett tried, under the direction of Cairncross (this is a deputy head who was happy to send pupils of CH to Rev. Ball for 'homesickness') who said that she 'followed instructions from Poulton the HM'.

Poulton, of course, says that she was in charge of these matters.

What I can say, besides Sillett willfully attempting to hide 'pedophilia' but gets an MBE for service to the community, that Bob Sillett has another rather unsavory reputation. You see he was a master in my time and his reputation was for something entirely different. Bob Sillett created and was very proud of it, the tangent caning method. This is where rather than striking the boys (girls weren't there then) across the flat of the buttock i.e. horizontally, he brought the cane down 'fast' on the top of the buttocks.

For those who don't know ask one of your children to do both lightly on you. Whilst the fat in the buttock on the horizontal method still allows pain the lack of fat and the combination of the nerves in the second, vertical, way causes extreme pain that has been used in Stalin's Soviet regime and North Korea for examples.

It is on the basis of these two items that I have asked the Forfeiture Committee of the Cabinet Office to remove Sillett's MBE as it 'brings into disrepute' the honour system'.

One question answered I'll deal with Cairncross and others in due course.

Thanks

Rob

[Molesworth 2]

The trial previously heard from an alleged victim who said housemaster Bob Sillett, a senior staff member, implied she would risk being named in the press if the school dealt with Mr Karim "publicly".

She said: "There was the implication that my name might be published."

I find it hard to believe that someone, with connections in the Masons (which has a reputation of being stuffed with Police) would not know that an underage victim of a sex crime would never (to my limited knowledge) be named in the press. Perhaps if the unholy trinity of Sillett, Poulton and Cairncross had actually bothered to report the matter to Police, the Police could have confirmed whether this was correct to the victim herself.

[graham]

The trial previously heard from an alleged victim who said housemaster Bob Sillett, a senior staff member, implied she would risk being named in the press if the school dealt with Mr Karim "publicly".

She said: "There was the implication that my name might be published."

I find it hard to believe that someone, with connections in the Masons (which has a reputation of being stuffed with Police) would not know that an underage victim of a sex crime would never (to my limited knowledge) be named in the press. Perhaps if the unholy trinity of Sillett, Poulton and Cairncross had actually bothered to report the matter to Police, the Police could have confirmed whether this was correct to the victim herself.

I find it hard to believe too, and the most parsimonious explanation is that this was an attempt to silence the victim and keep it all in-house. But the quote is not enough to go on alone - it's too ambiguous. It is sufficient to establish that the SMT handled this extremely poorly. Whether it it implicates Sillet in the cover-up, I don't know.

Robert seems to have more information however. Robert, I offer you my deepest respect for the work you are doing to get to the bottom of this long term problem.

[LHA]

The trial previously heard from an alleged victim who said housemaster Bob Sillett, a senior staff member, implied she would risk being named in the press if the school dealt with Mr Karim "publicly".

She said: "There was the implication that my name might be published."

I find it hard to believe that someone, with connections in the Masons (which has a reputation of being stuffed with Police) would not know that an underage victim of a sex crime would never (to my limited knowledge) be named in the press. Perhaps if the unholy trinity of Sillett, Poulton and Cairncross had actually bothered to report the matter to Police, the Police could have confirmed whether this was correct to the victim herself.

I find it hard to believe too, and the most parsimonious explanation is that this was an attempt to silence the victim and keep it all in-house. But the quote is not enough to go on alone - it's too ambiguous. It is sufficient to establish that the SMT handled this extremely poorly. Whether it it implicates Sillet in the cover-up, I don't know.

Robert seems to have more information however. Robert, I offer you my deepest respect for the work you are doing to get to the bottom of this long term problem.

Sillett's connections aren't really that great. His daughter was a corrupt police office who was jailed for fraud. Her ex husand but current business partner was a police officer who was not convicted of fraud but dismissed for gross misconduct.

Her linked in profile doesn't mention her time in the Police, or in prison.

https://www.linkedin.com/in/tanya-sillett-b3048a13/

https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/comp ... 8/officers

https://www.getsurrey.co.uk/news/surrey ... es-7797089