Skip to main content

Jailed: teacher who snapped (tip of an iceberg)

I find this story particularly sad. It is really the tip of an iceberg of problems with disrespectful behaviour across the country. For all that ASBOs and such mechanisms offer some slight hope to people terrorised by yobs they are not the real answer.

For the real answer we need to look at why patterns of behaviour are developing such that there are continual aggressive incidents across the country. Yesterday I drove across central London in a taxi and saw an aggressive row which was on the verge of serious violence (people pushing each other).

There are a number of difficulties. Most lie around the desire of some people to act in such a way as actually is designed to irritate others.

Part of this lies in how schools operate. The government's obsession with the rights of the parents of yobs means that teachers have to run around justifying reasonable actions they have taken to deal with indiscipline.

Those children learn that blagging gets results and that if they behave irresponsibly then all that happens is that they get more attention.

Tony Blair's Speech (March 3 2005) includes the text:
"However, on these foundations a fundamental system-wide change is taking place which we will take forward decisively if re-elected. Step by step we are putting 'parent power' at the heart of the education system - giving all parents, not just a minority as in the past, the choices and opportunities needed for their children to succeed."

They did this previously when they forced a school I know to readmit a boy expelled for attacking a classroom assistant. Such acts are so damaging to the discipline in the school that they have effects beyond the single act.

The first priority for education has to be to maintain discipline in the class. This means that parents of yobs would not have the same amount of 'parent power'. At the moment they can give the system the runaround.


PoliticalHack said…
What government obsession with the rights of the parents of yobs . Are you spending too much time with Mike Whitby?

I seem to recall a Liberal Democrat party which opposed the anti-social behaviour legislation in parliament and claimed that the use of curfews on young offenders 'restricted freedom.' Only a few weeks back, Charlie K promised that serving prisoners would get the vote.

There's a problem here that is broader than just schools, but that part of your post is misleading.

It is fair to be concerned about how appeals are decided, but natural justice suggests that their should be a review mechanism for a decision that can have a far-reaching effect on children.
john said…
Without accepting the rest of your post I accept that there needs to be a review mechanism. However, this mechanism should not be one that is skewed to undermine discipline in schools.

Popular posts from this blog

Statement re false allegations from Esther Baker

Statement by John Hemming
I am pleased that the Police have now made it clear that there has been a concerted effort to promote false criminal allegations against me and that the allegations had no substance whatsoever.
I would like to thank Emily Cox, my children, Ayaz Iqbal (my Solicitor), my local lib dem team and many others who supported me through this dreadful experience. There are many worse things that happen to people, but this was a really bad experience.
It is bad enough to have false allegations made about yourself to the police, but to have a concerted campaign involving your political opponents and many others in public creates an environment in which it is reasonable to be concerned about ill founded vigilante attacks on your family and yourself. Luckily there was a more substantial lobby to the contrary as well, which included many people who were themselves real survivors of abuse, which has helped.
I am normally someone who helps other people fight injustice. …

R v SUSSEX JUSTICES ex p McCARTHY [1924] 1 KB 256

I have only just found this one which I think is accurately reported below (but if it is not please give me an accurate report).


R v SUSSEX JUSTICES ex p McCARTHY [1924] 1 KB 256

November 9 1923

Editor’s comments in bold.

Here, the magistrates’ clerk retired with the bench when they were considering a charge of dangerous driving. The clerk belonged to a firm of solicitors acting in civil proceedings for the other party to the accident. It was entirely irrelevant that there had been no evidence of actual influence brought to bear on the magistrates, and the conviction was duly quashed.

It is clear that the deputy clerk was a member of the firm of solicitors engaged in the conduct of proceedings for damages against the applicant in respect of the same collision as that which gave rise to the charge that the justices were considering. It is said, and, no doubt, truly, that when that gentleman retired in the usual way with the justices, taking with him the…

Statement re Police investigation into Harassment and Perverting the Course of Justice.

It was recently reported that the police were not investigating the allegations of Perverting the Course of Justice that I had made. This came as a surprise to me as I had been told for some time that my allegations were to be considered once the VRR had been rejected. I have now had a very constructive meeting with Staffordshire police on Friday 29th June 2018 and the misunderstandings have been resolved. At that meeting the evidence relating to the perversion of the course of justice and the harassment campaign against my family were discussed. The police have decided to investigate both the perversion of the course of justice and also the harassment campaign. I would like to thank them for changing their decision and I accept their apology for the way in which they did that. I am also in possession of written confirmation a police force would be investigating allegations that a vulnerable witness has been harassed for trying to expose the campaign against me. I hope that the aut…