EXPERIENCES AT ST. VEDAST (now St. James) AND THE S.E.S

Discussion of the children's schools in the UK.
the annoyed

Postby the annoyed » Fri Mar 19, 2004 7:50 pm

It is absolutely sickening! ALL of it! St Vedast for boys was not a nice school at all, a place where you do not feel at home, but a place where you have to struggle to survive every miute of the day from the wroth of the teachers.

However as Tom pointed out, St James is different! You can the freedom the boys have now. Someone from the senior boys school might say too free?

Can you belive it? Just over 25 years and one could say it's the extreme opposite to what it had been before!?!

Balance is good.

A Shame.

Tom Grubb
Posts: 380
Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2004 10:23 pm
Location: London

Postby Tom Grubb » Fri Mar 19, 2004 11:20 pm

the annoyed wrote:
It is absolutely sickening! ALL of it! St Vedast for boys was not a nice school at all, a place where you do not feel at home, but a place where you have to struggle to survive every miute of the day from the wroth of the teachers.

However as Tom pointed out, St James is different! You can the freedom the boys have now. Someone from the senior boys school might say too free?


I am heartened by your acknowledgement that St Vedast "was not a nice school at all". I'd love to know if any current St James pupils have used their great freedom to ask Debenham, Hipshon or any of the other St James teachers who used to abuse pupils at St Vedast why they stopped abusing pupils and whether they feel any remorse for having abused them.

Matthew
Posts: 212
Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2004 6:57 pm
Location: London

Postby Matthew » Sat Mar 20, 2004 5:46 pm

Excellent point Tom! I'd love to know too.

bluelight

st james

Postby bluelight » Tue Mar 23, 2004 11:53 pm

I have been reading this forum with some interest for some days now.I am considering a detailed reply but feel I need to respond to some of the points raised so far.

As a former St James pupil in the late 1970's I feel I am far better qualified, not to forget experienced, to speak on these issues than some, especially those who claim to be current students.

The prevalent culture at St Vedast is well documented here but the St James school was little better, I speak as one who knows. I have to point out that many St Vedast staff also worked at St James, the nature of their behaviour is little different.

The statements from current pupils claiming the SES now runs a very pleasent school do not change the past, and definitely don't vindicate the individuals concerned.

I also note that these current pupils refuse to be named, if these people are accurately reflectling the current situation in such a positive way then why are they using annomity, surely the SES would be happy their pupils are showing the school in such a good light?

I don't really feel that this forum is a suitable place to discuss womens rights issues, this is more about what occurred at the schools involved. The Dickensian attitude of the SES towards women,not to mention pre-marital sex, should be in a seperate forum. I will submit a more full posting in the near future.

anon

Re: st james

Postby anon » Wed Mar 24, 2004 10:15 pm

bluelight wrote:I also note that these current pupils refuse to be named, if these people are accurately reflectling the current situation in such a positive way then why are they using annomity, surely the SES would be happy their pupils are showing the school in such a good light?



I wouldn't post anything about the school on this forum if the title on the thread did not mention St James.

Just because St james is much different than it used to be when it was St Vedast, ofcourse does not in anyway rubb away what once happened in the past.

I wish to remain annonymous because I do not desire any attention, specially on this subject as it is a very sensitive topic to all my class mates.

bluelight
Posts: 18
Joined: Wed Mar 24, 2004 12:02 am

Postby bluelight » Thu Mar 25, 2004 1:32 am

Further to my earlier post perhaps the SES or any "masters" from St James/Vedast would like to reply to the allegations made in this particular forum. It is of great interest to me that no formal explanation, reply or even barefaced denial has been made by such "enlightened" individuals. I, therefore, would like to invite any "masters" to actually give their account of these events in these pages, I am sure that that "the absolute" would approve of "the truth" becoming manifest.
The individuals concerned, who could resolve this situation, know who they are, as do we.

a different guest

Re: st james

Postby a different guest » Thu Mar 25, 2004 10:56 am

anon wrote:I wish to remain annonymous because I do not desire any attention, specially on this subject as it is a very sensitive topic to all my class mates.


WHY is it so sensitive a topic to your class mates?

mgormez
Posts: 501
Joined: Tue Feb 04, 2003 9:33 pm
Location: Amsterdam
Contact:

Postby mgormez » Thu Mar 25, 2004 11:44 am

I'd also like to know since when has it become a topic with your class mates. Has it always been known or did the recent stories of ex-pupils caused that realisation of past abuse?
Mike Gormez

Tom Grubb
Posts: 380
Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2004 10:23 pm
Location: London

Postby Tom Grubb » Thu Mar 25, 2004 9:27 pm

mgormez wrote:I'd also like to know since when has it become a topic with your class mates. Has it always been known or did the recent stories of ex-pupils caused that realisation of past abuse?


That's a question I'd love to know the answer to as well!

anon

Postby anon » Thu Mar 25, 2004 10:22 pm

No, only a few have read the ex-pupils report. Some of the few say it's totally unbelivable, and rest of the few say it used to be like that and is not anymore. That is as far as their views go on this subject of ex-pupils, I'm afraid. It is quite understandable that the past does not really affect the pupils presently is the school, as it might still do to to the ex-pupils.

It is sensitive, because people have very strong views on it. However it seems that we are quite mature enough, not to let those minor differences get in the way of our freindship. We all have our views, and they are veiws which are personal, we have a general feel of who likes the views of the SES and who is not too keen on them, in the end no one feels the need to discuss this topic any further. It really is not a HUGE deal to us.

a different guest

Postby a different guest » Fri Mar 26, 2004 12:28 am

anon wrote:. It really is not a HUGE deal to us.


So you don't care that people who are still involved with the school used to brutalise and abuse students???

Guest

Postby Guest » Fri Mar 26, 2004 8:21 pm

a different guest wrote:
anon wrote:. It really is not a HUGE deal to us.


So you don't care that people who are still involved with the school used to brutalise and abuse students???


Those people who 'used to brutalise the school' are not anymore.

Guest

Postby Guest » Fri Mar 26, 2004 8:22 pm

*brutalise the students

Tom Grubb
Posts: 380
Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2004 10:23 pm
Location: London

Postby Tom Grubb » Sat Mar 27, 2004 6:09 pm

Guest wrote:
Those people who 'used to brutalise the school' are not anymore.
[.....]
*brutalise the students


What are you saying, Guest? Do you mean that any current teachers at St James who used to brutalise students at St Vedast have changed their ways and no longer brutalise students? Or do you mean that St James does not employ any of the teachers who used to brutalise students at St Vedast?

Guest

Postby Guest » Sun Mar 28, 2004 1:44 am

Tom Grubb wrote:? Do you mean that any current teachers at St James who used to brutalise students at St Vedast have changed their ways and no longer brutalise students?


I think so....


Return to “St James and St Vedast”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 48 guests