NEW MESSAGE FROM DAVID BODDY

[Witness]

Patience, you wrote:

"But if people are just going to meet every move towards reconciliation with cynicism and disbelief - well, the bitterness and hate which has been so evident here in the last few months will presumably going on festering. And it can't be doing anybody much good."

I find your language patronising and arrogant. You are accusing people here of harbouring bitterness and hatred. You are using these accusations to dismiss concerns raised here. If you are not a hoaxer, and if you really are representing David Boddy, you have just bolstered his dismissive public image. Your tone is a PR disaster. David Boddy - you or your family or your colleagues or your friends are reading this. Notice how bad your PR is.

The "cynicism and disbelief" which is "festering" that you write about is created by the words that you use.

How dare you use the word "fester" in the face of masses of evidence of child abuse.

We are empowered, rational, organised, functional and independent people and we are going to acheive the justice that we deserve. Dismiss us now, pay a higher price later.

Witness.

[sparks]

Hello folks.

Folks?

David Boddy has asked me to post this message from him to everyone interested in the Inquiry:

Really? Do you expect anyone to take this seriously. If David Boddy has anything to say on the matter let HIM say it.

He is in the middle of moving house.

Please?is this a joke?

In any event this is the Governors? inquiry, NOT David Boddy?s. They have previously chosen to communicate information about the inquiry through their lawyers. They have appointed C Betts as the Clerk to the inquiry and, through her, have announced the ever-changing deadlines. Is she too busy moving house also (or is it cheaper to ask you to post on this forum instead)?

I wish to update interested parties ?

And who is ?I??

Governors remain committed to establishing the facts arising from the application of discipline at the schools

Rest assured, the facts will be established, with or without the Governors? inquiry.

So far specific complaints have been received from very few individuals

Of course the Governors have received few specific complaints?who in their right mind would do so without first having received the terms of reference for the inquiry? Why would anyone wish to submit detailed complaints to the institution responsible for the abuse they suffered unless they were convinced of the integrity of the inquiry?

Other initiatives have taken place whilst the Governors have awaited the 16th March deadline. These include meetings with various Local Authorities, the NSPCC, and other Child Protection Agencies.

I am delighted to hear this. Who initiated this dialogue? And have these child protection agencies you mention been made aware of the ?why are they dead? forum? What have these agencies advised the Governors regarding the establishment of an inquiry? Do they consider it acceptable for the Schools to refuse to contact former pupils who may have complaints against the school? Do they agree that the Schools can deal with allegations, which include criminal assault and sexual abuse, through the inquiry that they propose?

Are the Governors fully aware of their statutory as well as their moral obligations to both former and current pupils?

I wonder? the response I have had during my discussions with similar agencies has been one of utter disbelief that any institution believes it can behave in such a way.

Dialogue with some of the contributors to this website has meant that the Terms of Reference to the Inquiry and the appointment of a Chairman have not moved as fast as all would have wished.

I am sorry that ?dialogue? has been so troublesome ? could you expand on this point?

?.. the Governors wish to extend the time during which detailed and specified complaints can be received by the Clerk to the Inquiry, until Friday 29th April 2005.[/b]

This is irrelevant and meaningless unless:
1. The Governors withdraw their requirement that detailed complaints must be submitted. I am quite happy to notify C Betts that I have a number of serious complaints against the school which include, but are not limited to, criminal assault. But I am NOT prepared to submit more information, and nor do they need any more information, until..

2. The Governors have published the terms of reference of the inquiry, and

3. The Governors have made a serious effort to contact all former pupils.


With your hotline to the top, could you possible advise me. Are the Governors fully aware that the inquiry cannot be used as a device to prevent future civil or criminal proceedings against the schools?

Are the Governors, and more specifically current and former teachers, fully aware that there is no time limitation for criminal proceedings? Indeed this route is open to any pupil or former pupil who was physically assaulted.

Its time all concerned Lambie, Boddy, and Pincham and the rest of the Governors took this little more seriously?.stop pissing around before this gets out of hand!

[grimep]

Other initiatives have taken place whilst the Governors have awaited the 16th March deadline. These include meetings with various Local Authorities, the NSPCC, and other Child Protection Agencies.

What was the purpose and outcome of meetings with the NSPCC and other agencies?

A suspicious cynic like myself would suspect the SES are trying to pre-empt and manage the situation that could arise if former abused students contact the authorities first.

[Alban]

What was the purpose and outcome of meetings with the NSPCC and other agencies?

A suspicious cynic like myself would suspect the SES are trying to pre-empt and manage the situation that could arise if former abused students contact the authorities first.

Alternatively, they did not initiate the dialogue with the agencies, but have been responding to questions asked by the NSPCC etc!

I mean, why would a school invite various agencies associated with the prevention of child abuse to come and talk to them? Indeed, why would one of those agencies even bother unless they had reason to believe things are or were not how they should be.

Sounds like "Spin" to me.

[Anita]

To patienceismysecondname,

You sent me a private message but I cannot enter into a private correspondence if I don't know who I'm talking to. I wish I knew to whom I'm writing - face to face is better still.

In response to your PM, it's good to hear that some parents, especially mothers, recognise that their children were so damaged - but where are the fathers? The chauvinists who ran (and still run) the show? The bitterness, anger and pain that manifests through even the worst of the postings - the ones that display real fear and disturbance - are the most worrying. Of course they don't make pleasant reading!!

Blissful meditation can't make one drop of blood shed by Debenham's beatings on little boys go away. Until he weeps for what he has done, nothing will heal - and that applies to every teacher that followed his ghastly example.

And to every female teacher who encouraged bullying - who for example forced a little girl to expose a burnt body and sit in her knickers. This was meant to be a school of the soul for God's sake! Oliver Twist was mild!

Is MacLaren's portrait still hanging in its place of honour in the School? Despite your realisation that "the whole ghastly business was essentially his fault"?

Sincerely yours,

Anita Woolf

[Goblinboy]

Is MacLaren's portrait still hanging in its place of honour in the School? Despite your realisation that "the whole ghastly business was essentially his fault"?

Ah, Patience - it's all MacLaren's fault, so nobody else is to blame then - you were just following orders?

[Tom Grubb]

patienceismysecondname,

It seems that, after all, your message was not a hoax. My apologies.

I've just visited the website of everybody's favourite independent former pupils' organisation, the Seventh Form (http://www.seventhform.org/seventh_form.html). There, in the News section, is a strikingly similar message from Boddy himself, also dated 17th March.

Tom

[a different guest]

This line appears on both websites - which site does "this site" refer to one wonders.

Dialogue with some of the contributors to this website has meant that the Terms of Reference to the Inquiry and the appointment of a Chairman have not moved as fast as all would have wished

I note the 7th form site does not site its source of the information as someone with a "jolly little moniker".

[sparks]

Here is the posting in full from the 7th form website

--------------------------------------------------------------------


Inquiry into St James and St Vedast Disciplinary Policy and Application

MESSAGE FROM DAVID BODDY, HEADMASTER, ST.JAMES SENIOR BOYS SCHOOL

17.03.05

I wish to update interested parties on the latest developments with regards to the Governors Inquiry into Discipline Policy and Application at St Vedast and St James Schools during the l970s and l980s.

The Governors remain committed to establishing the facts arising from the application of discipline at the schools, and to this end had requested those with grievances to formulate them and send them to the Clerk to the Inquiry by yesterday, 16th March. The purpose of this request was to ascertain the volume and nature of the complaints, which is necessary before arrangements for an Inquiry can be made. So far specific complaints have been received from very few individuals, along with a few more general statements.

The Governors are genuine in their desire for any Inquiry to be impartial and independent and to provide a full picture of the Schools from 1975. Other initiatives have taken place whilst the Governors have awaited the 16th March deadline. These include meetings with various Local Authorities, the NSPCC, and other Child Protection Agencies.

Dialogue with some of the contributors to this website has meant that the Terms of Reference to the Inquiry and the appointment of a Chairman have not moved as fast as all would have wished. As a result of this, the Governors are willing to provide a further, but final, extension to the time period of submissions to be received by the Clerk to the Inquiry. Recognising the onset of Easter, the Governors wish to extend the time during which detailed and specified complaints can be received by the Clerk to the Inquiry, until Friday 29th April 2005.

The school has also received communication from some former pupils who wish to make more general points about their time at St James, including supportive comments. Consideration is therefore also being given as to how they can do so. Announcements on the mechanism for this will be made shortly.

Finally, the School will be sending letters to as many of its former pupils that can reached, inviting them either to participate in the Inquiry itself or if they wish to, make comments and observations of a more general nature.

We are hopeful that agreement will shortly be reached on the Chairmanship of the Inquiry and its Terms of Reference, and that there is no further delay in this. The Governors wish to make it clear that they are totally committed to a full and impartial investigation into the Discipline Policy and its application during the early years of the Schools. Those who wish to participate in equally good faith are strongly encouraged to do so.

David Boddy
Headmaster
--------------------------------------------------------------------

"The school has also received communication from some former pupils who wish to make more general points about their time at St James, including supportive comments. Consideration is therefore also being given as to how they can do so. "

Oh for gods sake! This is supposed to be an inquiry - not an opinion poll on who thinks SES Schools were hell and who thinks they were/are great!

The inquiry is supposed to establish the veracity of the many claims of abuse made on this website and elsewhere. It is not supposed to be about collecting glowing testimonials for PR and damage limitation purposes.

[Katharine Watson]

patienceismysecondname,

It seems that, after all, your message was not a hoax. My apologies.


Tom

Thanks, Tom, but I think it is I who should apologise. I am indeed Katharine Watson, as someone correctly guessed. I realise now it was a big mistake to try to be anonymous - I had my reasons, but they are not relevant now.

I should like to apologise to all concerned for having comprehensively upset everybody. Thank you all for your illuminating insights - I freely admit all accusations. I did mean to be helpful, but there you go.

I have tried, so far without success to change my user name, but the system doesn't seem to want to accept it. I chose the name on impulse because my second name is actually Patience.

Sorry, sorry, sorry.

Katharine

[daska]

Dear Patienceismysecondname

If you are Katharine and not just trying to deflect criticism towards a lady I remember with great affection and respect then thank you.

Can you tell us why the messages being posted on the 7th form site are different to the ones provided via this site?

[Daffy]

I have tried, so far without success to change my user name, but the system doesn't seem to want to accept it. I chose the name on impulse because my second name is actually Patience.

Katherine,

Mike Gormez or I can change your username if you like. Send a Private Message giving your preferred name (presumably 'Katherine Watson'?) After the change is effective you will then need to log in under your new username - the old one won't work.

[Tom Grubb]

patienceismysecondname,

It seems that, after all, your message was not a hoax. My apologies.


Tom

Thanks, Tom, but I think it is I who should apologise. I am indeed Katharine Watson, as someone correctly guessed. I realise now it was a big mistake to try to be anonymous - I had my reasons, but they are not relevant now.

Pardon my vulgarity, but does anyone else feel this thread is becoming as confusing as a Terry Fuckwitt strip in Viz?

Tom

[Alban]

...Thanks, Tom, but I think it is I who should apologise. I am indeed Katharine Watson, as someone correctly guessed. I realise now it was a big mistake to try to be anonymous - I had my reasons, but they are not relevant now.

I should like to apologise to all concerned for having comprehensively upset everybody. Thank you all for your illuminating insights - I freely admit all accusations. I did mean to be helpful, but there you go...Katharine

What sort of a sham is this....Considering this forum is the primary medium for information relating to the enquiry...isn't it bad enough that the figure-head of the schools could not be bothered to put up his own message, but now we have this.

It is quite clear to me that this enquiry is not being taken seriously in certain quarters.

[sugarloaf]

What sort of a sham is this....Considering this forum is the primary medium for information relating to the enquiry...isn't it bad enough that the figure-head of the schools could not be bothered to put up his own message, but now we have this.

Couldnt agree more.

Bring back C Betts!!!!

What on earth must people not in SES, or ex pupils be thinking when they see this?
Even us old timers who are fully aware of the SES's lessez faire attitude to emotional welfare and the safety of kids are finding this quite rediculous.

Quite what a new visitor would make of St James' method of communicating to Ex pupils on something as serious as this, I cant imagine!

I would have serious concerns about sending my kids to this school simply from reading this thread.....