A simple question for David Boddy
A simple question for David Boddy
This is a question for headmaster David Boddy on behalf of former pupils who were abused at St James Independent School For Boys and concerned parents of current pupils.
David Boddy, by your own admission you have teachers on your staff who were involved in the horrific abuses of children at St James in past decades.
You say you will not be removing them from the school.
Right thinking people everywhere would agree that *any* record of abuse on a teacher's record would immediately make that teacher entirely unsuitable for future work with children.
So, David Boddy, a simple question: What level of abuse do you think is acceptable for a teacher to have on his record?
Please answer here.
David Boddy, by your own admission you have teachers on your staff who were involved in the horrific abuses of children at St James in past decades.
You say you will not be removing them from the school.
Right thinking people everywhere would agree that *any* record of abuse on a teacher's record would immediately make that teacher entirely unsuitable for future work with children.
So, David Boddy, a simple question: What level of abuse do you think is acceptable for a teacher to have on his record?
Please answer here.
Another gap
There is another gap here which we should close if we can.
There was a celebrated case recently in Victoria where a 36 yo female Phys Ed teacher had sex with one of her pupils. I will get some of the details wrong - you can google them, but I had to pay to access the article so wrote this from memory instead.
According to the story - the boy, a 15 year old, made all the running. He was on the basket ball court and dared the teacher to kiss him if he could sink a seemingly impossible shot. The relationship developed, and sex ensued. It was entirely consensual.
The court was sympathetic and a very light (non-custodial?) sentence was given. Key to this was the testimony of the boy who pointed out to the satisfaction of the court that he had experienced no hardship or coercion
There was outrage in the press. ("What if the sexes had been reversed?") There was an appeal and a much tougher sentence imposed.
The story generated a lot of interest and discussion here.
In the final analysis the appropriate treatment of the teacher turns out to have relatively little to do with the wishes of the victim (a barely appropriate word in this case). The treatment is actually about what parents and children have a right to expect the school experience to comprise.
Looked at coldly it is totally inappropriate for a teacher to have sexual relationships with a pupil. In all circumstances. No ifs or buts. The response to such occurences needs to be crystal clear.
The same applies to criminal assualt by teachers towards pupils - and also to criminal negligence by governors.
There was a celebrated case recently in Victoria where a 36 yo female Phys Ed teacher had sex with one of her pupils. I will get some of the details wrong - you can google them, but I had to pay to access the article so wrote this from memory instead.
According to the story - the boy, a 15 year old, made all the running. He was on the basket ball court and dared the teacher to kiss him if he could sink a seemingly impossible shot. The relationship developed, and sex ensued. It was entirely consensual.
The court was sympathetic and a very light (non-custodial?) sentence was given. Key to this was the testimony of the boy who pointed out to the satisfaction of the court that he had experienced no hardship or coercion
There was outrage in the press. ("What if the sexes had been reversed?") There was an appeal and a much tougher sentence imposed.
The story generated a lot of interest and discussion here.
In the final analysis the appropriate treatment of the teacher turns out to have relatively little to do with the wishes of the victim (a barely appropriate word in this case). The treatment is actually about what parents and children have a right to expect the school experience to comprise.
Looked at coldly it is totally inappropriate for a teacher to have sexual relationships with a pupil. In all circumstances. No ifs or buts. The response to such occurences needs to be crystal clear.
The same applies to criminal assualt by teachers towards pupils - and also to criminal negligence by governors.
Child member of SES from around 1967 to around 1977; Strongly involved in Sunday Schools ; Five brothers and sisters went to ST V and St J in the worst years
Any answer yet?
Perhaps we could set some theoretical parameters?
Would you employ a teacher who had rape on his or her record?* Would you shrug that off too?
Or is it just beating ups that you shrug off?
* Of course there is no suggestion that this applies to any St James teachers past or present. It is just a theoretical example to help us understand what level of abuse Mr Boddy finds acceptable.
Perhaps we could set some theoretical parameters?
Would you employ a teacher who had rape on his or her record?* Would you shrug that off too?
Or is it just beating ups that you shrug off?
* Of course there is no suggestion that this applies to any St James teachers past or present. It is just a theoretical example to help us understand what level of abuse Mr Boddy finds acceptable.
Funny that St James preaches truth and courage. I hope that the Headmaster would be courageous enough to answer this question truthfully.
Incidentally, a broadcast journalist friend of mine is pitching a piece to his bosses next week about doing an investigation into the 3 remaining teachers from the inquiry days.
Keep your fingers crossed!
Incidentally, a broadcast journalist friend of mine is pitching a piece to his bosses next week about doing an investigation into the 3 remaining teachers from the inquiry days.
Keep your fingers crossed!
1980sstj
That's quite a responsibility you have taken on - to represent former pupils. You represent yourself and yourself only unless specifically asked by someone else as much as I speak for myself only.
No one is obliged to go on trial on this website - it does not have that authority to demand anyone to answer an anonymous questioner, or named for that matter. Rather than goad why do you not write to him and once you receive the response you can share it?
Sarcasm and cynicism do you no favours.
Yours
Patrick Wyatt
That's quite a responsibility you have taken on - to represent former pupils. You represent yourself and yourself only unless specifically asked by someone else as much as I speak for myself only.
No one is obliged to go on trial on this website - it does not have that authority to demand anyone to answer an anonymous questioner, or named for that matter. Rather than goad why do you not write to him and once you receive the response you can share it?
Sarcasm and cynicism do you no favours.
Yours
Patrick Wyatt
Merry / Patrick
Please don't forget that it is through this (anonymous) site that we have achieved the recognition that we have so far. I think it is a perfectly valid stance to publicly ask questions of David Boddy here - he has after all posted on here himself (or so we are led to believe) and we know that this board is read by a number of people who are able to report to him.
No-one is obliged to do anything, but by reading this board anyone can gain an understanding of the prevalent views of the large number of ex-pupils here. The point that is being made, very succinctly, is that there has been NO ACTION from the governors as yet, other than rather pathetic attempts to brush the whole thing under the carpet.
1980sstj speaks for many of us by asking these questions. If he/she wasn't asking them then it would be someone else. While this board has no leaders, it represents a body of pupils that have together raised the general awareness of a number of major issues. It is naive of the governors and / or anyone else to believe that we are going to each spend what little time we have writing letters to each of the govs and headmasters, essentially repeating what is said on here.
The governors have chosen to communicate via their own website, and in doing so they have recognised that they are dealing with a body of ex-students, just as we address a body of governors, head teachers and senior tutors. It is a shame that they cannot bring themselves to communicate with us on here - I don't know what they are scared of. Dialogue is after all the key to reconciliation.
So, rather than criticise the delivery, why don't you comment on the content.
Alban
Please don't forget that it is through this (anonymous) site that we have achieved the recognition that we have so far. I think it is a perfectly valid stance to publicly ask questions of David Boddy here - he has after all posted on here himself (or so we are led to believe) and we know that this board is read by a number of people who are able to report to him.
No-one is obliged to do anything, but by reading this board anyone can gain an understanding of the prevalent views of the large number of ex-pupils here. The point that is being made, very succinctly, is that there has been NO ACTION from the governors as yet, other than rather pathetic attempts to brush the whole thing under the carpet.
1980sstj speaks for many of us by asking these questions. If he/she wasn't asking them then it would be someone else. While this board has no leaders, it represents a body of pupils that have together raised the general awareness of a number of major issues. It is naive of the governors and / or anyone else to believe that we are going to each spend what little time we have writing letters to each of the govs and headmasters, essentially repeating what is said on here.
The governors have chosen to communicate via their own website, and in doing so they have recognised that they are dealing with a body of ex-students, just as we address a body of governors, head teachers and senior tutors. It is a shame that they cannot bring themselves to communicate with us on here - I don't know what they are scared of. Dialogue is after all the key to reconciliation.
So, rather than criticise the delivery, why don't you comment on the content.
Alban
Alban wrote:It is a shame that they cannot bring themselves to communicate with us on here - I don't know what they are scared of. Dialogue is after all the key to reconciliation.
Someone on another thread wrote:Remember who you represent, you are all the voice of the SES.
On the one hand, there is talk of the need for dialogue. On the other, any dialogue is futile given any statement by DB will be the 'voice of the SES' and nothing more.
Merry wrote:1980sstj
That's quite a responsibility you have taken on - to represent former pupils. You represent yourself and yourself only unless specifically asked by someone else as much as I speak for myself only.
No one is obliged to go on trial on this website - it does not have that authority to demand anyone to answer an anonymous questioner, or named for that matter. Rather than goad why do you not write to him and once you receive the response you can share it?
Sarcasm and cynicism do you no favours.
Yours
Patrick Wyatt
What a bizarre post! I have never in any way sought to represent former pupils nor claimed I do nor anything of the sort.
I agree with the response given to your post by someone else above.
We are talking about little children who were beaten up by adults. I think it is important to remember that.
Return to “St James and St Vedast”
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 89 guests