Positive experience of the inquiry

Discussion of the children's schools in the UK.
User avatar
ET
Posts: 194
Joined: Tue May 10, 2005 10:49 am
Location: Gloucestershire
Contact:

Positive experience of the inquiry

Postby ET » Thu Jul 07, 2005 2:28 pm

This post has been removed.
Last edited by ET on Wed Jul 20, 2005 10:17 am, edited 1 time in total.

daska
Posts: 270
Joined: Sat Jan 22, 2005 8:29 pm
Location: UK

Postby daska » Thu Jul 07, 2005 4:54 pm

I'd like to second ET, her experience matches my own, the chairman seems happy to have information provided for background purposes when the person submitting it has reason to want or need a degree of anonymity.

User avatar
Keir
Posts: 177
Joined: Mon Feb 14, 2005 5:04 am
Location: London

Postby Keir » Mon Jul 18, 2005 6:03 am

I have posted on another forum about my positive experience of all the enquiry staff.

One thing that is troubling me is the lack of legal advice available to those willing to give evidence. There seems little point after all in submitting a record of your experiences if they are going to throw the considerable weight of their legal resources at you in order to discredit you and protect their own.

Does anyone know the necessary legal stuff. ie personal accounts and opinions based on personal experience submitted to a private enquiry?Does that count as 'published' and therefore subject to libel law? etc

Pink womble
Posts: 9
Joined: Tue Feb 01, 2005 5:35 pm
Location: UK

Postby Pink womble » Tue Jul 19, 2005 6:00 pm

Keir, from my fading memory of a course on journalism law, I am pretty certain you've published something as soon as someone else reads or hears it. The damage to the person's reputation is determined by who and how many read/ hears it.

People have defences from being sued if giving evidence in court, but I'd assume the enquiry doesn't have the same status. I suspect you'd only be in trouble if someone claimed you were acting maliciously.

If you can borrow a copy of McNae's Essential Law for Journalists from the libary it should give you all the info you'll ever need. It was regarded as the industry bible while I was studying (about four years ago).

Hope that helps a little!

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

Postby mgormez » Thu Jul 21, 2005 1:51 am

I am not a legal expert but I do know of a case in which 25 thousand people had studied certain texts but it was still not considered published by the Swedish Supreme Court because an allegedly very strick admitance regime was in place. Not so strict the papers didn't hit the street but still, it was found good enough by the courts.

http://xenu.xtdnet.nl/court/10.html
Mike Gormez

Shout
Posts: 101
Joined: Tue Jan 11, 2005 5:19 pm
Location: Reality
Contact:

The Working Hour

Postby Shout » Wed Jan 11, 2006 6:02 pm

_____________________________________________________________
Last edited by Shout on Wed Nov 22, 2006 7:57 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
ET
Posts: 194
Joined: Tue May 10, 2005 10:49 am
Location: Gloucestershire
Contact:

Postby ET » Thu Jan 12, 2006 9:32 am

For clarification, I was asked to remove the post at the top of this conversation by Ms Betts herself, as she felt that it compromised the independent nature of the inquiry.
I understand, Shout, why you are worried. We are all worried, I think, about what the report will say. The only thing I can say is that I think the Mr. Townend made it clear in the TOR that all contributors to the inquiry (and all person's complained against) would receive copies of the report.
Those of us who have been so damaged by the school find it very difficult to trust in this process, but I myself am reserving judgement until I have seen the report.
It's quite possible that it will be a washout, and that Mr. Townend is being too much influenced by the people who are paying him. However, it is also possible that having read all the submissions and listened to interviews he will write a report in our favour. I certainly feel that the fact that the process has taken so long is probably a good sign - after all, the SES wanted it all to be over and done with in two weeks!!

Shout
Posts: 101
Joined: Tue Jan 11, 2005 5:19 pm
Location: Reality
Contact:

Hope Faith Doubt Despair

Postby Shout » Thu Jan 12, 2006 5:45 pm

_____________________________________________________________
Last edited by Shout on Wed Nov 22, 2006 7:56 pm, edited 1 time in total.

NYC
Posts: 122
Joined: Mon Feb 21, 2005 10:17 pm

Postby NYC » Fri Jan 13, 2006 2:51 am

For clarification, I was asked to remove the post at the top of this conversation by Ms Betts herself, as she felt that it compromised the independent nature of the inquiry.


mmm....how exactly does what you post under a pseudonym on an internet board compromise an in-house inquiry?

please forgive me for being so direct...but since you don't say you thought your comment compromised the inquiry, why did you remove it? If you had second thoughts about what you posted, for whatever reason, that is quite one thing. But to edit your post at the request of "Ms Betts herself" I think gives her too much control over what you write.

I don't want to be patronizing -- you haven't asked me for advice. But simply posting here does invite comment. Mine would be that when someone in authority asks (or tells) you to do something, you don't necessarily need to do it. Maybe you agree with Ms Betts' concerns -- but that isn't the reason you gave for editing your comments.

User avatar
ET
Posts: 194
Joined: Tue May 10, 2005 10:49 am
Location: Gloucestershire
Contact:

Postby ET » Fri Jan 13, 2006 10:50 am

Hi NYC,

I agree that just because someone in authority tells me to do something I don't actually have to do it!!

Without re-iterating the very comments I was asked to remove, Ms. Betts felt that I had not respected the confidentiality of the telephone conversation I had with her, and felt that I should respect the confidentiality of the inquiry in (and I quote directly from her e-mail) "the same way we have respected yours".

I felt that this wasn't too much to ask, being that she had been incredibly supportive and helpful in safeguarding my confidentiality with regards to the evidence I submitted to the inquiry (and I'm afraid I can't clarify what I mean by that on here - if you would like a clarification then you can PM me).

I have to say that in my (albeit limited) experience of the inquiry, confidentiality seems to be a high priority to both Mr. Townend and Ms. Betts.

Shout
Posts: 101
Joined: Tue Jan 11, 2005 5:19 pm
Location: Reality
Contact:

Postby Shout » Fri Jan 13, 2006 4:28 pm

_____________________________________________________________


Return to “St James and St Vedast”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 58 guests