trubleshtr wrote:Thank you Bonsai. I don't quite understand why they are not named if they are guilty of 'criminal abuse',
I'm no lawyer, however we must recognise the inquiry was not conducted to a standard of proof to determine criminal culpability. The outline to the inquiry makes it clear that the burden of proof used is that of the "balance of probability", which is simply that the allegations are more likely to have occurred than not.
I believe that what Mr Townend has uncovered is that the abuses that occurred constitute "criminal assualts" and that what was done to some of the former pupils far exceeds any acceptable level of physical chastisement by todays standards or the standards applicable at the time. Whether there is sufficient evidence to suggest that criminal proceedings could be taken against any particular teacher is not clear. It is not clear either, whether any particular teacher has been implicated as being responsible for these actions or not.
As a former pupil, I remain entirely stunned that the inquiry uncovered as much as it did. I think I, and most others, expected the outcome to somehow whitewash over what had happened and the school was going to be cleared. The fact that it does go as far as it does vindicates the former pupils that have been courageous enough to come forward and makes it absolutely clear that what was done to them was well beyond acceptable or caring.
St James would contend that all of this is in the past; that the school and teaching methods have evolved such that this sort of culture is behind them. I know that this is to some extend true. The culture changed whilst I was there and the use of corporal punishment from when I started in 1980 to when I left in 1994 was dramatically different. The main thing however is that St James does not acknowledge and the inquiry did not touch the role the SES Philosophy played in shaping the culture when the schools started and what it plays in the culture of the school today.
Personally I hold the teachers' and governors' defference to the Teaching as entirely responsible for allowing them to bypass their own natural human morality in allowing the abuses to occur. To me at least, this is an issue that remains today. Whilst physical harm at a teacher's hand is unlikely to occur to any pupil at St James, there is still room for emotional and psychological harm from the philosophy it touts and its teaching methods and culture. The school has no interest, unfortunately, in taking a good critical look at the philosophy.
Regarding the governors of the time, Roger Pincham was chair until last year. The only other governor I can remember that was heavily involved for a long time was Richard Edmunds. The governance of the St James schools is controlled by the Independent Educational Association Ltd. The trustees (directors) of this legal entity are the governors. I'm sure the full history of the trustees is a matter of public record with the charity commission.
The Head Teachers of the St James School were:
Nicholas Debenham (junior and senior boys, then just senior boys till c2004)
Shiela Caldwell (junior and senior girls, then just senior girls until 1996)
Paul Moss (junior Boys and Girls from late 80s I think till present)
Laura Hyde (senior girls from 1996 till present)
David Boddy (senior boys till present)
Julian Capper was head teacher of St Vedast boys
I don't know who was head teacher of St Veadast girls
Not sure about all the dates but hopefully someone can enlighten me where I'm wrong
Bonsai