Incest Is Rife

“This is like hiring the Ku Klux Klan to represent you in a desegregation case.” James McElroy

Prejudiced Duke Street Governors

Andrew Kidd	Head Teacher
Elaine Haddon	Teaching Assistant
Elaine Callan	Nursery Nurse
Anne Callander	Teacher
Sarah Ridley	Deputy Head Teacher
Joan Quinton	Teacher - Retired
Steve McLoughlin	Parent Governor - Wife teacher
Nigel West	Florist
Peter Whittle	Nigel West’s Delivery Man
Jane Watts	Teacher

The above listed people had been governors at Duke Street Primary School - including myself.

Andrew Kidd, head teacher (by default a governor) must be considered to be a hostile participant in my case. His role was supposed to have been impartial - the investigator has to have an open mind and it is for the governors to consider and judge the evidence. He continued to demonstrate through his actions that he held a significant resentment of me, not only as a teacher, but as a human being.
(Ref : Anonymous Text)

Elaine Haddon was the only witness to the incident. By definition, a hostile witness. (Another witness should have been the 5 year old girl. I would have expected to have seen reports produced by Social Services but there were none submitted !)

Elaine Callan, a hostile witness, whose testimony supported Elaine Haddon’s claim that I had been sitting on a stool using a whiteboard. Otherwise, her testimony was largely hearsay.

Anne Callander, another hostile witness, who claimed that I had admitted the assault to her whilst I was in a hysterical fit on the day of my suspension. Recently, she sent my partner an e-mail in which she admits that she had perjured herself. Her confusion had been apparent at both hearings.

(Elaine Haddon and Anne Callander are friends who meet socially and online through Facebook.)

Sarah Ridley had taught at Burscough Primary School where Andrew Kidd had been head teacher and they had shared the same class for some years. Andrew Kidd offered her a teaching post at Duke Street. Since then she has achieved an unprecedented, meteoric rise to deputy head teacher ... this resulted in understandable speculation by Duke Street staff !

Joan Quinton, a supply teacher, who filled my position throughout my suspension. I had known her over many years as a teacher at Duke Street. Her motivation was always that of self-interest. She had been a well liked teacher and had retired many years ago. It was to her financial benefit that I did not return to school !

Steve McLoughlin had an interest in protecting his wife who was a teacher at Duke Street. His wife, Janet, had been fearful of recrimination by Andrew Kidd - so much so, that, even though we had known one another for 20 years, she could not provide me with a character reference :

Nigel West is a local florist in Chorley, Marshalls. He has the contract for the school’s floral requirement and as such has a vested financial interest and therefore an obligation to Andrew Kidd.

Peter Whittle works for Nigel West as a delivery man. It seems unfair and incorrect that he should have attended my disciplinary hearing with his employer.

My hearings could never have been fair or impartial because everyone, in one way or another, had a vested interest.

Everyone knew one another; at best it was a confused mix of divided loyalties and personality clashes; at worst it was an outrageous theatrical farce !

There are 16 governors at Duke Street Primary School, 10 had a predetermined / vested interest in the outcome of my case. One governor was deliberately excluded and another is ‘intellectually challenged’ but had had their hair done for the occasion !

And that was just the tip of the iceberg ! Throw in a couple of Lancashire County Council HR managers who are not averse to adding their lies and to deliberately excluding the only trustworthy and upright Duke Street governor - Mohammed Naeem.

Christine Toward and Robert Sage are other governors of note who should have been prohibited from being involved with the judgement of my case.

Christine Toward had presided over my disciplinary hearing and Robert Sage over my appeal hearing.

They will feature in later discussion in subsequent blog entries.

I close with a special thanks to another governor, Lorraine Nicholls, school secretary. She approached me at the appeal hearing to let me know how much that she had been looking forward to the day and that she had had her hair done especially !

I hope that she enjoyed the day - it is reassuring to know that there was someone there who could recognize the significance and importance of the destruction of my life whilst still enjoying themselves ! (If you ever attend another hearing, don’t forget your knitting !)

Beat that Mary Antoinette !
Just for you Lorraine - At the execution of Mary Antoinette, Madame Tussaud sat knitting.

---

----- Original Message -----
From: Anne Callander
To: False Allegation
Sent: 05 January 2010 15:49
Subject: Anne Callander sent you a message on Facebook...

As a Headteacher myself I know that the safeguarding and protection of a child is paramount, above all other concerns, and there are procedures that simply have to be followed.

The outcome would have been so different and Jane would still be teaching today if she had accepted that she needed support during the difficult time she was having. Instead she chose a different route.

The Jane I once knew would have taken the correct advice and accept the support offered from the start. She would NOT have ignored the advice from her union, her friends and the supportive network at county. She would NOT have followed the corrosive and destructive path that was advised by her partner whose first contact with her after the suspension was to tell her to “Shut up and don’t say any more”.

None of this was reported at the hearing. I could have done had I chosen to, but I wanted to say as little as possible whilst still telling the TRUTH.

This was the stance I had taken all along which I now know was “sitting on the fence”. I also took this attitude during the phonecalls that I received from Jane possibly giving the impression that I was agreeing with her by responding with “mmmm” and expressive “oh nos” and the like.

...
...

Her e-mail continued but her actions clearly show that she was guilty of lying by omission :

“... I wanted to say as little as possible whilst still telling the TRUTH.”

In her e-mail, she also makes the statement :

“No doubt this is what led to Jane expecting me to lie for her at the hearing.”

I had no such expectation of her or of anyone else but she went ahead anyway and lied for her own reasons ! All that I ever wanted to be presented was the truth but it was witnesses like her and others that chose to lie for reasons that I will never understand that damned me to my life today.

She claims to be a friend but friends do not behave in such a manner - her intent was callous, malicious and scheming, her reasons and rationale are beyond comprehension.

She claims to care about children, their safety being paramount ... but her actions demonstrate that she cared nothing for the well-being of the 5 year old girl, Exxxx ... this is why existing policies and procedures that are there to protect children so often fail with such disastrous results ... because people like her determine their own versions of TRUTH and to hell with the consequences !

---

Anne Callander is also saying something in her e-mail that is so sinister yet undeniably has substance and validity :

“The outcome would have been so different and Jane would still be teaching today if she had accepted that she needed support during the difficult time she was having. Instead she chose a different route.”

There is an implication that the process of dealing with an allegation of assault by a teacher transcends the truth itself. This is what I have been saying all along – the truth per say was never of any importance. It might be that if I’d grovelled, respected my peers and been remorseful (for something that I’d not done) then somehow it would have all come out right – and bizarrely, I think that she’s probably correct in what she says !

The Lynch Mob

“The mob is man voluntarily descending to the nature of the beast. Its fit hour of activity is night. Its actions are insane like its whole constitution. It persecutes a principle; it would whip a right; it would tar and feather justice, by inflicting fire and outrage upon the houses and persons of those who have these. It resembles the prank of boys, who run with fire-engines to put out the ruddy aurora streaming to the stars.”

Ralph Waldo Emerson (1803-1882)

Michael Gove Empowers and Sanctions Mob Rule
‘Mob Mentality’, ‘Herd Behaviour’, call it what you like, but we hear it all the time to do with emotive issues and some not so emotive ones. The type of mob rule we see when it comes to morals like child abuse is an example where people just talk and very rarely do anything about it.

Moral Panics have several distinct features. According to Goode and Ben-Yehuda, moral panic has the following characteristics :

Concern – There must be awareness that the behaviour of the group or category in question is likely to have a negative impact on society.

Hostility – Hostility towards the group in question increases, and they become ‘folk devils’. A clear division forms between ‘them’ and ‘us’.

Consensus – Though concern does not have to be nationwide, there must be widespread acceptance that the group in question poses a very real threat to society. It is important at this stage that the ‘moral entrepreneurs’ are vocal and the ‘folk devils’ appear weak and disorganised.

Disproportionality – The action taken is disproportionate to the actual threat posed by the accused group.
Especially poignant; the disproportionality of the perceived threat to the mob. The mob sees demons in every corner, supplied indeed by their own imaginations or perceived fears.

Volatility – Moral panics are highly volatile and tend to disappear as quickly as they appeared due to a wane in public interest or news reports changing to another topic.

---

On 27 September 2007, I was suspended for allegedly assaulting a child. I was not allowed to know the nature of the allegation until my arrest on 31 October 2007.

The police told me that I had been accused of slapping a 5 year old girl on the hand on the afternoon of 26 September 2007. The incident had been reported by Mrs. Haddon, a teaching assistant who had been working in my classroom.

Mrs. Haddon’s statement said :

“On the afternoon of Wednesday 26 September 2007 at approximately 2pm, I was working with 2 children on the table directly opposite to the table J Watts was working with a group of children.

A short while into the activity I heard J Watts shout, I looked up from what I was doing just as she was standing up, she reached over the desk to Exxxx, smacked her hand and snatched the pencil that was in the same hand from her.”

So here is the scene that was alleged :

A five year old girl writing at a circular table using a Staedtler pencil – large in comparison with her small hand. I reached over the 120 centimetre diameter table and slapped her hand, hard enough for it to be clearly audible across a classroom of 28 noisy children but not hard enough to knock away the pencil from her hand !

The police accepted my statement and passed comment on the validity of Mrs. Haddon’s version of events. They were concerned by the fact that Mrs. Haddon had waited 20 hours instead of reporting the incident immediately. The police added that they believed that I was being victimized. They asked me if there were bad feelings between myself and Mr. Kidd and Mrs. Haddon.

The police dismissed the case on 19 November 2007 … the case then moved from the ‘professionals’ to the school – the ‘lynch mob’ – Lancashire County Council, school governors all led by Mr. Kidd !

Whilst the police believed my statement, Mr. Kidd did not and he set about ‘proving what he believed and knew’. Evidence was fabricated and statements embellished – anything that might support my case was suppressed – Mr. Kidd said “Such evidence only served to ‘cloud the issue’ of what I believed and knew.”

Even in the hands of the police, there had been no real or concrete evidence that supported the case one way or another. Mr. Kidd changed that and presented a report to the ‘mob’ that established certainty – absolute and irrefutable evidence.

In the absence of commonsense and through the introduction of ‘mob rule’, the magnitude and scale of the alleged assault now increased beyond all recognition.

Mrs. Haddon and Mrs. Callan agreed that, at the time of the alleged assault, Exxxx had not cried or reacted nor had any of the other children who had been working at the table.

The police had been pragmatic and recognized the trivial nature of the so called ‘slap’ even if the incident had taken place.

By the time Mr. Kidd had finished, it was clear that Exxxx had been fortunate to escape with her life !

To explain the 20 hour delay in reporting the incident, Mrs. Haddon said that the assault had been so vicious, violent and unprovoked that she had suffered shock and had been unable to react. It had taken her many hours to recover from the effects of witnessing such an attack !

The ‘lynch mob’ responded to this dramatic and graphic image in sheer outrage. Mr. Kidd then added further impact by describing the mental state and anguish that Exxxx was still suffering. A year had nearly elapsed and poor Exxxx was still exhibiting signs of post traumatic abuse and bed wetting. She still remained in fear when coming to school just in case Mrs. Watts had returned.

The drama of it all proved too much for the ‘mob’ to bear and I was lynched by a group of so called responsible and upright citizens.

---

Everyone has experience of one form or another of the result of the ‘mob mentatility’. Sadly, the consequences, especially in those areas where children are involved, can be devastating.

Everyday there are news reports, public outcries for justice - and then it all goes quiet and the story becomes no more than a wrapper for fish and chips. Life returns to normal and nothing ever changes !

When will Michael Gove begin to appreciate the consequences of his policies and initiatives ? How many more innocent people will be lynched by the ‘angry mob’ that he has empowered ?