To think innocent until proven guilty even at school?

[PurplePenguins]

There's 2 parts to my post really. Both annoy me but AIBU?

1. My DS3 is 15yo and very quiet and shy. A boy at his school was attacked in the playground (not badly so as to call the police). He accused my DS3 of the assault. I didn't believe him. It's not DS3 nature and the size difference would make it impossible (DS3 being a lot lighter and shorter). Anyway, DS3 was to spend the day in isolation while the school investigated. It took 3 days to watch the CCTV!!!! They discovered that it wasn't DS3 who attacked the boy in fact DS3 was the other side of the school grounds at the time so DS3 has spent 3 days in isolation for no reason. He has not even had an apology from anyone.
2. During his time in isolation, he has missed all breaks including lunch. DS3 wears braces (so no sugary foods or drinks) and is dairy intolerant. He has not been allowed a proper school dinner, but has been offered either a jam or cheese sandwich for which I have been charged £2.60 even though DS3 refused both. The school has a no packed lunch policy, saying they can cater for all dietary requirements. I wasn't told about the lunch arrangements when I was told about isolation. When I complained, the response was, in a nut shell all.students are treated equally and if DS3 doesn't want to eat that is up to him. AIBU to feel annoyed and feel as though they may have been treating him as though he was the one in the wrong?

(Sorry if I'm rambling)

OhGoodness:

"and not leap to rash conclusions based on one side of part of a story."

No poster is asking them to jump to ANY Rash decisions.
But inconsistencies in the claims, would have come to light quite quickly.

I think that anyone, any Deputy Head, HoY, etc, could quite quickly, in fact anyone with any nonce, could have established quite quickly, that the original claim by the attacked child, didn't stack up.

Or that it possibly wasn't Op's ds who did the attacking.

And then, if that did highlight questions, I, if I was a teacher, would make it a priority to find out exactly what HAD happened.

And not let it drag out for 3 days.

Are you a teacher?

jalpie perhaps not.

But he wasn't locked away. And he was given food he could eat. And we've heard a selective representation of half the story.

So not really the same is it?

Truly horrendous. Your child will learn how awful school can be and how unfair and wrong those in authority can be . He deserves an apology. 3 days to look at a physical incident is really bad for the victim as well. Complain to governors and head.

And we have to question?
WHY?
Why oh why? Did the attacked child, claim it was Op's ds?
Now that is seriously worrying.
Why lie. If you chose not to inform school of an attack, that's one thing. But to LIE. About which child it was.

That's is BAD. Really Bad.
Its one thing to say you aren't sure. To say, it was dark, and I was hit in an alley/attacked and I don't know who it was. Its a totally different thing to claim you've been attacked by a specific individual. To name them.
Very odd.

This situation doesn't sound good and needs addressing but regarding the title - no. Balance of probabilities for most things.

I'll bite oblomov seeing as you think you're a competent lead teacher.

Accuser wanders in at 1.15 saying he's been beaten up by OP son. He's had time to get a couple of his mates briefed on the story. You park him in you office to write his statement, and send staff to round up his mates and get their statement. You don't know where OPs son is so are going to have to wait till pm reg to collect him.

You request and review CCTV. Unfortunately its inconclusive - you can't tell as the person committing the assault has their back to camera and a hood up.

You now have 3 statements to review and questions to ask. OPs son is in a side room waiting to be interviewed. By the time youve taken statements and talked to all 4 so far its end of day 1.

Day 2 - you've identified people corroborating OPs sons story and some other witnesses from the accusers story. By now its clear there is more than one story here. You collect all these witnesses, take statements, review and question. By now its lunchtime and these statements have identified a wider pool of witnesses. You start to collect these and question. Day two ends.

Day three - you've reviewed all statements and have further questions for key witnesses. You spend most of your day chasing these down. By end of day you think you have a clear picture of what is going on and discuss with head.

So tell me again how you were going to collect 20+ witness statements, interview 20+ kids multiple times, and do your full time job in 30 minutes?

@ohgoodness of course the two scenarios are not exactly the same but the fundamental principles are .. you seem to be having a very strong reaction that seems founded in a dislike for teenagers or perhaps an overly inflated opinion of teachers and a belief that they shouldn't be questioned or held accountable ... no profession is above scrutiny or accountability!

Not even the isolation, I’d be absolutely bloody furious that they think those choices of lunch are acceptable to someone with allergies, and let him go 3 days without eating lunch. I’d be straight in there demanding an explanation.

"DS3 had punched the boy repeatedly in the stomach and then pinned him against the wall by his throat so that his feet left the floor."

Hardly a case for mistaken identity is it.

As this happened in the middle of the playground, in broad daylight.

This is an absolute miscarriage of justice. Teachers who investigated this have been very poor. Handled it poorly.

And worse still not apologetic, in hindsight. Head should have gushed apology to OP, at first opportunity. But no, she has been invited to a meeting. But not today. Not until tomorrow. At the end of the school day.
even if Head was busy today, surely he could get Deputy to ring her today, with the promise that Head will deal with himself tomorrow. That's poor.

No sense of urgency.

And then to make it worse, we get some posters, who don't have the grace and dignity to be able to admit when teachers get it very wrong.
Thats why, these things continue to happen again and again.

Oh Goodness, you are misquoting me.

If you're gonna do it, get it right!!

I never claimed to be a "competent lead teacher".

And I never said you could solve it in 30 minutes. But I did say you could have looked at the cctv quickly. And that would have very quickly highlighted inconsistencies. Very quickly.

Which should lead you to investigate further, quickly.

Not let the innocent accused boy stay in isolation for 3 days.

Oblomov - I think you'll find in that narrative that is a thorough investigation carried out quickly . Its when you discover contradictory stories that you need to bring in a wider circle of witnesses.

That it took more than an afternoon is a strong indicator the CCTV was not reliable or useful.

I'm interested in how long it would take you to build up a suite of witnesses, locate, retrieve, take statements, review, question. Assume 20. 1 day? 2? 3? It is fairly normal for those entirely unfamiliar with a job to grossly underestimate the complexities and time it takes to do it.

Jalpie
"@ohgoodness of course the two scenarios are not exactly the same but the fundamental principles are .. you seem to be having a very strong reaction that seems founded in a dislike for teenagers or perhaps an overly inflated opinion of teachers and a belief that they shouldn't be questioned or held accountable ... no profession is above scrutiny or accountability!"

I don't disagree with you. However the irony is lost on most posters who have heard part of an unsubtantiated story and leapt to a conclusion as to who is right/wrong without realising this is what they're accusing the school of doing - whereas the reality will probably involve a detailed and thorough investigation over a few days to determine the truth.

How do you know we are all inexperienced?
Many people here may have done complex investigations.

" is lost on most posters who have heard part of an unsubtantiated story and leapt to a conclusion"

No we aren't leaping to any conclusions. We are suggesting that the school should have and could have dealt with this, better, and more quickly.

Based on conclusions drawn from a partial representation of an unsubstantiated account.

You've assumed much and known little.

@ohgoodnesssakes You keep reiterating that cctv is notoriously poor quality and not always reliable - and in many cases you wouldn't be wrong.

You seem to be missing the point though that it wasn't in this case. As soon as they viewed it, the OPs son was exonerated. Her point is that if it had been viewed promptly he wouldn't have been punished for three days - and she's right!

pengggwyn, oh sorry I mean
ohgoodness, is extremely biased towards schools and teachers and writes a whole load of goady bollocks on every thread like this.

Funny how it took school 2 hours to see same cctv footage on another occaision and deal with the incident.
It cant be that bad to decipher.

OhGoodness
God save us from teaches who have such a mindset.

I don't think I've assumed very much.
I've suggested lots of thing. Speculated. Questioned.
Not asuumption and presumption.
These things are very different.
And its shocking that you can't tell the difference.

It would be perfectly obvious that the boy couldnt be ops ds from the difference in height and weight.

And dont tell me they didnt have someone in mind from the get go. Our school is never surprised when i report bullying of my son by the same group of kids every time damm time.

How is 3 days in isolation not a punishment especially for a quiet consciousness child?? God if I’d have been put in isolation at 15 I’d have been bricking it quite frankly. How is anyone supposed to work to their full potential feeling shame and guilt when they’ve actually done nothing wrong. I wouldn’t be impressed at all- he deserves an apology the school have let him down. I hope you get the resolution he deserves op.

He had food - he chose not to eat it.

FFS, the school gave sandwiches with cheese and jam and, I strongly suspect, butter in to a child who is dairy intolerant. What element of choice did he have there? Was he supposed to eat it and suffer the invevitable reaction?

Why was he only offered sandwiches anyway?

A jam sandwich is punishment on its own let’s be right!