Queen Ethelburga school and sex abuse

[BatmansBat]

www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/news/crime/owner-of-york-boarding-school-queen-ethelburgas-jailed-for-historical-sexual-abuse-of-pupils-3295138%3famp

www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9754347/amp/Millionaire-businessman-bought-37-000-year-boarding-school-abuse-pupils-jailed.html

Ok, so I am really cross that the previous thread got deleted. It had a lot of helpful links. This concerns child abuse and safeguarding and I am still aghast that this can happen.

A predatory male buys a boarding school (allegedly through various holding companies)

he installs somewhere between 500 and 700 cameras around the building, including in areas where children get changed

he abuses children

his lawyer threatens to sue MN when women tried to discuss anything negative about the school

He got appointed to Chairman of the Governors which meant that he could help write the safeguarding policies.

He managed to get off from charges the first time

www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-york-north-yorkshire-44785825.amp

How can this be allowed to happen? As parents we need to know that our children are safe. I think this should be used as an example of how important all safeguarding principles are!

@BatmansBat

The last thread got deleted (so many brilliant links disappeared) but my understanding is that the results were presented in an innovative way.

a) They divided the school up in two subsections where on was better performing and was was worse performing.

b) this division ticked all regulatory boxes but there was no obvious reason for the split (like two single sex schools like haberdashers or different locations) and the pupils shared teachers and buildings.

c) the results tables (showing excellent rankings) excluded well known extremely academic schools like Westminster and St Pauls for some unknown reason.

d) ownership structure was extremely complicated and the school was owned via various trusts. According to the recent articles the ultimate owner, Mr Martin, is sentenced for sexual abuse of children at the school.

a) Mr Martin was overseeing the school as a governor when all the cameras were placed all over the school, including in changing areas.

When any hints of improper arrangements were made by the women here, the lawyer for Mr Martin (?) contacted MN and threatened to sue. They were stating things like “the division between the two part of the school is legal” (well ticking all boxes but maybe unethical?) and (the owner of the school is a trust/charity (well yes, but then you had the owner of the trust and of that trust etc, ending up with Mr Martin).

I think this shows three things.

1. The extraordinarily entitlement on some men and how they will operate technically within the law but with a disregard for the spirit of the law.

2. How some men will go to any effort to access children for sexual gratification. This man bought an entire school

3. when people start playing fast and loose with safeguarding for whatever reason (the school was criticised for the cameras) really bad things will happen. Because only the most rigorous safeguarding policies will protect children from predators who are willing to do anything for their sexual gratification.

4. people who are so worried about a discussion that they manage to get thread after thread deleted and even involve lawyers are likely to have something to hide.

Excellent points.

It never ceases to amaze how far some people will go to stop discussion around very important issues, particularly those involving children.

I saw the news story and was horrified. I hoped there would be discussion about it but there has been very little coverage so am glad to see this thread. It should become a case study used in every discussion about safeguarding.

I definitely think this should be a case study in safeguarding. And I agree with OholyJesus, in every situation we need to look at the worst possible scenario and plan for that.

Nobody should be able to play fast and loose with safeguarding. DRS checks needs to be thorough and take all previous names into account. Nobody is above suspicion, regardless of status, race, sex or gender. Nobody should be able to get away with flying under the radar due to status (happened here, white, privileged, rich owner male) or by playing a victim card. We should all be under suspicion and safeguarding needs to plan for that.

We should all be under suspicion and safeguarding needs to plan for that.

I like your use if the word 'we'. I saw a local council policy about safeguarding a few years ago (when I woke up to what was happening in schools) and it very deliberately stated that safeguarding was everyone's responsibility.

Whether parents or not, whether we are just ok the fringes of a family, or not.

We should all relearn to trust our instincts, respect boundaries and report anything that creates that nasty feeling in our stomachs if something just not being quite right.

Wow.

It used be a joke on here that any thread about the school would get deleted.

Didn’t realise why though

Someone is playing hard at manipulating Google results.

The Daily Mail report only appears if you add "Daily Mail" to the search term.

Doing that brought up this as well.

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5254331/Teacher-boarding-school-banned-classroom.html

There is another schoo who used to use threats of lawyers to get threads deleted on forums, so much so that one forum banned all mentin of the school.

That school was Ballet West, a school that took 16 year olds to the remote scottish highlands, made them stay in accommodation owned by the owner personally and where countless students were groomed by the owners son.

Luckily ITV disregarded all the threats and investigated and the schoo closed last summer. It looks like Queen E needs similar publicity.

Comefromfaraway, would you be able to start a thread on that school? I think this needs to be widely discussed. I am horrified at this.

It's sort of old news in that it all kicked off last summer and the school closed unexpectedly. Jonathan Baron was charged in April. I have no first hand knowledge but dd has friends who attended.

How come he's only got three years??

He was acquitted of six counts before. And it's evident that his abuse is about as premeditated as you can get.

He'll be out in 18 months.

Wait, Kimikos, I just looked at your link. We have three male sex offenders at this school,

the owner.

www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9754347/amp/Millionaire-businessman-bought-37-000-year-boarding-school-abuse-pupils-jailed.html

A teacher

yorkmix.com/cold-and-calculating-teacher-hid-camera-in-bathroom-of-school-near-york/

And another teacher

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5254331/Teacher-boarding-school-banned-classroom.html

Three male perverts at the same school and one of them with an influence over the safe guarding policies

He bought the school, and then invited his mates?

Why is this in "sex and gender"?

I feel like this is especially likely to happen with small schools - my DS is being pushed towards a small independent specialist school. One of the two is run/managed/maintained by the owner so that means the owner is on site all the time, doing repairs etc. Family run small businesses already have a bad reputation for HR, people not really knowing the regulations, giving jobs to their friends, not quite following the rules. Which is not too bad if it's a hairdresser's or a plumber, but catastrophic if it's a school.

DS was previously in a small village school and most of these have the Head as the SENCO and again, you can't complain to one about the other where they are the same things. Schools should not be run by amateurs.

In terms of safeguarding and CCTV, there are rules, I'm sure. Our local school installed some, and it was very swiftly pointed out that one of them was in an inappropriate place. And had to be removed.

Surely just reporting CCTV in changing rooms would result in a visit?

(I don't know anything about this subject, so I could be wide of the mark).

It is beyond reprehensible. He bought the school, was responsible for the insufficient safeguarding policies and hired/invited to other perverts to teach at the school.

All whilst taking legal action against any negative rumours.

Why is this in "sex and gender"?

I'm pretty certain it wasn't when I just posted a while ago. Has it been moved?

Is there a reason why HQ wants to have a more limited audience?

Or does sex and gender actually have a wider audience? (Wouldn't surprise me)

Oh god, I was desperate to go there when I was young! Thank fuck I didn't!

I posted in chat - it still looks like it is in chat for me. I am still trying to figure out how to operate the split board. This had nothing to do with gender identity, just a bunch of male perverts trying to access children.

Datun, the cameras were allegedly in the classrooms, not the changing rooms. But then some children were always changing in the class rooms…. funny that

It's coming up under 'feminist chat' for me, although there is a small sub-heading 'feminism: sex and gender'.

Very good point about safeguarding up thread. I think in schools etc, there should be much more robust policies about appointing safeguarding leads.

All too often, the head appoints the colleague they are friendliest with and knows will back them up.

This is the antithesis of safeguarding.

(By "one of the two" I mean we are being pushed towards two schools and this is the smaller and newer of the two).

I think safeguarding has to be at the forefront of all minds at the moment. I have started a thread about the other school, Ballet West, where the son of the principal abused young girls. Apparently the nature of ballet means that girls need to lower their natural boundaries (being touched by males) in order to get help adjusting their posture.

Safeguarding is there for a reason.
Boundaries need to be respected.

Drspouse, I hope you can take a decision you are happy with. I would personally ask to see the safeguarding policies and cross reference with other policies if I loved the school. It is so hard isn’t it?

We don't love the school at all, and the other one which we hate slightly less has a historic conviction associated with a staff member (but less than 10 years ago) and a trans child with ASD aged 10 whose announcement that they are 10 has confused the other children.
(I am totally unconvinced that a child aged 10, still less one with ASD, can "be trans", but the school could handle it much better and not confuse the other children).
We are over a barrel frankly.

This thread is currently in Feminist Chat. I found it by doing an advance search on 'ethelburgas' for the last two days, after seeing a reference to this thread on the Girl Guides thread that there was a thread in Chat. I looked in the main Chat section first, which is where this should be. The vast majority of posters to Mumsnet have/had/will have children or grandchildren in schools, clubs, nurseries etc, or work or volunteer there in some capacity. Safeguarding should be one of Mumsnet's big topics of interest, not something treated like a dirty word and hived off to an area that many posters never look at.

You make a good point about ballet OP.

Any sport or club that is designed for children to be involved, girl guides, ballet, gymnastics, etc, all teachers, trainers or coaches need to have DBS checks but we there are different toes of background checks and name changes can be done by deed poll so it relies on the applicant being honest about previously held names.

Larry Nasir's victims worked hard under extreme stress to break the story of the abuse they suffered at his hands whilst participating in gymnastics, they have also spoken about his American Gymnastic tried to cover it up and this extended to the Olympic and Paralympic levels.

(Nassir hid in plain sight, he didn't need a name change to absolve him of any previously committed assault, he once inserted his finger into the vagina of a victim whilst the mother was present, under the guise of 'treatment' to align her spine. For more I recommend Athlete A on Netflix.)

Why are so many adults involved in either the abuse or the silencing of victims of abuse?

"Simone Biless and Aly Raismann are angry that the proposal — which would divide money between 517 athletes who have sued USA Gymnastics — precludes any future lawsuits against the U.S. Olympic & Paralympic Committee and other key figures.
Victims have claimed the USOPC tried to hide the Nassar abuses or, at the very least, failed to act sufficiently in protecting athletes."

www.latimes.com/sports/story/2020-03-02/simone-biles-aly-raisman-decry-settlement-in-larry-nassar-scandal

Oh I misread it as being in "sex and gender" but yes, it should be in AIBU or In the News or just Chat.