Maxie Allen and Rosalind Levine arrested - The vindictiveness of the school and police overreach

[Everanewbie]

AIBU to worry that this type of incident seems to be happening more and more? To me, there are several concerning aspects to this story. Here is a link if you aren't yet aware.

www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2025/mar/29/parents-arrested-by-hertfordshire-police-for-complaining-about-daughters-school

Firstly, the apparent opaqueness of a public organisation and attempts to shut down private conversation and the vindictiveness the school has shown in attempting to silence this couple.

Secondly, the treatment of the pupil whereby she is being dropped off an escorted into school, and inability to discuss he disability and SEN with teachers, leading to multiple emails that were ultimately used against the couple.

And thirdly, WTF are the police doing? 6 Officers to arrest a meek professional couple, in front of their daughter. Holding them in a cell for 11 hours? Why are the police not dismissing this out of hand? I have always tried to be a supporter of the police, but how can reasonable people continue to accept this when they wont attend a burglary or detain shoplifters, but turn up in force for a middle class couple who called a governor a control freak in a private conversation?

You exaggerated what they said and put your own spin on it. Why would the cops cough up, if your interpretation is true?

You don't think they downplayed what they did?

The cops coughed up because they arrested people in a heavy-handed way who didn't meet the threshold for arrest. That doesn't mean they didn't do anything bad, particularly when they had already admitted to sending the school 80-odd emails, moaning about them on social media, trying to interfere with the appointment of a new head and getting a mate on the council to also email the school.

Is there a link to this. I haven’t seen this admitted?

Original reporting https://archive.is/uqHpm
and
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c36499drpg8o

But none of the article says they admitted what you say they admitted? What they have admitted is that they questioned the recruitment process and commented on the school. You have really mischaracterised their admissions and should really ask to get your post deleted as it isn’t accurate.

If your view is that they may have underplayed what they did that is one thing, but actually you don’t have any evidence that they did that, so you should be posting that you feel they could have done it, not that they admitted it.

It is really important to remember that not all schools or staff act honestly or fairly, even though the vast majority of schools and teachers do behave well. It is not illegal for parents to question schools or criticise what they do.

I am particularly surprised to see you post like that given that I think you started a thread about stronger moderation to ensure more pleasant debate on mn.

80 emails, over a long period and the school frequently didn't reply usefully, or helpfully. The head was appointed in breach of the rule to advertise the job. The school ordered the parents, with zero legal authority, not to discuss the case.

They then set the Police on them and you still think, despite overwhelming evidence, that the parents are on the wrong.

But none of the article says they admitted what you say they admitted?

Which bit of "sending the school 80-odd emails, moaning about them on social media, trying to interfere with the appointment of a new head and getting a mate on the council to also email the school." is untrue, specifically?

You said they had admitted their comms were spicy. I don’t think they have said anything of the sort.

You also said they had admitted they had bombarded the school with comms. They have not admitted anything other than sending emails. They have admitted nothing about the volume being inappropriate.

It was really inappropriate to suggest they had.

Interfere also has an implication that it was inappropriate. I don’t think they have admitted that it was inappropriate for them to question the appointment?

I said that they bombarded the school with emails. The amount of emails that they detailed as having sent was a lot. Perhaps you don't think they were a lot, but the school said that the volume was unmanageable.

Here's a screenshot of Maxie Allen admitting that his wife made spicy (his word not mine) comments.

Yes, it’s interesting. There was a degree of exaggeration and misrepresentation there too.

“Vaguely spicy” is what he actually said.

Which is rather different to plain “spicy”.

More misrepresentation. Why do you seem to have a problem with this couple?

im not sure why this is even still a conversation?

What they did/didn't do is irrelevant, the fact is, it didn't meet the threshold for arrest and as such they've been compensate £20k for the illegal arrest.

The Jewish Chronicle has reported on this story as they are Jewish parents JC article

“Allen remarked that the school had no authority beyond its gates.

“No public body has the power to control what people say about it,” he wrote.

They then started writing to the school and, in one email, Levine asked: “What precautions had been put in place to keep Sascha [who is epileptic] safe in the swimming pool?”
“Swimming with epilepsy could be fatal without proper supervision, so I would like to see the risk assessment for this please.”

Levine told the JC in April: “Some people have the impression that we were bombarding the school, but we sent no more emails than any other parent in our position. Because we were banned and put on limited communication, I couldn’t just nip into the office like I might have done before. Everything about Sascha had to go through email.”

As a family member of someone with epilepsy I can completely see why the family were concerned about supervision while swimming.

“but we sent no more emails than any other parent in our position. Because we were banned and put on limited communication, I couldn’t just nip into the office”

That is rather revealing though. Schools don’t ban or limit communication for a parent who merely asks about swimming precautions. The vast majority of parents wouldn’t be in that position in the first place.

@noblegiraffe is it though? Schools do make mistakes and break the law themselves and are run by humans who can be fallible. I have no idea what happened here and neither do you. Why would it have to be the case that the school’s stance was legitimate? That is your assumption and you have no evidence.

We have some idea what happened because both the school statement and what the couple say fundamentally agree with each other.

If you read the articles, it says the parents had written to the school previously over ‘various concerns’. There were procedural and governance issues and the parents took an interest in their child’s school.

You seem determined to infer that it was the parents that were entirely in the wrong here but you have no evidence that it wasn’t the school that was entirely in the wrong. In fact I’d say that from what we know, it is the school has behaved very badly on a number of counts. One of the most serious being the safeguarding issues around their epileptic daughter.

you would be surprised how easy it is to get yourself banned from the school premises as the parent of a disabled or SEN child. It's well known that it happens.

My kids primary school threatened quite a few parents with it when they became upset/irate with staff for failures in care/not following the EHCP.

I was issued a stern final warning after giving one of the teachers quite a firm dressing down after she kept my son in the classroom all day because he wouldn't do a piece of work, in full breach of his EHCP. It was only rescinded after i escalated a complaint of blatant disability discrimination to the Governors.

Yes, I think it’s unreasonable to condemn the parents based on the schools actions as the school is obviously getting it wrong and we know that many schools behave in a combative or inappropriate way.

The school mentioned upthread where a male teacher is allowed to impose his ‘identity’ issues on his young students in a highly contentious and questionable way for example.

You were probably labelled as "one of those parents"
I was too. Pretty frustrating when all you want is what's best for your SEN child...

oh i was absolutely one of 'those' parents. I wear that badge with pride.. i am still wearing it now they're in college.

I have always said that i am my kids one and only advocate, and if i don't stand up for them, no-one else will.. so you bet i'm THAT parent.

Being that parent has got my kids what they need, when they need it.

The learning curve was how to get there firmly and politely.. and i learned it after that incident. I just make it very clear these days that i know the law, and i know what their obligations within it are, and i expect it to be met.

I'm sorry about your experience and children with SEN are being let down by the education system across the country. It really isn't fit for purpose.

However, in this case, the couple were not banned from the school site for challenging provision for their child with SEN, but for their complaints about the recruitment process for a new headteacher.

The details about what exactly they did there seem to be lacking. The emails about the care for the SEN child (and I think the rude social media messages) came after the ban, and that's what the news seems to be focusing on, as that's what led to the (unwarranted) arrest.