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?

If you were at the school in question you would absolutely ban those parents for “merely asking about swimming” because as far as you’re concerned they are 100% guilty.

You have consistently shown you take the schools side and see everything the parents have done as evidence of their unreasonable behaviour. You cannot see it as a result of the unreasonable actions of the school.

Parents who take an interest in their child’s school irritate the wrong person at school. Their child requires greater communication with school due to additional needs. The school (ie probably one or two already biased individuals) allows their feelings of the parents to cloud all future interactions with the parents who they’ve branded as trouble-makers. Everything they say or do is going to back up their version of events as to why these parents are so awful. They sent so many emails because school banned them from the premises then didn’t reply to those emails, even though they needed to in order to provide adequate care for the child. That’s appalling. The story the school then told the police was their biased version of events which the police didn’t bother to investigate properly.

Someone at school took against the couple and that’s why they were wrongfully arrested. Someone at school allowed their personal view to cloud their judgement which is exactly what you’re doing so no, it’s not unbelievable to think these parents were wrongfully banned.

If you were at the school in question you would absolutely ban those parents for “merely asking about swimming” because as far as you’re concerned they are 100% guilty.

They asked about the swimming via email after the ban.

As I said, details on what they did to get the ban have been very scant apart from 'challenging the appointment process for the new headteacher'.

Someone at school took against the couple and that’s why they were wrongfully arrested

But schools can't get anyone arrested. The police arrest people, not schools. That's why the police had to make the payout, not the school.

it’s not unbelievable to think these parents were wrongfully banned.

They have given plenty of detail about everything that happened since the ban. Not so much about why they were banned apart, really just how inconvenient the ban was.

They were arrested because the school reported their actions to the police, and rightfully so,

*We contacted the police following a very high volume of direct email correspondence and what we considered upsetting and derogatory social media posts, on Facebook and WhatsApp, from two parents.
"As a school we welcome dialogue with parents however the nature and large volume of the communication and public posts meant that the school were no longer able to manage using normal internal procedures.
"As a result we sought advice from the police.
"Cowley Hill School continues to put its focus on providing an excellent education for its pupils and will not be commenting any further on this matter."

A police officer issued a warning to the family in December, telling them to take their daughter out of school, which they did the next month.
But a week after that, on 29 January, Mr Allen said six police officers turned up at his home.
Mr Allen, who is a Times Radio producer and Liberal Democrat councillor on Hertsmere Borough Council, denied using abusive or threatening language, "even in private".
He said a letter was sent by the chair of governors to all parents "warning them about what he described as inflammatory comments on social media".
Mr Allen said: "When that was used in context with us, they never actually told us what it was we said that was so terrible, because they've never disclosed the WhatsApps that they got hold of.
"But when we look back through, the spiciest thing that we could find was Roslyn calling one senior person at the school a control freak, and that was the strongest remark we could find.*

noblegiraffe · Today 11:57

+++Someone at school took against the couple and that’s why they were wrongfully arrested.+++

But schools can't get anyone arrested. The police arrest people, not schools. That's why the police had to make the payout, not the school.

Hmm. Do you think that there's a possible connection with the school making a complaint to the Police and the parents being arrested? The school doesn't have powers of arrest, of course, but they utilised a body which does have those powers.

The problem is schools can lie and noone holds them accountable. They can make safeguarding referrals with no proof of Safeguarding concerns. This then is up to the parents to prove otherwise. Even when the parents have proved the school has lied, no action is taken. This is a power imbalance, which some schools seem to get a kick out of

Oh, so if I want someone arrested all I have to do is phone the police and complain about them? Is that how it works?

Yes.

You tell the police what you think someone has done and if they think it sounds legit and like the person’s behaviour warrants police intervention they may go and arrest them.

If you tell the police someone has been incredible abusive on repeated occasions and they have put you in fear and alarm of your safety they will (should) investigate the validity of your accusations. They may interview witnesses who may or may not support your claims.

If they proceed to arrest the accused on the basis of what you have claimed and it turns out you embellished the facts or your interpretation of events was unreasonable then the police may find themselves having to compensate the accused for wrongful arrest if they haven’t carried out a thorough and fair investigation.

Looks like Maxie Allen and Rosalind Levine weren't the only people targeted by the school.

https://www.theguardian.com/education/ng-interactive/2025/nov/22/whos-screenshotting-our-messages-how-a-whatsapp-saga-spiralled-into-two-parents-wrongful-arrest

Primary school WhatsApp groups are for birthday invites, asking each other if it is a non-uniform day the next day and reminders about bake sales. They're not for bitching about the school leadership and moaning about the school.

Feel sorry for the other parents on the group who must have felt very uncomfortable about it all - and clearly at least one felt strongly enough to report it to the school.

You sound slightly unhinged! Why would a school lie if there was no proof? Why would they make safeguarding referrals with no proof of concerns? Have you had a school make referrals about your child?

Proving my point, that people automatically think school staff are trustworthy. So much so that they would call someone unhinged, to even suggest otherwise.
Schools lie because they can, especially if it's to hide their negligence/failings.

The school don't seem to have lied in this case because what they say matches what the couple says. The interpretation of how reasonable the couple's actions were are different, but the facts of what happened appear to be the same.

So do you think the school were right to call the police noblegiraffe?

I've said that I don't think the police should have arrested them.

The school said that they phoned the police for advice. I think that phoning the police for advice if people are causing you huge problems is fine.

I have no idea what actually happened between the school and the police but schools can't make the police arrest people. That's on the police to do their jobs. An article said that the police could have just called the couple in for an interview but chose not to and chose to arrest them instead.

Rubbish

https://www.thejc.com/news/uk/revealed-police-quizzed-wrongfully-arrested-jewish-mother-over-her-faith-gvhymd83 www.thejc.com/news/uk/revealed-police-quizzed-wrongfully-arrested-jewish-mother-over-her-faith-gvhymd83]]]]

Not sure if the screenshots are in order, but thought they might be handy for those disinclined to read an article.

Learning that the mother is Jewish has explained a lot of the school and police actions to me. Anti semitism is sadly rife within the police

[Ignore this post - quoted this poster accidentally and now can’t delete it]

@Lolapusht and @Jerabilis very sad to read that the police asked why she had withdrawn her daughter from Easter and to see that a Holocaust Memorial Day led to dispute

https://www.thejc.com/news/uk/revealed-police-quizzed-wrongfully-arrested-jewish-mother-over-her-faith-gvhymd83?utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=JC%20Daily%20261125&utm_content=JC%20Daily%20261125+CID_9103fa2b50474a4f3156baefccdf118b&utm_source=Campaign%20monitor%20newsletters&utm_term=Revealed%20Police%20quizzed%20wrongfully%20arrested%20Jewish%20mother%20over%20her%20faith

“Documents seen by the JC now suggest Cowley Hill Primary School cited Levine’s emails relating to her Jewish faith, her Israeli family and her desire to promote Shoah education as part of a harassment report.

Levine said it felt like she had “slipped into an alternative reality” when she was forced to explain her religious rights from inside a police cell. “I felt I was in a weird nightmare,” she told the JC.”

Some of this is really frightening

“Information released in the last month as part of the request revealed that the exchanges between Levine and the school relating to the Holocaust and Easter prayer had been logged in a document titled “timeline – cease and desist”.
The first entry on the document from Levine was labelled “email about Holocaust Memorial Day – what will it entail”, sent at 7.21pm, with the time highlighted in red to denote that it fell “out of school time”.
More than a month later, on March 31, 2023, the log recorded a “complaint about Easter assembly. Mum stating this is not ‘agreeable to them’.”
A further entry on April 17 noted that Levine was “chasing the email complaint about the Easter assembly”. Several additional entries followed, relating to subsequent correspondence regarding the school’s collective worship policy.
Levine now believes that this log of events was seen by the police. “Why else would they have been questioning me like this?” she said.
When she saw the log, the questions “suddenly made sense to me,” Levine said.”

“The school’s apparent preoccupation with Levine’s Jewish faith also emerged in a separate subject access request, which had nothing to do with the parents’ arrest.
When applying for her daughter’s Education, Health and Care Plan (EHCP), Levine sent another SAR to the school. Within the document bundle returned to the family, a single email from the council appeared, revealing that the school had gone to council lawyers for advice about her request to withdraw her child from the Easter assembly.
The email suggests the school resisted letting Levine withdraw Sascha from collective worship. “The school are not sure about withdrawing the child at these times as it will encourage several other parents to do the same,” the council lawyer wrote.
“The pupil is Jewish and the mother has expressed her disgust that the daughter took part in the Easter assembly and prayer.”
The advice ultimately confirmed that parents have the right to withdraw children from prayer and that “the school must comply”.
The JC understands that the council provides regular legal advice to schools and the Cowley Hill collective worship policy means any parent can ask for their child to be removed from prayer.

But Levine said she was “really shocked” that requests about religious observance had been escalated to lawyers and then the police.

“I’ve absolutely no idea why the school had a problem with Holocaust Memorial Day or exempting a Jewish child from Christian worship,” Levine said.”

It is worth noting, before labelling the school completely antisemitic, that the issue raised with the Holocaust Memorial email was the time it was sent, and not the content and that the school agreed for the holocaust survivors to come and talk to the pupils.

@noblegiraffe but why did the school not know it is totally permissible for a Jewish child to be removed form Christian worship?

Also @noblegiraffe you don’t know that was the only issue they raised.