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?

It says to me that the school felt things had got so extreme they asked for police help.

Nice bit if victim blaming there! Why would you feel the need to make this comment?

But again, we are assuming that the parents' narrative given here is all there is to the story. If this had been a couple from some council estate, I doubt very much we'd be automatically placing the school/police in the wrong based on the testimony of said parents.

Why aren't we questioning more about this from ALL angles. Have all the messages to the school been released? How much do we really know about this? Given that various PPs have said you can't get the police to come out very easily, and certainly not mob-handed, I'd say there is something here that's missing from the story.

It just goes to show, in my view, that 'nayce' professional people are always innocent victims even when they aren't, because people are much less likely to look beneath the meek and mild veneer.

I'd like to see a full breakdown of information given to the police and messages sent. One poster has already said they have seen some of the messages and they were pretty vile. If any emails sent to the school were threatening, that would have been taken very seriously.

I find the assumption that all this happened over nothing rather concerning. What else do we gloss over on the basis that the people involved seem nice, decent sorts?

Because if you are a parent of a child with SEN, even without the disability, you know the fight you go through just to get your child a basic education

I agree with PP that it happens more than anyone realises
My DC (sn) had a terrible time in primary school. They needed to be out of mainstream but HT wouldn't support as they got a lot of money for having my child in the school. The money never went on support
DC told me they sat her in front of a cupboard at the school entrance as punishment. HT said they would never shame and punish a child so publicly. I tried to work with the school. I went to collect child and found them sat in the school entrance, hands under legs, facing a cupboard with a teacher stood behind
That was amongst many other grievances. I started a complaint and was barred from the school
No raised voices or abuse from me
The chair of governors told me HT is respected and they would always support him
HT actually told me on day that he was like a king with an empire. It was in a meeting that DC paediatrician actually attended with me so plenty of witnesses

The other thread is awful with posters sure the parents are at fault and glad they have their comeuppance 🙄

You’re either unbelievably thick or work for the school or police that perpetrated this appalling miscarriage of justice.

I hope there’s a proper inquiry into misuse of police time and that the police officers involved are disciplined.

They made her out to be the issue, making her see a child psychologist who told her that Mummy and Daddy are making her sad and the boys involved (of which there was 6, all twice her size) were being mean as she annoyed them. Lovely bit of victim shaming.

@WillimNot that is shocking.

The things police waste time on baffle me. Six officers? Is that how little genuine crime there is in Herts?

Reminds me of the time my gym called the police because somebody refused to get out of the pool at closing time. 8 officers showed up.

The you can be arrested and cautioned for the purposes of gathering evidence and investigating it doesn't have to be a case to be built against you for the arrest to be legal.
If you think about the logic of what you infer it just couldn't work

Is that right? I haven’t seen that.
The end of the linked Guardian article says the police had self-investigated and decided their response had been proportionate.

I think this is a bit much, tbh.
Schools are run by their Senior Management Teams and boards of governors (who are volunteers and include parent representatives). None of them fulfil their roles for the school with the intention of messing things up/being discriminatory/not doing their best.

From the Guardian article, it sounds as though the communication from the parents was aggressive and persistent, so I can imagine it feeling very personal for those on the other end of it.
Reporting it to the police seems very extreme, so I’d love to hear their side of the story before making such harsh judgments.

I am a police officer (nothing to do with this case, and work at the opposite end of the country). I can’t speak as to the ins and outs of the case itself, but can explain sending six officers.

The couple were arrested for harassment and malicious communications. The way we would prove/disprove such an allegation is by seizing and examining electronic devices. This would involve a house search (requiring at least one officer, preferably more) which needs to take place at the time of arrest or immediately after as per the legislation. We have no power to seize property belonging to people who are not under arrest. Two people were arrested, who need to be transported to custody separately, requiring at least one officer per suspect but best practice is two - one driving, one observing the suspect. In addition, they knew or suspected there may be children at the address which would require officers to look after while making arrangements for their care - relative/social services. So what may look heavy-handed quickly becomes logistically the minimum number of officers required to carry out the job.

The investigations were closed with no action being taken against the parents, so presumably no evidence was found on any seized devices. It may well have been a malicious/exaggerated report from the school. Having dealt with similar cases, it’s not the norm to make arrests unless what’s being reported are serious threats to school staff. I don’t know about the specifics of this case but reading between the lines I would speculate that the school made it sound a lot more serious than it turned out to be.

Thanks for that, IfIHadAHeart

To my mind, if the Police had all the emails, then surely they had their evidence and should have read and assessed it? They have concluded that there is no case to answer, 5 weeks in.

Could that not have been done first? Or a voluntary interview, rather than an arrest?

I’m a teacher and I have had my fair share of unreasonable and sometimes frankly offensive communications from parents (being accused of promoting witchcraft was a particular special case!). I’ve also known parents make vexatious subject access requests, requiring weeks of man hours to process, attempts to get the police involved for minor incidents, threats to sue - all manner of nasty batshittery (from middle class parents, before anyone pipes up about class). Maxie and Ros may have been annoying but they haven’t done anything wrong. If being a pain in the bum was an offence, the prisons would be bursting at the seams even more than they currently are. Some parents are annoying. Schools with decent staff and robust systems handle this effectively in-house.

Was anything personally defamatory said? No. Were the communications offensive? No. Was there harassment? No. This is an example of a weak and defensive management style from the school.

I get that but there is still a threshold for arrest. Friend of mine is a custody Sargent and says his job is about deciding if that threshold has been met and if not then he de arrests them. There are certainly cases where people sue for wrongful arrest because the threshold isn’t met.

The police shouldn’t just arrest someone because the school says xyz. There should be some examination of messages, etc before the arrest

so due to the lack of action by the couple against the police for wrongful arrest I suspect that threshold had been met. Which is why I wouldn’t be surprised if there is more to the story about what they’ve said /done than they’ve told the media. Yes parents can complain, they can moan, they can send emails demanding answers but at some point they will cross a legal threshold for harassment. And I suspect they crossed that line.

I do also suspect the school could have handled this a lot better.

Excellent post.

Any compensation for wrongful arrest will time consuming and negligible in sum. Telling their story to the world is far more effective strategy in tackling this overreach from the school and the police.

Well unless the school can produce something to the contrary, the schools feelings were very wrong, based upon the facts that have been established so far an the testimony of the couple involved.

Just speaking in general terms, as I don’t know the specifics of this case, if the reported “threat” was serious or imminent you may arrest first in order to protect the safety of any victims/property etc.

The problem with a voluntary interview is that the officers would have had no power to seize any electronic devices, which would have been used to send the emails/texts. We could ask for them to be surrendered voluntarily, but obviously a “guilty” person is unlikely to do so. Giving them prior notice of the investigation would give the suspects time to delete evidence/destroy phones, laptops etc. Obviously I’m speaking more in general terms as I don’t know anything about this case beyond what’s been reported in the papers.

Surely the school would have sent in proof of the malicious communications or given examples of what they were.

To make an arrest the police must have had enough information that there is cause to think a crime has/is/will be committed

Even then given the nature of the “crime” as people are presumed innocent not guilty, inviting the couple into the station for a chat or a home visit by a couple of officers without sending in 6 police officers then finding out the school had over exaggerated everything

What is dreadful, having found out which school this is and knowing the school and the area well is I know someone who lives around there and could have used 6 police officers after she dialled 999 because of a home invasion by a gang whilst she was at home What she got was 45minutes later a couple of officers coming round to give her a crime number

@FairKoala this is the 'sub-text' or 'sub-plot' to this story. Irrespective of whether people think Allen and Levine are hero's or villains, there are real crimes being committed and people have the perception that the police are either too stretched or not interested. I know it is all anecdotal, but how can anyone justify this when they don't attend burglaries?

Why are the police prioritising malicious communications over shoplifting, burglaries, drug offenses and so on? Real crimes, real victims. Not a touchy head governor and dubiously appointed head teacher on a power trip keen to stamp out "disharmony" from good parents with a bit of a bee in their bonnet.

inflammatory and defamatory” comments on social media

Writing defamatory comments comes with consequences

Can I call the police for slander?

If statements are made which are threatening, grossly offensive or obscene, then this could constitute malicious communication, which is a criminal offence. This could be reported to the police. Generally, this requires the communication to be by way of letter, electronic communication or article.

warnings on a private WhatsApp group

a group isn't private

added to which its evidence

Where does malicious communication turn into stalking? - and which one is a real crime? or are neither a real crime and both should be made legal? Would or should malicious communication be made legal in UK?