Should parents be told about new safeguarding measures enacted after primary school principal investigated by police for sexual assault on pupil over 8 weeks at the school?

[bernadette1984]

We recently had a parent publicly out, via the school Mum's WhatsApp group, that my Year 5 daughter's primary school principal was accused recently of sexual abuse against a year 6, 11 year old, school girl inside his office at the school over an 8 week period (every Friday). It is alleged by the two girls that in the office with the Principal that he regularly stroked the arm, held her hand, and played with her hair, after pulling the blinds, locking the door and using his coat to cover the view through the door. And that he complimented her and in the 11 year old girl student's words, made her "feel special". He denied the allegations, and says they were only studying.

The police were called. The school and police both found the allegations were not malicious but could be neither proven, nor disproven, and the girls have now left the school and the Principal continues in his role.

The police have said in a written email to the alleged victim's Mum, that it doesn't "pass the threshold of evidence to prosecute", "but the behaviour remains of concern", and "the information remains retained on his file, and may be referenced in future safeguarding processes". The school, after the parent divulged what was alleged to have happen, and the police's view on it, finally confessed an "incident" had happened. And it says they have now "introduced a new range of safer working practices" but refuse to say what they are. And that they have also introduced a policy that says "all small group work should be visible" but refuse to show any parents the policy or disclose why small group work only needs to be visible now.

I have emailed the school 4 times asking to meet with the school informally (as is their policy on their website) about my daughter's safeguarding at the school and safeguarding in general (but not the allegations as they say these are confidential which I accept) and they ignored all my emails (unlike any other general email I've sent over the years). The school also removed the Principal from the year 6 residential 3 night trip due to parent complaints and concerns (but won't confirm he will be banned from future trips, so that concerns me, that my girl will likely be in the trip with him overnight from school grounds for 3 nights unsupervised, considering his behaviour that police are "concerned about" carried on for 8 weeks without any staff raising concern, as it was the girls that finally reported him).

Should I be concerned? And be unhappy with this response, and feel that they should tell us what these "safer working practices" that they wrote to us about are? And should they provide us with a copy of the new small groups working policy they have introduced? And should we just let him go on next year's trip with different 11 year old girls? For context, most parents seem happy enough that new safeguarding measures (the new "safer working practices", and new "small groups working" policy), which remain a secret, are said to have been introduced.

Or should I just carry on with my life, like most parents, and forget about it, now the police are not pursuing charges, and the girls accusing the principle have now left the school?

If not, what do I do now, considering the school just ignores any email I send asking politely to meet to discuss my child's safeguarding and current safeguarding in general at the school. I know approx 30 parents (out of 300) are not happy, so do we collaborate somehow, or tell Ofsted? Or how else do we get the school to even discuss, let alone reply to an email asking them to discuss safeguarding, or to even tell us what the current safeguarding measures or arrangements are at the school now, or should I just trust them, and let these new measures remain a secret?

Help please

@Maddy70not false. The school says "unsubstantiated" while thry explained means they weren't malicious or false but coukdnt be priven either way. What has been oriven is on msny occasions he was in that room with the girls, not visible, for hours, and dusregsrded basic safeguarding. Is that ok? Surely his job is to follow basic safeguarding?

@Maddy70 I am laughing at your statement that safeguarding enquiries in schools are always robust. If only!

Op, I agree with your concerns about the apparent secrecy. Safeguarding policies should always be available to anyone who wants to see them and I would be contacting governors on that specific point.

The safeguarding policy should include a section about what to do if you want to raise a concern about a senior member of staff and/or the safeguarding lead, does it do that? Not for now as this has been dealt with, but a clear reporting line if there is a further concern?

It's not likely you will get a 1:1 meeting as the school won't have capacity and will not be able to discuss anything about a specific staff member.

Above all I'd focus on educating your daughter. If the allegations were true then it sounds like the risk is grooming and the best defence is for your daughter to understand the signs and what she should do if she is worried.

This thread is nuts, my daughter would be out of that school so fast her feet wouldn’t touch the ground. THIS is why abuse happens and is allowed to continue - pathetic, ie can’t ‘prove’ anything so a man who takes 2 pre-pubescent girls into a room and strokes them keeps his job. JUST taking them into a room on his own with no access is enough.

FGS

I’ll own up and say I’m incredibly biased, but I was that kid with a teacher. Like I said , my DD would be out of that school regardless of what DH said , or random posters on MN or what is deemed fair. It’s not their kid in the school with that man , is it? A man, who at best, was so arrogant to think safeguarding rules don’t apply to him.

Sure put THAT responsibility on a primary school child.

Ex teacher

union advice (but not official safeguarding policy) during my career was never be alone with a child or small numbers of children in a room and if circumstances mean that you have to always leave the door open.

most teaching groups are whole classes so 30 or so. Nurture groups are usually 6 or more.

malicious allegations are quite common at secondary level hence the union advice. This advice (don’t be alone with small numbers of students) isn’t really about safeguarding students - it’s about protecting teachers from allegations. Hence why it’s not normally considered part of safeguarding.

a class of 30 kids who are (mostly) paying attention prevents accusations that aren’t true because there’s 29 other witnesses to say what actually happened.

ditto with nurture groups etc.

if a teacher is 1:1 with a student then failing forensic evidence or cctv it will always be a their word against the students and that’s why union advice is never to be in that situation because false (not necessarily malicious) accusations can ruin lives.

@MrsMabelThorpeyes the parent has shared police emails. I have spoken to the police officer myself also. The school is very vague in communication and only communicated once this was exposed but by incident I think they mean him being in that room alone with the two girls out of sight as that's why they have introduced these new policies and safer working practices that they won't disclose.

Wasn’t Jamie Varley head of safeguarding at his secondary school? I’m going to put a warning in case people aren’t aware who he is and what he’s just been given a whole life sentence for.

@MayaLuithank you and yes agree great advice about raising awareness of grooming. Do I have a right to not have my daughter alone in that room considering there are real grounds for me to be concerned, as while the allegations may not be true the disregard for safeguarding is true and why the school has had to add to their safeguarding practices after his behaviour? Or can I not prevent him being alone with her?

@measuretwicecutoncethats my view. But it's really shocked me that at least 90% of the parents at the school have no concerns or interest and in fact are more interested in the school fair held on the weekend!! It's shocked me, and as you say I feel that whether the allegations are true or not, I agree with the police that being alone with those 2 girls for hours every Friday for 8 weeks, is "of concern". It has shown me how easily as you say this abuse happens and imo if more allegations were to be made I feel us parents doing nothing would be responsible. A quick Google search shows principals whose behaviour was questioned for years before being convicted. And as I say Jimmy Saville was never convicted, let alone charged.

being in a room with two students is not actually disregarding safeguarding.

consider for example music lessons which in a school are often a situation where it is one adult and one student.

at primary level it’s quite common to have small groups led by a TA for additional support with phonics or with maths or similar.

IF he stroked them and locked the door etc then yes obviously this is a problem.

you need to decide yourself whether you believe he did or not.

@anonymoususer9876cant complain to Head as he is the accused. The Director if the school and CEO ignore my emails. This concerns me more than the allegations tbh. Surely in that culture anybody with ill motived would thrive?

Let’s take a step back. Why would a head teacher need to have safeguarding procedures put in pls and explained to him.

As someone who has coached sport at a basic level I can tell you there is no way I’d be 1-1 with a child. Anybody who knows anything about safeguarding will tell you that.

@ChalkOutlinessorry you suffered that. The 2 girls have now left the school so are safe from him. But I'm not convinced that solves the problem as most parents think.

Not buying the TA or music teacher scenario although I’ve no doubt it could happen. TA is not a locked room and typically in a busy environment same as music teacher. Students in and out for lessons. Not selected pupils.

I’ll say it again 2 pre-pubescent girls every week, bloody hell, but let’s no ruin a man’s career eh. How about men take an active decision to not do things that might ruin their careers unless of course they can’t help themselves ……

@Octavia64thank you. Would it not be good safeguarding practice to protect children as well (and teachers from malicious rumours). Visibility is surely important for Safeguarding and the school has now introduced this.

@Octavia64. I am ok with 121 lessons but the door being closed and jacket over the door and blinds pulled i am not. I don't believe that is all necessary. Do you?

i suspect he did but I can't be certain. But surely the higher than normal risk, as he is somebody who has this on his police file now, means I can request that only he, not other staff members, be alone with my daughter? Or is this not the case? He is allowed to be alone with her against my wishes?

This is my thoughts. I feel he's been incompetent at best, obviously criminal at worst. Eithier way, I don't feel he should continue in the role if he has no knowledge after 20 years of teaching, if basic safeguarding. But my view seems to be very much in the minority, which blows my mind, but nonetheless that is others view.

I left teaching a few years ago so cannot comment on current practice but protecting teachers and children from rumours isn’t the point of safeguarding, no.

when I worked in primary it was very common for year 6 in particular to be split up for maths and English. So they would get very focused teaching at their level. I generally used to teach a small group at the bottom of the class, another TA would be pulled to work with the middle group and the main class teacher would work with the top group. We always struggled for space and on occasion my group were in the floor in a corridor.

as the sats approached children who were still off target would often get 2:1 or 1:1 coaching from, frankly, anyone who was available and it would be done in any available space - the library, the classroom while the rest of the class were doing PE, etc.

most schools are pretty busy places so there’s a lot of witnesses around and very few places in a school are even capable of being locked.

if you think he did it, which you clearly do, then moving your chold(ren) is the sensible option.

What are your concerns for your daughter? Does she have 1-2-1 sessions with the head? Has she indicated to you that she is uncomfortable?

Whilst I would expect that the school safeguarding policies are readily available, I would not think that the school would meet face to face with you given that you are not involved in any way.

It is odd that they didn’t address the situation head on with parents given that WhatsApp groups must have been wild with chat about it.

Nobody but him and the girls know what happened. There is not enough evidence to take it further. Do you think that his career should be ended over an unsubstantiated allegation?

@SixAndJulieti don't. But do you think new safeguarding measures introduced that make up current safeguarding should be kept secret? And do you think I can ask the school that he not be alone with my daughter in any small group situation? I feel as a parent not requesting somebody who has 2 girls in his office with no visibility to not be in a small group with my girl would not be doing my job as apparent, or should I let me be alone with my daughter to study?

@SixAndJulietyou are clearly very happy for your year 6 daughter to be in a locked room with another chosen girl and the male head of the school every Friday for a few weeks. Evidently there is nothing to see here apart from both girls (with parents who have brain) having left the school.

Its really very very easy to do the right thing when it comes to safeguarding, in fact anyone, especially males, should be going out of their way to ensure they are not in a position where their actions could be questioned. But no, on this thread everyone wants to protect the poor man, with obviously very poor judgement and potentially bad intentions. We can’t ’ruin’ his career can we. Absolute madness.

@SixAndJuliet Your calm good sense is far too rational for some on this thread. I feel very uncomfortable with the bile and animus being displayed and encouraged by some.

OP: yes, I think the school should publish its new policies. Unless there is a good reason, e.g. not ratified by governors yet, they are wrong and foolish not to. Yes, the man was at best very foolish. I am unclear, though, whether the locked door, blinds drawn, jacket put deliberately over door etc. are undisputed facts or part of what is disputed. If they are proven facts I can’t imagine why he is being allowed to stay in post. If they are not, it is unfair for such rumours to keep being spread.

But since there is apparently no proof of evil intent or breaking of safeguarding policies I don’t think it’s reasonable for you to impose conditions on the principal's relationship with your DD. If you really don’t feel you can trust him and are worried about your DD's safety, you should remove your daughter from the school. Otherwise, leave him alone.

No doubt even saying this much is going to make me a target for people who are whipping up rumours against a possibly innocent man and want to accuse me of being a paedophile apologist.

I’ve already said that the safeguarding policies should be available. You have every right imo to get a response re this is there has been a change or amendment to these. It does appear that their communication on this has been poor. They should reply to your email with a link to the new policy. They don’t need to meet with 30 parents about it.

Does your daughter have 1-2-1 time with him currently? Has she ever? Is it even on the cards? I suspect you want the school to meet with you to discuss the allegations which they realise and they are not going to do.

Contact your chair of governors to request a copy of the policies.