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

As a teacher I feel and also know a few things.

1. I agree with other posters. MATs do behave as if rules don't apply to them. He'll be at work with little time off because they want their money's worth. The value of academies isn't on quality of education. It's on keeping costs down and maximising profits.

2. I've known male teachers to do dodgy stuff and be able to remain employed (relationship with a student, went to court - innocent - huge compensation payout as damages, married her later).

3. MOST allegations in schools are false (had one made against me, thank god another teacher was a witness to it not happening).

4. Governors in most schools are pretty toothless. And useless in academies. They're for show.

@SixAndJulieti've already said I understand the allegations are confidential and not open for discussion and I've never discussed that. But I would like to discuss my daughter never being alone with that man, that the police "have concern" about. There's no point going over the past, but would Yiu not agree there is a possible heightened known risk so why could the school not have anynody else do 121s with her, if they feel he would normally be involved. Or should I just accept he can be in a 121 or 122 situation without informing me (as happened in this case).

@Rivertrudgeso you disagree with the police's, "concern with his behaviour" then? You do know history is literred when "clues" are ignored and you think you should wait for proof and a comviction until you close off access to your daughter? What's such a big deal about requesting he not hold 121s with her? He can still hold his job. And you think it's unreasonable to request he always he with another staff member if with my daughter?

@Fiddlesticks1thank you. I will do.

If you don't trust the HT then you need to remove your children from the school.

No, you can't request special treatment for your girls on the basis of allegations which were not proven.

@ClawsandEffect
1.i know little about Academies. When Yiu say profits I was not aware there were profits for a school, well, an academy. So they get money from the Government I presume? Then where dies the profit go?

1. So he was found innocent but clearly want them married her? That's the thing isn't it these accusations are very hard to prosecute, let alone prove. And most parents have the view if the police can't prove or disprove it, then I don't care (even if history is littered with these things escalating over years and eventually, after more girls are damaged before they are charged, prosecuted and licked up).

1. Sorry that happened to you. Must have been very stressful. I'm guessing you weren't out of sight? So didn't have door closed, blinds pulled, and coat covering door window? And this obviously helped you price your innocence? I'm struggling to think why he'd want to not be. Visible with those 2 girls tbh.

1. So Governors are just yes people in the MAT? Are they appointed by the MAT I'm guessing?

Thank you for your help. I'm not in education and clueless about how this all works and what to do or not. Maybe I do nothing? Maybe it's pointless?

I don’t think the police's "concern" necessarily means any more than that they think he was very foolish to put himself in a position where allegations like that could be made. I agree, but it doesn’t mean he is guilty of what has been alleged. Police are not allowed to say or imply they think someone is guilty when there has been deemed to be not enough evidence for a prosecution, but that is how you are choosing to see it.

If you don’t trust the headteacher to the extent that you don’t want your daughter to be alone with him (not that this happened in the case in question, where he was with 2 children, not 1, so I don’t know why you and others keep talking about 1:1s) you should remove your daughter from the school. That is how you can "close off access" to her. It is not reasonable to keep her there but ask for special treatment. A school can’t be run like that.

@WhosGotTheKeysToMyBimmai'm not requesting on the basis of the allegations. The allegations were unproven eithier way. I don't wish to discuss them and neither do the school
I'm requesting based on the current view of the police on his behaviour "remaining of concern", and that being known as being recorded on his police file. Surely that's a simple, prudent move as a parent, though I respect other parent's right to choose and who would like their girls to do 221's and 121's that are hidden from view (as occured in the "incident" as the school puts it, omitting that this behaviour was over 8 weeks, so plural and far from one week).

I'd remove my child.yoy seem to think you cant.

I'm sure its been covered somewhere in the thread but separately I'd be researching it first then having conversations with your dd about what teachers can and cannot do and what you can and will do to protect her and keep her safe.

E.g. the door cannot be closed in a 121 she can refuse it and she can insist on going back to the classroom or just leave / run away. If she is told she will be in trouble she doesnt need to be afraid / its not true. Mummy will come to the school and fix all of it. She wont get in trouble irrespective of what the teacher says.

I'd warn her specifically about him by name.

That said I cannot believe he is still doing 121s.

I also cannot understand how camt go on this years residential because hes a potential paedo but next year we can trust he wont SA kids...

@Rivertrudgewhy do you think a very experienced head teacher would "put the self in that position" then as you say? I've really struggled with this. He's also controls safeguarding there, so somebody who puts themsekf "in this position" are they suitable to hold this position if they appear to have such a lack of awareness of safeguarding and their actions resulted in additional safeguarding policies being written?

100% agree if the parents speak with their feet he will have to go. There is rarely reliable evidence for child abuse because of the nature of the crime. Every single child safe guarding policy that ever existed said children should never be alone with adults. Every club you join as a leader, medical safe guarding course, everything say the same thing. That practice of having kids alone in his office should be enough to see him fired.

As far as I can see it wasn’t a 121. There seem to have been two children there, though I agree OP does not always make it very clear (similarly with the door: "closed" or "locked" - there’s a big difference? and the coat - deliberately arranged to obscure the view into the room, or just hanging on the coat hook on the door?).

If it got to the stage of you feeling you needed to warn your child about the dangers posed by her headteacher, by name, you’d be crazy not to remove her from the school.

As far as I can tell, he wasn’t alone with one child. There were two. That’s not to say abuse wasn’t still possible, but let’s not repeat inaccuracies.

@SalmonOnFinnCrispthsnk you. Good points. The residential trip is easily explained. He was removed from the trip, and replaced by the deputy principal, with no explanation. Lots of parents eithier complained or removed their girls from the trip because of fear of him abusing their children so the school faced the embarrassing situation of having to cancel the trip, or suffer the financial or go with massively reduced numbers, and they didn't want this as it shone a spotlight on him, and them, which they have avoided. Parent opposition is highest in the Year 6 parents, so obviously the school and Principal believes this (and I suspect it will) largely disappear over the next 12 months before next year's trip and the most vocal parents will no longer be at the school.

@Brunchatstephaniesthats what I thought. But the school has just now introduced a policy that "small group work should be visible" so I'm guessing he's not sacked as that wasn't the case before which seems wild to me. So I guess the argument is he didn't know but he does now there's a new policy do therefore it's all fine as he'll just follow this new policy.

@Rivertrudgethe coat blocked the view. The motives nobody knows obviously. The locked door is disputed, but closed and not being visible is not. It was a 221, but I wouldn't feel safe with my child in a 221 like this let alone a 121 situation this.

Ive read the majority of the majority of the thread but am jumping in.

You should be able to get a face to face meeting at your school about anything which is troubling you! (prompted by the poster saying it's basically not your business)

What they do, or do not disclose to you at that meeting is another matter. But you should 100% have the opportunity to go in and sit down and speak with someone about this OP. To take notes and to ask the questions you have regarding the details of the new safeguarding.

A group chat maybe with all concerned parents.

I'd be absolutely horrified to think a school was keeping parents at bay when they had concerns.

Id email the governors and tell them you are being ignored. Personally first of all I'd physically go to the school and calmly and politely speak to their reception team and say you would like a meeting arranged with one of the leadership team please, and that your emails are being ignored.

Of course you want the details of the new safeguarding. There won't be any personal info in a general safeguarding procedure description. No reason not to share it with you.

Fuck who else or how many other parents give a shit OP. Your kid is your responsibility and if i was a parent at that school i'd be standing right beside you at the school reception this morning!

(TA for 10 years at primary)

@Laistei do feel very isolated tbh and doubting myself as many parents are disinterested and as I say the school, the Trust's directors just ignore my emails. Them ignore a simple polite request for a informal meeting to discuss current safeguarding, five times now, tbh scares me more than the allegations. The parent of the allegedly abused child accuses them of ignoring her too and at first I gave the benefit of the doubt to the school but I now know while their policy is any parent is entitled to an informal meeting and this is the process and it's in their website, in practice they ignore you and refuse to even say they refuse to meet you (as they obviously don't want to admit they refuse to meet you as the optics don't look great for them).

Another child is still not appropriate in this context. Children are easily groomed and manipulated. @bernadette1984 there is simply no way I’d be keeping my child at the school, no way. If other parents are not taking it seriously then that is on them I’d be glad that I have the opportunity to move while things are quieter before other parents take actions. You are responsible for your own child other are responsible for their children. Many parents are incredibly unreactive in these type of circumstances, I’ve seen another very serious situation where parents did not react at all.

“You need to take this opportunity to teach your children about keeping themselves safe and keeping an eye out for each other.”
What exactly do you expect these children to do if he calls them into his office? They are children and he is an adult. There is an inherent power imbalance. He is in a position of authority. He is a headteacher who was reportedly taking two children to his office weekly for eight weeks.
OP, these accusations are serious, regardless of whether he was found guilty. They are clearly not going to remove him. Take your child out of that school.
The fact that he is still there as headteacher is a major safeguarding risk. I would not want my child attending a school that protects people like him.

Of course he may be guilty, and he was certainly foolish /naive to lay himself open to the allegations, but I don’t understand why you seem to see "taking two children to his office weekly for eight weeks" as automatically wrong or suspicious. In the run-up to SATs most primary schools do some intensive individual or small-group coaching of "borderline" children, and often the headteacher is the only one who has any time available during the school day to do it.

The two children have said what happened in that room and I believe them. If it was SATs prep or any other form of intervention, the parents should have been informed. Framing the headteacher’s behaviour as “naive” or “foolish” is honestly making me sick. I would not be surprised if, in a few years’ time, other children come forward and say he did something similar to them. Personally, I would not be willing to take that risk. The fact that he remains in post would be enough for me to remove my child from the school.

@FreudvsJungi had the same thought. That future allegations could arise, which could be prevented. And also if you went back and asked the girls that have been in his 221's previous years (if they happened, as I've no doubt the police did not look into this) what would you be told now, or in the future?

@bernadette1984
Does your dd have sessions.with this man or other staff members at the school?

I understand that. I would expect my primary aged children to recognise that something felt amiss and report it to me straight away. I’m not expecting them to understand what the risks are exactly, but if they found an adult behaviour strange or secretive, they should tell someone. I don’t think that’s an unreasonable lesson to teach young children.