School behaviour policy and scope of authority

[Smeeth]

My 15 yr son has just been excluded by his school. He had 5 friends at home on friday night supervised by myself with a few beers, later in evening he was filmed by one of the boys making some slightly slurred insensitive race related comments, all the boys were white. One of the boys shared the video without my sons permission to a snapchat group of 20, one of the non-white boys on group shared with his parents who raised a concern over the offensive language to the school. The school behaviour policy only extends off site to education trips and buses and the home is 14 miles from school and boys not wearing school uniform etc. The school have just sanctioned my son not the boy who posted the video without permission. The school conducted a limited investigation and did not establish context or even speak to myself (despite attempts by me to speak to school staff dealing with incident). They have also refused to share redacted copy of the video (all other copies destroyed) son and I have not seen it and redacted copies of the specific complaints
My son is contrite but I have wider concerns on the schools processes, scope of authority and decision making. It has got to the stage I would rather it was a police complaint as he would be dealt with fairly, proportionally and reasonably.

Sorry for long message but lots of issues to unpick, I have raised my concerns at process already with school, I am giving then another 24 hrs to respond before I submit GDPR request and raise complaint to governors.

Any advice precedent. Son and boys have learned lessons but there are some dangerous and worrying wider issues of principle here.

Any legal precedents/advice - I have government policies etc
Thank you.

You’re one of those parents.

You’re not doing your son any favours.

One of the MOST annoying things about MN is the inability people have to actually read the question in the OP and respond accordingly.

Thank God for the fabulous prh47bridge who is blessed with this ability in spades - but surely you don't need to be a lawyer to have a modicum of reading comprehension ?

So OP . In answer to your actual question. No - the sharing will not be investigated as it it's not practical as it is clearly not in the public interest to prosecute. (I work on a police investigation team). I would also think very carefully about involving the police. We work on evidence. Although there is some degree of discretion It would be very unwise to involve the police with regards to a crime that has clearly taken place and for which their is clear and compelling evidence that your son was the perpetrator of that crime. At present he is being 'prosecuted' by the school and received an exclusion. Much preferable than your sin having a criminal record for inciting racial hatred. THAT would have a far greater impact on his life than this exclusion.
Be careful what you wish for ! and think yourself lucky that the complainants parents went to the school and not the police.

As for the alcohol thing. Bloody hell MN is quite the parallel universe sometimes. I have 7 children both mine and DHs .. every single one of them was drinking beer at 15 ! (Which is not illegal by the way ) - we have beer in the house bought by us for us however the kids were all allowed some when mates came round.

Contrary to popular belief their brains didn't atrophy and 5/7 went to Uni with the other 2 in the services... and I would much prefer them to learn about alcohol in the safety of their own home than neck bottles of vodka 'up the rec' (which the children of the most sanctimonious of you are almost certainly doing !)

Well, that was quite a sanctimonious post for someone calling others sanctimonious.

Giving your 15 yr old a drink on a special occasion in your own home is one thing. Allowing a group of his friends to drink in your house is quite another. I would be furious if my 15 yr old was facilitated to get pissed by a friend’s parent!

That’s beside the point, though. The reason nobody has specifically addressed the OP’s legal questions is because they’re ridiculous and misguided. She needs to accept that her son made a racist comment and needs to take his punishment, then focus her energies on educating her child not fighting the school.

Thank you for reading the question/post. My points were clear:

• The school have refused to share the redacted video and complaint so I am having to act on hearsay. This is in breech of due process and ensuring a defendant is dealt with fairly.
• That said, I have not condoned my sons actions and left him in no doubt that any race hatred language or actions are totally unacceptable.
• It is not illegal for 15 year olds to drink at home, I had all parents permission. They were not drunk or pissed, they had a few beers and were checked by myself about ever half hour.
• The school behaviour policy did outline scope of its authority outside of school - it was limited to on school buses and education trips.
• The school did not adhere to the requirement to conduct a thorough investigation, not talking to myself (supervising the boys) or considering the role of the boy who posted video. This again brings into question of fairness.
• Context is important legal requirement in any judgement, both as evidence and mitigation.
• The boy who posted the video also has a case to answer, he posted it without sons permission and caused the offence to the victim- he remains unsanctioned. Again is this fair.
• My son has been contrite, apologetic and has served his sanction.
• However, there are lessons in how the school has acted. I have seen a laissaz faire attitude to school how school investigate serious incidents, gather evidence and pass judgement. It is interesting that if you google: how to conduct investigations in school, there are 100s of posts on how HR should deal with teachers, but none on how to investigate, assess and judge child related incidents. There appears to be no guidance other than 'thoroughly investigated' fair, proportionate and reasonable, and teachers and heads support british values or rule of law, individual liberty etc. Finally, it is the primacy that parents have for children not the school/state, I was not consulted once during investigation/sanction process either as witness or parent, despite making myself available.
• I was trying to identify if others had similar incidents. Or if there was a policy/guidance in place on school investigations etc... not get my son off...
• If lessons are not highlighted and concerns raised, cultures do not change. Next time it could be your child that is wrongly sanctioned/excluded as a result of flawed institutional due process. I have submitted GDPR request to see the redacted video (my right) and I will be raising my concerns on the procedural failings so lessons can be learned not to overturn my sons sanction.
• Unfortunately, for some this makes me a racist, some of the comments on here are bordering on hate incident/crime with limited/no knowledge of facts. Again a warning for many that the minute you challenge or highlight concerns you are shouted down, and if you mention race the ability to have a balanced wider discussion on important issues disappears.

For process, school or trust complaints policy. Follow it through the stages.

Your son has admitted what he has done so why do you need to see the video?

does your son ask for consent before sharing any videos of his friends every single time?

it doesn’t seem the school have done anything wrong. Hopefully it will be a swift kick up the backside to get him back on track.

Unless you or your son wants to deny what happened, I'm not sure how sharing the redacted video helps. In any event, the school is not a court of law, so talk of "due process" is irrelevant. Given that you are not denying that your son did what he is accused of, I'm not sure what a further investigation would have achieved. Again, with both that and your point about context, you are trying to argue that the school must act as a court of law, which is wrong. As far as the law is concerned, the only requirement is that their actions are not Wednesbury unreasonable, which essentially means irrational. In this case, since they saw a video of your son making racist remarks, there is nothing to investigate unless he wants to deny it and, for example, claim the video has been manipulated or that it wasn't him.

Without seeing the school's behaviour policy I can't comment but, regardless of what it says, they are entitled to take action in any of the situations listed in my previous email.

The boy who posted the video without your son's permission has no case to answer as far as the school is concerned. I get that you are unhappy with this, but he hasn't done anything for which the school can reasonably sanction him. The offence was caused by your son's remarks. The way in which the non-white boy became aware of your son's remarks is irrelevant, except inasmuch as the fact it was a video makes it much harder for your son to deny making the remarks. Trying to shift part of the blame onto this other boy won't wash.

Follow the process.

I'm surprised the behaviour policy doesn't include online behaviour in this day and age.

Have the school responded to the SAR?

I think the school has generally followed an appropriate process. They responded to a parent's complaint about another pupil.
I would take issue with them withholding the video from your son. But otherwise they seem reasonable to me.

Have you complained to the school about the distress the friend has caused your son by his social media post? I wouldn't personally, but you could under the same behaviour policy and associated process.

Your son is not a ‘defendant’, OP. He is not being prosecuted for breaking the law, he is being sanctioned by the school for racism. You are lucky the other child’s parents didn’t report him to the police.

You may have reason to feel aggrieved that the school didn’t communicate clearly with you, and that they haven’t shared the video. But you’re not disputing the fact your son got drunk and racially abused someone, so it seems a pointless exercise to start hounding the school about their processes. What are you hoping to achieve?

Keeping Children Safe in Education makes it clear that schools DO have a duty to safeguard children from online abuse. It doesn’t matter what their policies say (although they should update them to reflect the statutory guidance).

If I were you I’d be focussing on a) ensuring your son understands the serious nature of his actions and doesn’t do it again b) exploring with him why he felt it was OK to racially abuse someone and c) ensuring the school have a plan to support him, as being labelled a racist at school could lead to ongoing issues of bullying or ostracisation.

In other words, focus on what matters ratter than getting caught up in a dispute that will make you look unreasonable at best.

Totally agree with this.

Thank you for your input. Significantly more balanced than most. After submitting a GDPR request school have now acknowledged that they should release redacted video and nature of complaint. Their refusal earlier in the week was illegal, even more so that it regarded to ensuring a fair and objective discussion with my son and school on the scope of the bad behaviour. If anything the school are now more aware of their legal position regarding videos, data and CCTV which they have previously always denied access to parents.
Once I have the facts and evidence I can have a more meaningful discussion with my son rather than relying on third hand/hearsay evidence. It is also important that the school realise that if they are to work with parents in the interest of the child there must be trust; denying a legal right of access to the data does not build trust. And it was not just one individual at the school, it was position an institutional position adopted by 4 senior teachers (one of whom was safeguarding lead) and sanctioned by the headmaster.
Message for all parents - if schools deny you access to redacted CCTV of your child it is illegal.
Finally, to clarify my son was not drunk.

prh47bridge

Putting aside the specific situation and talking more generally (which is what OP meant anyway), suppose I am a pupil, at home, with my friends. We chat and I say that my physics teacher is stupid. Later it turns out that one of my friends took a video and sent it to the teacher. Following the reasoning you laid out, I should be investigated and the school should punish me for this remark.

Do you agree that a 15-year old is not allowed to say anything negative about their teachers when talking to friends privately?

Good, thank you for the update

I am very surprised it is only a fixed term exclusion. Are you sure it isn't a fixed term exclusion pending a review? It should be a permanent exclusion, and possibly a police report. That is what would happen in our school, and in fact did happen last year, but the fixed term exclusion was the first, holding measure, while the situation was reviewed by the MAT.

I hope he is expelled - that is what should happen, that is the only fair outcome for the other children at the school

Nowadays schools are expected to deal with everything. Things in school and out. Parenting, manners, eating with a knife and fork, toilet training.
It’s not really fair on schools as they haven’t got the resources plus parents only give them grief either way.

That's a bit OTT - he is 15 and about to start his exams. You would ruin this child's education and the likely ramifications with a permanent exclusion? If what happened is as OP said then the school seem to have dealt with it very well and quick. I would hope they know the child and his usual conduct to make that assessment. It is about educating him and the consequences should be proportional. How does a permanent exclusion teach him anything about racism.
My only query is that OP was trying to minimise in that the boy who shared the video should also have been sanctioned alongside her son.

Thank you this is my point - more generally, comments were made in private - not in public and video was shared without his permission - which is illegal too. The level of offence caused has yet to be established. Context has been disregarded. You said it someone took offence - closed case - exclusion or if you are being consistent end of teachers career if a teacher is caught saying something after a few beers at a rugby club or local wedding.

Yes, all this needed was for school to let parents know - share redacted and let those offended know it has been passed to parents to act. If it was of very serious nature and caused gross offence school should pass to police.

I agree with other message - we want schools to focus on educating our children not take on all parenting responsibilities 24/7, 365 days a year. My son missed 2 days of education, if I had been left to deal with it - it would be out of school sanctions not disrupting his education.

it clearly caused offense to have been recorded and shared. It is a hate crime. If it was views by those present as innocuous, it wouldn't have been recorded and shared. You dont get to commit a hate crime on social media and remain in your institution of employment or education. It seems pretty clear cut to me, not OTT at all, the normal result of a hate crime

That is not following my reasoning. There is a clear difference between
making racist remarks and being negative about a teacher.

Quite. And then probably to be wheeled out again in 20 years time to say he's a racist and shouldn't be in a certain job.

So many sanctimonious comments on this thread. As if you didn't do stupid things as teenagers (and no, I don't believe you weren't ever racist, either - everyone was and arguably still is, but that's for another discussion)). The only reason people got away with it was because we didn't have smartphones videoing the behaviour everywhere.

I have a certain amount of sympathy that private behaviour outside school not in school uniform or on a trip should not be sanctioned by the school.

I think the parents should have complained to the police rather than to the school. A visit from a stern police officer would be more useful than a school exclusion in my view anyway.

However, OP, what were you thinking letting them drink alcohol? Why do parents do that? Alcohol fuels stupid behaviour!

Get him to read Adam Rutherford's boo How to argue with a racist. It is a very good book.

OP as a separate issue - if you think the school has not conducted a fair investigation that is different. You can look at the behaviour policy and their investigation policy and ensure they have followed it properly. If they haven't, then you can raise it as a concern and state where you think they haven't followed policy.

But it does sound like racist remark on a video is fairly open and shut. You son has also admitted it, so it's not like it's a deepfake or anything.

God, you sound like a total nightmare, OP. So self-righteous and pompous and asserting total nonsense dressed up as legal knowledge when your 15 year old son was filmed slurring racial abuse, despite being supervised by 'yourself' (the word 'myself' is not a formal version of 'me' by the way, though your use of it added beautifully to the overall impression created).

You really ought to just home school him. You remind me of a parent I spoke to last week who would not accept that her son was excluded for calling a teacher a fucking slag as there were not witnesses to the event, so it was her word against his, which isn't good enough, apparently.

We are not police officers, it's not a court of law, stop focussing on whether 'the school' dealt with something the way you think they should and deal with your kids!