Dad punches "teacher": Right or Wrong?

[Brian Ellis]

Unfortunately, it is human nature to make mountains out of molehills. If this were not the case, Saddam would still be luxuriating in his palaces and several Frenchmen would not have been cleared of paedophily (one of them having committed suicide in the meanwhile, despite his innocence).

I question the veracity of the girl. Psychologically, it would be very unusual for a child to admit she had been sexually assaulted or otherwise molested. It would be much more common for her to feel very much ashamed and to retire into a self-imposed shell about it. If she were to talk about it, it would be much more likely that she would mention it to her mother or to another woman and least likely to a man. If she did so, then it would be more likely to be an act of spite than the truth or, at the very least, exaggerated out of all proportion. It is all too easy to interpret an accidental touch as something sinister.

Now, reading between the lines, I suggest that the man's complaint is probably the first the school heard of the case, as the accused had not been suspended at that time. If so, I suggest that it is ridiculous to accuse the school and its authorities of doing wrong. They did the correct thing by putting him on paid leave as soon as it came to their notice. Note that the person in question has not been charged. I have little doubt that the police have investigated him carefully and taken depositions from the parties concerned in the hours following the incident (at least 10 hours, as the guy who punched him was in clink for 10 hours until he bailed himself out). If the police thought there was a chance he was guilty, surely he would be held for questioning, if not actually charged, yet he appears to be free and the news agency did not release his name. Furthermore, note that the father was not released from the charge, only bailed out. If it seemed the accusations against the teacher were substantial, I would have thought that the police would have taken a much more lenient view and let him out a back door quietly, having shaken his hand.

By all accounts, without further information, there is nothing to go on in this story. If the teacher is exonerated, he should take the father to court for every penny he has (unjustified trauma can be very distressing, as can slander and damage to his career and persona). And the father should be imprisoned for common assault. If the teacher does prove to be guilty, then he will get the punishment he deserves (other prisoners are not kind to sex offenders).

Let's not be too hasty in jumping to conclusions, otherwise we may find ourselves in the same position as the father.

[TransformX]

Unfortunately, it is human nature to make mountains out of molehills. If this were not the case, Saddam would still be luxuriating in his palaces

Watching videos of people being tortured ane executed, while his sons continue raping and murdering

and several Frenchmen would not have been cleared of paedophily (one of them having committed suicide in the meanwhile, despite his innocence).

I question the veracity of the girl. Psychologically, it would be very unusual for a child to admit she had been sexually assaulted or otherwise molested. It would be much more common for her to feel very much ashamed and to retire into a self-imposed shell about it.

And I'm the one being called a chauvinist pig?

If she were to talk about it, it would be much more likely that she would mention it to her mother or to another woman and least likely to a man. If she did so, then it would be more likely to be an act of spite than the truth or, at the very least, exaggerated out of all proportion. It is all too easy to interpret an accidental touch as something sinister.

See my last comment. Instead of being happy the girl has a good mind and is capable to defent her principles, you claim she's supposed to be more docile. Or maybe like that girl that was gang-raped in Pakistan and didn't commint suicide like other girls usually do and she was supposed to

Now, reading between the lines, I suggest that the man's complaint is probably the first the school heard of the case, as the accused had not been suspended at that time. If so, I suggest that it is ridiculous to accuse the school and its authorities of doing wrong. They did the correct thing by putting him on paid leave as soon as it came to their notice.

No they didn't, the parents came to the school to discuss the subject, so it was already well known

Note that the person in question has not been charged. I have little doubt that the police have investigated him carefully and taken depositions from the parties concerned in the hours following the incident (at least 10 hours, as the guy who punched him was in clink for 10 hours until he bailed himself out). If the police thought there was a chance he was guilty, surely he would be held for questioning, if not actually charged, yet he appears to be free and the news agency did not release his name. Furthermore, note that the father was not released from the charge, only bailed out. If it seemed the accusations against the teacher were substantial, I would have thought that the police would have taken a much more lenient view and let him out a back door quietly, having shaken his hand.

No, the man might be charged for assault, that means he has to pay bail...

By all accounts, without further information, there is nothing to go on in this story. If the teacher is exonerated, he should take the father to court for every penny he has (unjustified trauma can be very distressing, as can slander and damage to his career and persona). And the father should be imprisoned for common assault. If the teacher does prove to be guilty, then he will get the punishment he deserves (other prisoners are not kind to sex offenders).

And you've served time in prison to know that, right?

Let's not be too hasty in jumping to conclusions, otherwise we may find ourselves in the same position as the father.

Same for Iran, right?

[az]

Not TOO quietly. The parents of the kids involved need to know, and it needs to be noted that it's happened. There's quietly and there's "coverup".

Of course. By quietly I mean not blurting it out to all the parents not involved, and asking (while honestly assuring them that all hell will break loose against the guy if he is found guilty) the people involved not to blurt "Mr. Fisher is a rapist!" at every opportunity. There's a difference between informing those who are involved and punishing someone before his trial.

[Jessterw]

I think assuming she was raped (or is making accusations of such) might be taking it a bit far. The complaint seems to have been concerning inappropriate behaviour of a lesser degree.

[Wombat]

Not if your kid came forward and the school doesn't suspend the potential offender. If yor kid comes forward, saying some teacher did this and that, and the school allows that teacher to be in contact with those kids, it's the school administration's fault. A suspect should *NOT* be in the same kind of contact has he was before with those accusing him. I'd punch him -and- the school administration for that.

What planet are you on? If a teacher were suspended whenever such an accusation were made, kids would be pointing fingers left and right! Got a detention? Accuse! Not ready for the test Friday? Accuse!

He/she isn't a suspect in any reasonable fashion. But innocent people would be falsely accused if you had your way, and suspensions like that leave permanent marks on your professional record, even if you're found innocent later. Find some other way to keep the kid separate if you must, but in the meantime, save the suspension for if/when charges are filed.

[Admiral]

In the end it just seems to be a tricky sittuation of either leaving the kids open to such assulats or messing up the teacher's life...

[TransformX]

What planet are you on? If a teacher were suspended whenever such an accusation were made, kids would be pointing fingers left and right! Got a detention? Accuse! Not ready for the test Friday? Accuse!

He/she isn't a suspect in any reasonable fashion. But innocent people would be falsely accused if you had your way, and suspensions like that leave permanent marks on your professional record, even if you're found innocent later. Find some other way to keep the kid separate if you must, but in the meantime, save the suspension for if/when charges are filed.

This isn't a case with just one kid, there are more than one kid involved here. How would YOU react if you'd hear of a teacher's misconduct with several kids, who keepes his/her position and during that time misconducted with more kids, or worse, with your child because of it? Better be on the safe side. If the kid(s) invented a story, let their parents assume responsibility.

[Umfriend]

Same for Iran, right?

TX having abias against Brian E???? Noooooohhhh

[TransformX]

That's from the thread where Brian tried to convince us that maybe Iran is looking to enrich Uranium for praceful reasons.

[Umfriend]

Which is relevant to this thread because, well, erm, you see, uhm, clearly, eh?

[TransformX]

Assuming the teacher involved is innocent, when a few kids say he/she misconducted is almost criminal. As much as children can be little horrid and vindictive creatures, they come first.
When a person (Iran) goes shopping in a gun store (tries to enrich Uranium), talking about killing people, you can assume he's a good, level headed person (like Brian does) or assume he's a wannabe serial killer (like I do).

edit: Let me put it more bluntly. You see me taking out my gun and shooting someone in the head. The other person falls dead to the ground, blood and brain pouring out of his/her head and I put my gun back in the holster.
Option 1: I wasn't put on trial, wasn't proven guilty in a court of law, you might have imagined things, we could be filming a movie, so you come to me and ask what happened and whether I'll hand over my gun, hoping you're not the next to die.
Option 2: You assume the worse, duck for cover, call the police, do your best to stop me before I do that to other people.

Which one will you choose?

[Wombat]

This isn't a case with just one kid, there are more than one kid involved here. How would YOU react if you'd hear of a teacher's misconduct with several kids, who keepes his/her position and during that time misconducted with more kids, or worse, with your child because of it? Better be on the safe side. If the kid(s) invented a story, let their parents assume responsibility.

What responsibility? The kids are minors, nothing will happen to them.

[TransformX]

Well, since the parents are into the story too, you can alway sue the parents, it's their responsibility as well once they start making noise or throwing punches.
Now, since I've answered your question, please answer mine. What if that teacher has kept his position during the inquiery and during that time molested your kid?

[Admiral]

I'm not sure if punnishing the parrents is the best thing to do, kids would just start "blackmailing" the parrents with their actions... I think The PIT had a thread last year about this issue, a case in the UK.

Some sort of juvenile (legal) punnisment for the kids with false accusations, like comunity work or something harder and for the teachers taking them out of contact with the children while things clear out (innocent/guilty). In both cases time is critical, on one side endangering the kids if keeping them in contact with such teachers on the other marginalising/stigmatising an inocent teacher. Guess there's no perfect legal sollution for this, modern society just seems to twist every procedure and situation, political corectness on one side radical thinking/action on the other... if you want a real culprit, the school administration and authorities (police) should take matters like this seriously, it's up to them to arbitrate and protect the rights of both sides.

[Umfriend]

Assuming the teacher involved is innocent, when a few kids say he/she misconducted is almost criminal. As much as children can be little horrid and vindictive creatures, they come first.
When a person (Iran) goes shopping in a gun store (tries to enrich Uranium), talking about killing people, you can assume he's a good, level headed person (like Brian does) or assume he's a wannabe serial killer (like I do).

edit: Let me put it more bluntly. You see me taking out my gun and shooting someone in the head. The other person falls dead to the ground, blood and brain pouring out of his/her head and I put my gun back in the holster.
Option 1: I wasn't put on trial, wasn't proven guilty in a court of law, you might have imagined things, we could be filming a movie, so you come to me and ask what happened and whether I'll hand over my gun, hoping you're not the next to die.
Option 2: You assume the worse, duck for cover, call the police, do your best to stop me before I do that to other people.

Which one will you choose?

Sorry, bollocks. Now if the father had actually seen the guy bothering his daughter and the rest of the story remained the same, then then your analogy might hold.

But IMHO, you would not care about that when it concerns, say, brian E.

If one of my daughters would ever tell me she was molested by this and such guy, I might well do the same or worse. Does not make it right.