The aim of my last post was not to spread rumour or malicious gossip,
merely to propose some alternate ideas to gibble gabble, although
yes, most are 'against' her original thoughts- there just happen to
be none I really agree with!
I can assure you there was no hatred involved while writing it, I'm
sorry if you picked any up while reading it, but I assure none was
intended or felt.
I assume that what upset most is what I have written about Mr.
Southwell?
This again was a part of a suggestion or alternative idea, I do not
believe I have actually said anything against him, and there was
certainly no intent to spread rumour or gossip. (I am still a little
unsure as to exactly what I have said on this point.) What I said
would refer to all the teachers involved at the time who are still
teaching now. I used Mr. Southwell's name as he was the teacher that
Gibble Gabble mentioned.
The question I was looking at in that part of the message -if you
take away the name Mr. Southwell- was does the past effect the
present? Gibble gabble was very dismissive of past events and the
testimonials from the past, but I put forward the idea that if she
had more knowledge about the past of the schools and/or teachers
she/he might feel differently, so in this way the past might be
relevant.
Gibble gabble also said that she was afraid for the reputation of the
day schools if people from the past kept speaking out. I would take
this further and say she should be concerned also for the reputations
of the teachers. But again I would say that a reputation is based on
the past actions of an individual, both good and bad. So is it a good
idea that the bad be hidden? As I feel I have demonstrated it is.
There are many strong examples of it being a dangerous thing- A more
recent one that came to mind was Ian Huntly, who was employed by a
school that knew nothing of his criminal record, with tragic results.
I feel that by stating that there was abuse of boys at St. Vedast and
later St. James I am not spreading rumour or gossip, I feel there is
enough proof from what is right here.
You mention the justice system. It is not the aim of the ex-pupils
concerned to sue St. James/Ses, as far as I know. They are dealing
directly with the people involved. But I would say that there are
difficulties in putting a case against Ses/St. James.
Although I have little experience of bringing court cases against
people, these are things I see as being problems-
Ses/St. James have far more money than anyone could have that would
be against them.
Many of the senior Ses members are lawyers, Mr. Lambie is himself, so
know far more about the law than anyone against them.
However, Frith Oliver, who's story is -somewhat sensationally- told
in the first chapter of `The Secret Cult', seems to have managed to
win her court case against the school, although it implies that this
was mostly done with the help of witnesses.
I think that witnesses to the then-children's stories would also be
hard to find, most would be dedicated Ses members, and therefore
unwilling to speak against the establishment. But as someone
mentioned we haven't had much feedback from parents so I don't know
how many of them would be supportive of their children's stories.
But I don't really know much about witnesses and court battles or
other families situations so I will stop now.
I hope that helps,
Adrasteia