Forums

A child regularly swearing at a teacher - telephone the police?

Last post 24/12/10 at 11:21 by dinx67, 253 replies
Post started by MissedOpportunity on 13/12/10 at 19:16

Rate this topic

Select colour:
  • Offline
    31
    Posted by: Middlemarch 14/12/2010 at 14:40
    Joined on 09/09/2005
    Posts 12,784

     The judge said otherwise, Joe, in a case later than the acts you mention.  As it's now legal precedent, all a defence lawyer has to do is wave it at the judge.

  • Offline
    32
    Posted by: MeanAverageJoe 14/12/2010 at 14:57
    Joined on 04/12/2008
    Posts 8,409

    Middlemarch:
    The judge said otherwise, Joe, in a case later than the acts you mention.

    It seems extraordinary that law that was specifically enacted to include schools within "knife crime" legislation does not apply.

  • Offline
    33
    Posted by: Middlemarch 14/12/2010 at 15:46
    Joined on 09/09/2005
    Posts 12,784

    I suspect it's all in the wording, unfortunately.

  • Offline
    34
    Posted by: pedigree 14/12/2010 at 16:20
    Joined on 24/01/2006
    Posts 783
    This is an example of VERBAL ABUSE AND MUST NOT BE TOLERATED! IF THE PUPIL WERE TO SAY THIS TO A POLICEMAN IN THE STREET ONE WONDERS IF HE/SHE WOULD BE ARRESTED?????[
  • Offline
    35
    Posted by: Crowbob 14/12/2010 at 16:27
    Joined on 17/03/2010
    Posts 320

    Middlemarch:

    MeanAverageJoe:
    FWIW The current legislation re knives and other offensive weapons applies to public places and , explicity, schools.
     

    FWIW, legal precedent has defined a school as not a public place in the case I mentioned.  The government's 'legislation' has no weight if a judge rules otherwise.

    If this was a Crown/Magistrate case then the judgment you refer to is not binding, it is at the most persuasive. Precedent only binds lower courts in the hierarchy. 

    Secondly, if the CPS prosecuted the case on the basis of s.139 (which refers to a public place) it could be quite possible that this does not apply to schools. 

    S.139A creates a wholly different offence of having a bladed article on school premises. 

    Perhaps, in the case you refer to MM, the CPS just made a mistake in the route to prosecution...

  • Online
    36
    Posted by: existentialtyke 14/12/2010 at 17:26
    Joined on 02/03/2005
    Posts 6,153

    Crowbob:

    Perhaps, in the case you refer to MM, the CPS just made a mistake in the route to prosecution...

    Sounds like it. Under the legislation correctly mentioned by MAJ, the judge would have to have interpreted the words of the Act literally and he could not have excluded a school for any reason. He is there to apply the primary legislation after all. I suspect that the CPS took a different prosecution route.

    In terms of the OP I am strugglng to see a criminal offence, save perhaps The Protection From Harassment Act but in the real world there is no chance.

    This should be dealt with by the unions. There are some issues of employers' liability that may concentrate the minds of the SMT.

    This is not a police matter. 

  • Offline
    37
    Posted by: weebecka 14/12/2010 at 17:37
    Joined on 15/09/2010
    Posts 823
    nomad:
    And your point of telling the police was?
    They asked and I didn't realised it was possible they would start criminal proceedings against a child when it was clearly inappropriate to all concerned (apart from the particular police officer who started proceedings). I think it's possible that others reading this thread may not realise that if they mention an assault to the police the police may take action without their consent whether or not it is appropriate to the child or the situation and whether or not there is any chance of a conviction (remember I never went to the police to talk about this - it came up in another context). There was an issue with the quality of the policing here and I did follow this up. Also you need to consider what is going to happen during the time it takes for a case to get going. If you are still teaching and the child is still in school, how will this be managed?
  • Offline
    38
    Posted by: weebecka 14/12/2010 at 17:53
    Joined on 15/09/2010
    Posts 823
    lovelylouboutins:
    So why was it OK for this pupil to assault you but not the other???? If you think being assaulted in a classroom is a matter for the police (which it most certainly is) then why not apply this to all students?

    A criminal record is a major thing for a young adult to carry. Whereever possible things should be handled by the school. This is especially true if it seems likely that the incident would not have occurred in a non-institutionalised setting.

    The situation would have to be exceptionally extreme for me to report a child to the police. For example if the student had a history of serious assaults on staff, if my form students were seriously intimidated by this student out of school, if the student was soon to be 'out of school and in the community i.e. they were well in to year 11' and if no significant action were being taken against the student by the school.

  • Offline
    39
    Posted by: Lilyofthefield 14/12/2010 at 17:55
    Joined on 19/09/2001
    Posts 14,034

    Does the offence "Wasting Police Time" still exist?

  • Offline
    40
    Posted by: garyconyers 14/12/2010 at 18:30
    Joined on 28/09/2006
    Posts 2,345

    ET is right - this is not a police matter as sec 5 public order is for offences in a public place.

    Lilyofthefield:

    Does the offence "Wasting Police Time" still exist?

    It does, but its rarely used, as it needs a measurable amount of police-officer-hours wasted on what can be proved to be a lie (IME).

Back to top

Sign up – it’s free!

  • Don’t miss out on the latest jobs
  • Connect and share with friends
  • Download thousands of resources
  • Chat in the forums