Eve Ritchie-Fallon cleared of slapping teenager at The Forest (From Daily Echo)

Great news!

One in the eye for chavism

Seems justice can sometimes be done in htis country.....

Oh wonderful.
Poor teachers have hard enough jobs to do in the first place, then rather than showing appreciation they get dragged into courts and that too on the basis of allegations made by dope smokers.
Hope this head teacher will recover out of this awful ordeal she had to go through.
Now what are they going to do about those who must have caused lot of distress to this head teacher?

Will she be compensated for the false allegations, all the stress that this has caused for her, damage to her reputation, the sleepless nights, will the cost be covered for the court her solicitor, her time off. Probably not, unfortunetely I had to go through a very similar experience, I didnt even get an apology. Only some of the costs will be covered by legal aid. Its outragious.

Great news by the way Eve,

Very pleased to hear the news that this lovely lady has been rightfully cleared. Hope they will compensate for her earnings loss and the stress of being wrongly accused.

I expect she will get compensation but not from the kids but from the tax payers. Lets hope in future these cases do not get as far as court.

It beggars belief that this case was prosecuted at all. Eve R-F can never be wholly compensated for the stress this incident must have caused, but I hope that such compensation as can be made is paid in full.
There are too many cases like this, and teachers should surely be given all the support that they need, as they are so vulnerable to allegations from pupils, some of whom have such a gross sens of entitlement as to make them a real threat.

Over the years, and that is 20 odd years ago we had young teachers staying with us and I was horrified how they were treated AND that was by the Government. Then it was the Government's directives that one should spare the rod with the kids - the children soon got savvy about how much they could get away with and teachers were powerless - but was the Government there to HELP them - NO. You would not believe the mothers or fathers or both turning up at the school had as big a mouth as their kids and aggressive. Ms Ritchie-Fallon deserves compensation but taking it out of the families pockets - get rid of the tele, computers, game boy - strip their homes and see how they feel. But it won't happen will it - they were hoping for compensation - let them suffer.

goard

I think the parents should fork out the compensation for producing such evil lying children.

Can I just ask those of you that have commented about the young person involved, do you actually know them?

From the other side of the fence, think about it this way, we all go on and on about how young people have no respect for authority etc etc, but this young person has stood up for what they believe in, they have approached the authorities and tried to get themselves heard, however it has all been thrown out as a lie despite all their efforts, how do you think they are going to feel about authority now?

Before all the young people involved get branded 'dope smokers' (thank you for such a stereotypical view there Paramjit) try and think about it from their point of view, and try and think about the damage this will do to their already low respect for the law.

Does anyone recall the old Scotland and Blackburn defender Colin Hendry ?

No reason, just thought I'd ask.

Mike88 wrote:
Can I just ask those of you that have commented about the young person involved, do you actually know them?

From the other side of the fence, think about it this way, we all go on and on about how young people have no respect for authority etc etc, but this young person has stood up for what they believe in, they have approached the authorities and tried to get themselves heard, however it has all been thrown out as a lie despite all their efforts, how do you think they are going to feel about authority now?

Before all the young people involved get branded 'dope smokers' (thank you for such a stereotypical view there Paramjit) try and think about it from their point of view, and try and think about the damage this will do to their already low respect for the law.

I think the person involved has shown what they think about the law by making false allegations. Poor thing probably felt disrespected in front of his peer group and decided to use the law as a way of obtaining retribution. I imagine the family background is none too pleasant and this person will be a familiar face on the court circuit as he grows up.

Mike88 wrote:
Can I just ask those of you that have commented about the young person involved, do you actually know them? From the other side of the fence, think about it this way, we all go on and on about how young people have no respect for authority etc etc, but this young person has stood up for what they believe in, they have approached the authorities and tried to get themselves heard, however it has all been thrown out as a lie despite all their efforts, how do you think they are going to feel about authority now? Before all the young people involved get branded 'dope smokers' (thank you for such a stereotypical view there Paramjit) try and think about it from their point of view, and try and think about the damage this will do to their already low respect for the law.

it is views such as yours which have destroyed the opportunities of bright working class kids who have to suffer the poor behaviour of others on a daily basis in sink schools. Until you are an adult you are still the responsibility of your parent, as stated in law.

It is a criminal offence for kids under 18 to smoke, the boy broke the law.

Kids have no chance if people like you become parents.

Mike88 wrote:
Can I just ask those of you that have commented about the young person involved, do you actually know them?

From the other side of the fence, think about it this way, we all go on and on about how young people have no respect for authority etc etc, but this young person has stood up for what they believe in, they have approached the authorities and tried to get themselves heard, however it has all been thrown out as a lie despite all their efforts, how do you think they are going to feel about authority now?

Before all the young people involved get branded 'dope smokers' (thank you for such a stereotypical view there Paramjit) try and think about it from their point of view, and try and think about the damage this will do to their already low respect for the law.

I think the person involved has shown what they think about the law by making false allegations. Poor thing probably felt disrespected in front of his peer group and decided to use the law as a way of obtaining retribution. I imagine the family background is none too pleasant and this person will be a familiar face on the court circuit if he grows up.

Mike88 wrote:
Can I just ask those of you that have commented about the young person involved, do you actually know them?

From the other side of the fence, think about it this way, we all go on and on about how young people have no respect for authority etc etc, but this young person has stood up for what they believe in, they have approached the authorities and tried to get themselves heard, however it has all been thrown out as a lie despite all their efforts, how do you think they are going to feel about authority now?

Before all the young people involved get branded 'dope smokers' (thank you for such a stereotypical view there Paramjit) try and think about it from their point of view, and try and think about the damage this will do to their already low respect for the law.

Just the sort of do goody attitude thats bugggered this country up how about some national service or a big stick. they might think twice then.

I hope this case sets a precedent for the judiciary. It's about time we got back to an acceptable standard of behaviour in schools. This should be based on the fact that children at school are not there to be treated as the equal to their teachers. They are there to learn - in the capacity of pupils - to be taught by their elders and betters. The kid in question probably derserved a slap - even if he didn't get one. All you parents out there who believe that the sun shines out of the backside of your little angels should see what they are like in school. Kids today know they can get away with murder with little or no retribution. If your kid comes home and tells you that he had a clip round the ear from a teacher you should give him another one to go along with it - he probably did something to deserve the first one anyway - don't go screaming up to the school to have a go at the teacher because they were just trying to instil some of the discipline that you as parents failed to do in the first place.

Mike88 wrote:
Can I just ask those of you that have commented about the young person involved, do you actually know them? From the other side of the fence, think about it this way, we all go on and on about how young people have no respect for authority etc etc, but this young person has stood up for what they believe in, they have approached the authorities and tried to get themselves heard, however it has all been thrown out as a lie despite all their efforts, how do you think they are going to feel about authority now? Before all the young people involved get branded 'dope smokers' (thank you for such a stereotypical view there Paramjit) try and think about it from their point of view, and try and think about the damage this will do to their already low respect for the law.

If you read the story you will see that at least one of them was doped up and at least one of them changed their story. So no need to stereotype anyone; they did it all by themselves.

I think that Mike88 is either nuts, or is being deliberately provocative because he doesn`t go out enough.

The Crown Prosecution Service need to take a long, hard look at themselves after this farce.

There is absolutely no way this should have gone to court, particularly given the changing of witness statements and given the fact one of them was under the influence of narcotics!

Any sensible person would have looked at this case and said there was absolutely no way that it could be conceived to be in the public interest to prosecute.

No way whatsoever.

I pity those poor teachers who have to put up with abuse, insolence and disruptive behaviour and then at the same time get absolutely no help or support from the system. In fact, in this case they have gotten exactly the opposite.

Children have rights, one of which is a decent, safe education, but at the same time there have to be boundaries.

Mike88... your absolutely conkers!!

I haven't the energy to even say what I feel... thankfully most previous posts have already said it.

goard wrote:
Over the years, and that is 20 odd years ago we had young teachers staying with us and I was horrified how they were treated AND that was by the Government. Then it was the Government's directives that one should spare the rod with the kids - the children soon got savvy about how much they could get away with and teachers were powerless - but was the Government there to HELP them - NO. You would not believe the mothers or fathers or both turning up at the school had as big a mouth as their kids and aggressive. Ms Ritchie-Fallon deserves compensation but taking it out of the families pockets - get rid of the tele, computers, game boy - strip their homes and see how they feel. But it won't happen will it - they were hoping for compensation - let them suffer.

goard

Goard, now and again you do come up with some sensible posts and this is a good one.

Mike88: If you had followed the proceedings, and even read this article then you would have discovered:
The boy was in a school for children deemed unteachable in normal schools,
The boy admitted smoking cannabis, which is illegal in the country.
The boy admitted smoking on school premises, which is against the rules, and all common sense.
The boy admitted swearing at Mrs Ritchie-Fallon.
The boy admitted 'squaring up to' Mrs Ritchie-Fallon.
The Court apparently believed that he also a liar.
From the above I deduce that it is safe to say that he is an objectionable little tyke,
Can you spot any redeeming features?, none seem to have been reported so far.

mike88, just one question.....

exactly which planetary system are you from?

The Watcher wrote:
The Crown Prosecution Service need to take a long, hard look at themselves after this farce. There is absolutely no way this should have gone to court, particularly given the changing of witness statements and given the fact one of them was under the influence of narcotics! Any sensible person would have looked at this case and said there was absolutely no way that it could be conceived to be in the public interest to prosecute. No way whatsoever. I pity those poor teachers who have to put up with abuse, insolence and disruptive behaviour and then at the same time get absolutely no help or support from the system. In fact, in this case they have gotten exactly the opposite. Children have rights, one of which is a decent, safe education, but at the same time there have to be boundaries.

Your right the CPS do have a lot to answer for. Apparentley all cases are means tested, but they never follow these rules otherwise it would of been thrown out. Go have a look at the test on-line, it would always fail.

Carpe Diem wrote:
I hope this case sets a precedent for the judiciary. It's about time we got back to an acceptable standard of behaviour in schools. This should be based on the fact that children at school are not there to be treated as the equal to their teachers. They are there to learn - in the capacity of pupils - to be taught by their elders and betters. The kid in question probably derserved a slap - even if he didn't get one. All you parents out there who believe that the sun shines out of the backside of your little angels should see what they are like in school. Kids today know they can get away with murder with little or no retribution. If your kid comes home and tells you that he had a clip round the ear from a teacher you should give him another one to go along with it - he probably did something to deserve the first one anyway - don't go screaming up to the school to have a go at the teacher because they were just trying to instil some of the discipline that you as parents failed to do in the first place.

Right on the button, unfortunately the parent(s) of these little gems think that they are owed an education regardless of the behaviour of their offspring. They don't have the capacity to understand that which you have pointed out.
X Old Bill, you are not allowed to confuse the issue with facts, you will upset some of the weird posters on here. :o)

Mike88 wrote:
Can I just ask those of you that have commented about the young person involved, do you actually know them? From the other side of the fence, think about it this way, we all go on and on about how young people have no respect for authority etc etc, but this young person has stood up for what they believe in, they have approached the authorities and tried to get themselves heard, however it has all been thrown out as a lie despite all their efforts, how do you think they are going to feel about authority now? Before all the young people involved get branded 'dope smokers' (thank you for such a stereotypical view there Paramjit) try and think about it from their point of view, and try and think about the damage this will do to their already low respect for the law.

Actually it does say that he admitted to smoking cannabis!

Mike88 wrote:
Can I just ask those of you that have commented about the young person involved, do you actually know them?

From the other side of the fence, think about it this way, we all go on and on about how young people have no respect for authority etc etc, but this young person has stood up for what they believe in, they have approached the authorities and tried to get themselves heard, however it has all been thrown out as a lie despite all their efforts, how do you think they are going to feel about authority now?

Before all the young people involved get branded 'dope smokers' (thank you for such a stereotypical view there Paramjit) try and think about it from their point of view, and try and think about the damage this will do to their already low respect for the law.

With the greatest of respect, this should be an excellent lesson in Law. i.e. you can't 'get back' at someone by using the Courts, you will get found out! Whilst I appreciate that this child has a difficult background, respect has to be both ways. Part of working with these young people means that it's made clear that their behaviour is not acceptable, not condoning it and making excuses for it. I don't think anyone really cares a flying fig that they will have a low respect for the law now! if you are being serious which perhaps you are not...this has all the signs of a wind up...

oh notice Southy has been very quiet on this one after saying growing your own and smoking dope "I'm all for it"..... hmmmmm really enhances judgement doesn't it.... NOT

I am well aware of the struggles that teachers & staff face when at work. As a professional working in a similar environment to the facility here, one has to be even more aware of ones own vulnerability to allegation. This 'little gem' as he was described earlier, must remember that we all have social rules we have to abide by, because in the real world they are called LAWS. As for Mrs RF. she is one of the most child orientated people and one who is invariably on the childs side when the parent has not been. Today she cleared her name & quite rightly so.

I am well aware of the struggles that teachers & staff face when at work. As a professional working in a similar environment to the facility here, one has to be even more aware of ones own vulnerability to allegation. This 'little gem' as he was described earlier, must remember that we all have social rules we have to abide by, because in the real world they are called LAWS. As for Mrs RF. she is one of the most child orientated people and one who is invariably on the childs side when the parent has not been. Today she cleared her name & quite rightly so.

Mike88 wrote:
Can I just ask those of you that have commented about the young person involved, do you actually know them? From the other side of the fence, think about it this way, we all go on and on about how young people have no respect for authority etc etc, but this young person has stood up for what they believe in, they have approached the authorities and tried to get themselves heard, however it has all been thrown out as a lie despite all their efforts, how do you think they are going to feel about authority now? Before all the young people involved get branded 'dope smokers' (thank you for such a stereotypical view there Paramjit) try and think about it from their point of view, and try and think about the damage this will do to their already low respect for the law.

Mike88
I am not stereo typing all the youngsters. Dope smoking bit came out in the court evidence.

Take a look at the Daily Mail web site today (Thursday). There's another bunch of chav parents complaining because their little darlings are placed in isolation when they are disruptive. They are also complaining because only kids who behave and abide by school rules on discipline and uniform are allowed to go on school trips. Priceless ! Or maybe, looking at the photos, I should say Shameless ! What are the chances of the kids who do behave and who do want to learn when so much time is spent pandering to the needs of these morons. Chavs breeding chavs ad nauseum.

X Old Bill wrote:
Mike88: If you had followed the proceedings, and even read this article then you would have discovered:
The boy was in a school for children deemed unteachable in normal schools,
The boy admitted smoking cannabis, which is illegal in the country.
The boy admitted smoking on school premises, which is against the rules, and all common sense.
The boy admitted swearing at Mrs Ritchie-Fallon.
The boy admitted 'squaring up to' Mrs Ritchie-Fallon.
The Court apparently believed that he also a liar.
From the above I deduce that it is safe to say that he is an objectionable little tyke,
Can you spot any redeeming features?, none seem to have been reported so far.

Good post X Old Bill. I did refer your post to UKjusticeisajoke and another poster from the New Forest who seemed to think that the perpetrators here had a raw deal. It would seem that the echo did not like the posts and deleted them, don't know why, there was no reason to.

Excuse me but I purely put my own opinion out there for discussion, there is no need for your last comment. 'People Like Me'

What is that exactly then, you know me do you?

mowrench wrote:
I think that Mike88 is either nuts, or is being deliberately provocative because he doesn`t go out enough.

None of the above, actually, I just prefer to have my own opinion on matters, not just lap up everything the papers tell me.

X Old Bill wrote:
Mike88: If you had followed the proceedings, and even read this article then you would have discovered: The boy was in a school for children deemed unteachable in normal schools, The boy admitted smoking cannabis, which is illegal in the country. The boy admitted smoking on school premises, which is against the rules, and all common sense. The boy admitted swearing at Mrs Ritchie-Fallon. The boy admitted 'squaring up to' Mrs Ritchie-Fallon. The Court apparently believed that he also a liar. From the above I deduce that it is safe to say that he is an objectionable little tyke, Can you spot any redeeming features?, none seem to have been reported so far.

This post is to the one quoted but also to all above really, I wasn't standing up for the young person's behaviour nor was I condoning it, I was just voicing my opinion and asking others to think about the young person for a change.

To X Old Bill, I respect your opinion and I realise that in this instance the young person had a lot against him, but as for any redeeming features, no not in this article but then the papers generally take one side or the other. The young man himself has plenty of redeeming features, it's a pity none of these make the headlines.

freemantlegirl2 wrote:

Mike88 wrote: Can I just ask those of you that have commented about the young person involved, do you actually know them? From the other side of the fence, think about it this way, we all go on and on about how young people have no respect for authority etc etc, but this young person has stood up for what they believe in, they have approached the authorities and tried to get themselves heard, however it has all been thrown out as a lie despite all their efforts, how do you think they are going to feel about authority now? Before all the young people involved get branded 'dope smokers' (thank you for such a stereotypical view there Paramjit) try and think about it from their point of view, and try and think about the damage this will do to their already low respect for the law.

With the greatest of respect, this should be an excellent lesson in Law. i.e. you can't 'get back' at someone by using the Courts, you will get found out! Whilst I appreciate that this child has a difficult background, respect has to be both ways. Part of working with these young people means that it's made clear that their behaviour is not acceptable, not condoning it and making excuses for it. I don't think anyone really cares a flying fig that they will have a low respect for the law now! if you are being serious which perhaps you are not...this has all the signs of a wind up... oh notice Southy has been very quiet on this one after saying growing your own and smoking dope "I'm all for it"..... hmmmmm really enhances judgement doesn't it.... NOT

All the signs of a wind up?
Sorry but no I am not trying to wind anyone up, merely have a healthy discussion, which I thought might be the case on a civilised website. A shame people can't accept other people's opinions and discuss them any more without being offensive.

Condor Man wrote:

Mike88 wrote: Can I just ask those of you that have commented about the young person involved, do you actually know them? From the other side of the fence, think about it this way, we all go on and on about how young people have no respect for authority etc etc, but this young person has stood up for what they believe in, they have approached the authorities and tried to get themselves heard, however it has all been thrown out as a lie despite all their efforts, how do you think they are going to feel about authority now? Before all the young people involved get branded 'dope smokers' (thank you for such a stereotypical view there Paramjit) try and think about it from their point of view, and try and think about the damage this will do to their already low respect for the law.

it is views such as yours which have destroyed the opportunities of bright working class kids who have to suffer the poor behaviour of others on a daily basis in sink schools. Until you are an adult you are still the responsibility of your parent, as stated in law. It is a criminal offence for kids under 18 to smoke, the boy broke the law. Kids have no chance if people like you become parents.

I tried to quote this post earlier but I failed to do so,
Basically I will reiterate what I mentioned in an earlier post.
Please don't make this personal, I was merely voicing my opinion, there is no need for your last comment about me being a parent.
You don't know me and you don't know anything about me.

Was 8 in 76 wrote:

Mike88 wrote: Can I just ask those of you that have commented about the young person involved, do you actually know them? From the other side of the fence, think about it this way, we all go on and on about how young people have no respect for authority etc etc, but this young person has stood up for what they believe in, they have approached the authorities and tried to get themselves heard, however it has all been thrown out as a lie despite all their efforts, how do you think they are going to feel about authority now? Before all the young people involved get branded 'dope smokers' (thank you for such a stereotypical view there Paramjit) try and think about it from their point of view, and try and think about the damage this will do to their already low respect for the law.

Just the sort of do goody attitude thats bugggered this country up how about some national service or a big stick. they might think twice then.

Just the sort of old fashioned attitude that the UK has fortunately grown out of over time.

Well I think I have answered everyone that made a comment directly at me. I hope some of you decide to have a decent discussion rather than a slagging match. If so, I hope to hear from you soon!

It seems that the so-called council chiefs needs some form of testicular fortitude here. Why was this teacher automatically suspended. In such a situation surely it is necessary to demonstrate that mere unsubstantiated allegations especially from obviously dysfunctional kids will not result in automatic suspensions. Having dealt with such people for many years I know that they will make allegations just to inflict pain and discomfort on good people who stand up to them.
It is time for limp wristed weak bureaucrats to swap places with teachers who face dysfunctional kids and families and weak insipid bureaucrats everyday.
Walk a day in the shoes of teachers and I guarantee that the weak kneed bureaucrats will never again take teachers for granted. Hopefully they will also realise that teachers deserve their full support rather than the current "throw them to the wolves" approach.
If I could I would initiate an inquiry into the rationale behind the suspension of an obviously dedicated teacher grappling with impossible situations and pressures. I will happily conduct the investigation and ensure that the weak kneed bureaucrats have every opportunity to explain their actions. If they cannot convince me that they acted in the interests of the education systems, in the interests of teachers and acted simply to cover their weak vacillating butts then I would subject them to ridicule and suspension similar to that imposed on this poor teacher.
We need bureaucrats who represent main stream midddle of the road philosophy not some left wing limp wristed ideology that sees every member of the establishment as guilty until proven innocent.
Time for society to take a large step back to the centre and reject these lefties.

X Old Bill wrote:
Mike88: If you had followed the proceedings, and even read this article then you would have discovered: The boy was in a school for children deemed unteachable in normal schools, The boy admitted smoking cannabis, which is illegal in the country. The boy admitted smoking on school premises, which is against the rules, and all common sense. The boy admitted swearing at Mrs Ritchie-Fallon. The boy admitted 'squaring up to' Mrs Ritchie-Fallon. The Court apparently believed that he also a liar. From the above I deduce that it is safe to say that he is an objectionable little tyke, Can you spot any redeeming features?, none seem to have been reported so far.

'Unteachable in normal schools'

With all due respect, the pupils at the Forest Education Centre don't have to be unteachable to gain a place.

The Watcher wrote:
The Crown Prosecution Service need to take a long, hard look at themselves after this farce. There is absolutely no way this should have gone to court, particularly given the changing of witness statements and given the fact one of them was under the influence of narcotics! Any sensible person would have looked at this case and said there was absolutely no way that it could be conceived to be in the public interest to prosecute. No way whatsoever. I pity those poor teachers who have to put up with abuse, insolence and disruptive behaviour and then at the same time get absolutely no help or support from the system. In fact, in this case they have gotten exactly the opposite. Children have rights, one of which is a decent, safe education, but at the same time there have to be boundaries.

The Crown Prosecution Service rules are not based on the predelictions of sensible people, they are based on what the law says and the realistic prospect of obtain a successful outcome. If this case met that criteria at the time then they would have gone ahead with it. Fortunately, the CPS dont decide the final outcome, as has been seen in this case.
Short of rewriting the entire system, I dont see what other procedure the CPS could have adopted.
I am extremely glad the in the finality, the system worked and the said teacher was exonerated.