Wallasey School deputy headteacher arrested

Wallasey School Headteacher

My old school

shocking news if its true

I always find it sad that they release stories like this without proof of the persons guilt.

Even if he's innocent he isn't going to be working as a teacher again with his name connected to something like this.

Agreed

fair enough if its true let it out in the open but if not then he whole career is ruined.

Totally disgusted that they have reported this and pictured him, i hope it is not true have 2 kids in this school and met him a few times and he is a nice person, but they shouldnt name and shame until it is proven.

I agree with you on your post ex0__. Innocent until............?? Mmmmmm.

Absolutely agree.....he shouldn't be named until proven guilty.

There was the similar case with the Wallasey Gym instructor last year, big photo on the front page of the Echo, he even made the national papers.

He's since been cleared of all charges, but I didn't notice a big front page on the Echo saying this.

It really is terribly wrong that stories and pictures of people in such situations are released at such an early stage and even if he is proven innocent (hopefully so) he will be tarnished forever.Same applies in rape cases, when the male is invariably named even if it is later proven that he is innocent even odd times when women have just made it up.Those sort of women help nobody at all.

People in such positions (of control over minor children) need to be snow-white and completely unimpeachable. No way he should even have got himself into the position of ever even being suspected of something like this.
It simply can't remain secret given the gravity of the allegations - even if it were suspicion of theft, or murder, or any other felonious crime, it would be no different. "Arrested on suspicion of" anything, it is all done in the public domain, is it not? Why should this be any different?

This isn't the US. The papers (usually) do not name and shame for 'suspicion of' stories in this country.

Oh yes they do. They DO publish when someone has been arrested 'on suspicion of' and the person has not yet been formally charged. This is more 'usual' than the reverse in my estimation.
Just 2 recent examples:

Liverpool FC's Stewart Downing.. .. arrested on suspicion of assault
Nine people arrested on suspicion of ticket touting (all were named).

Originally Posted by CVCVCV

People in such positions (of control over minor children) need to be snow-white and completely unimpeachable. No way he should even have got himself into the position of ever even being suspected of something like this.
It simply can't remain secret given the gravity of the allegations - even if it were suspicion of theft, or murder, or any other felonious crime, it would be no different. "Arrested on suspicion of" anything, it is all done in the public domain, is it not? Why should this be any different?

The only important thing is if he's innocent or guilty. That will be decided in a court of law. Whether you, me or a tabloid rag suspect him is totally irrelevant. His name should be kept out of the public domain and only revealed if found guilty.

Personally, I believe all people charged with a crime should be anonymous till found guilty. It's ridiculous that your name, age and address can be revealed in the media.

Not at all this is embodied in freedom of speech and freedom of the press. There are also issues concerning the Public's right to know. We do have the right to know if someone has been arrested and to know for what they have been arrested. This by the by, rather helps to stop people simply disappearing, never to be seen or heard from again, like frequently happens in various totalitarian states.

fkin hell Hughesy!! He was a legend, was the third ranking Deputy Head when I was there, behind Theetan and Beacher, whenever I'd get sent to a DH or Headmaster for misbehaving (very rare ya'd get sent to Hughes) or even rehab lol, I'd go to him, he was really lenient with ya, would discuss the trouble and why you'd done whatever you'd been sent for, instead of just telling you off for it. Made a lot of sense looking back at it. Usually got the receptionist to make you a cup of tea and biscuits lol.

Don't believe he would ever have done anything to an actual child, and hope they find these allegations to be untrue, fantastic teacher/mentor during the time I was there.

Originally Posted by CVCVCV

Not at all this is embodied in freedom of speech and freedom of the press. There are also issues concerning the Public's right to know. We do have the right to know if someone has been arrested and to know for what they have been arrested. This by the by, rather helps to stop people simply disappearing, never to be seen or heard from again, like frequently happens in various totalitarian states.

what are you on about

Originally Posted by dave_h

Originally Posted by CVCVCV

Not at all this is embodied in freedom of speech and freedom of the press. There are also issues concerning the Public's right to know. We do have the right to know if someone has been arrested and to know for what they have been arrested. This by the by, rather helps to stop people simply disappearing, never to be seen or heard from again, like frequently happens in various totalitarian states.

what are you on about

Habeas corpus.

Originally Posted by MattLFC

fantastic teacher/mentor during the time I was there.

totally agree with you matt

hope this turns out to be untrue

Originally Posted by chriskay

Originally Posted by dave_h

Originally Posted by CVCVCV

Not at all this is embodied in freedom of speech and freedom of the press. There are also issues concerning the Public's right to know. We do have the right to know if someone has been arrested and to know for what they have been arrested. This by the by, rather helps to stop people simply disappearing, never to be seen or heard from again, like frequently happens in various totalitarian states.

what are you on about

Habeas corpus.

does that apply here though, hes been arrested and thats it

Yes it does, when people are saying that it shouldn't be public knowledge that 'named person' was arrested, nor what for.

The point is, that when 'the authorities' don't have to tell anyone who they are arresting, or why, then things can go very downhill, very fast - there are way too many countries where this has happened in living memory (and still is probably). Most of those people who disappeared in places like Russia and Romania and Cuba etc were only ever "Arrested" too.

Originally Posted by CVCVCV

Yes it does, when people are saying that it shouldn't be public knowledge that 'named person' was arrested, nor what for.

The point is, that when 'the authorities' don't have to tell anyone who they are arresting, or why, then things can go very downhill, very fast - there are way too many countries where this has happened in living memory (and still is probably). Most of those people who disappeared in places like Russia and Romania and Cuba etc were only ever "Arrested" too.

Good? If they weren't guilty they have every right to dissapear.