As many of you will know, I was a pupil here for 13 years. I have supplemented those 13 years by a further 17 years' education as Headmistress. I have watched the School I love grow. I have enjoyed almost every minute of it. However, I have to go at some point, and I can think of no better time to do that than at the end of this Centenary Year. I would like to thank all those members of staff teaching and nonteaching, who are the engine of the School's success, and all the girls, who make it unique and new and vibrant every year.More news as I learn of the details.
Wednesday, 31 August 2011
Mrs Gumley Mason is resigning
A letter has gone out to all parents at St. Augustine's. After spending some time talking about GCSE and A-level results, Mrs. Gumley Mason has announced that she is resigning, effective the end of this year.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
At last - and the "gardener" as well?
ReplyDeleteBest news ever about time! Does anyone know why? Surely the gardner can't stay now, didn't she create the job just for him?
ReplyDeleteHurray. I hope the school will be throwing a party, good ridance to the pair of them, lets hope no other establishment has to contend with the gruesome twosome.
ReplyDeleteThank you Mr West I am sure if this blog hadn't existed the dealings of that woman wouldn't have been exposed, and we would still have had to put up with the lies and overall dishonesty.
ReplyDeleteThat is absolutely fantastic news, the school can now move on and thrive,
ReplyDeletewithout the dictator and her side kick.
Let's hope the next resignations are from her puppets Hemmingway and the Murphy's.
ReplyDeleteAlso Gumley Mason should be forced to issue a public apology for the shameful way she and her cohorts have behaved.
There will be no one pulling the puppets strings, they will be sitting in a corner redundant twiddling their thumbs as they wont no what to do, they should resign as they have shown themselves to be totally incompetent.
ReplyDeleteThey allowed that woman a free reign this cannot be allowed to happen again, how can they remain when staff and parents have no confidence in them?
Thats the best news eve,r how about that man who pretends to be a gardner, how much was he paid for the fictitious job?
ReplyDelete22.15
ReplyDeleteIt shouldn't be just an apology, she should also reveal the truth about all her failings.
This is good news for the school. Too much damage has been done, all in the name of vanity and pride. Does the Headmistress now see what a mess she has made? Can she now admit that?
ReplyDeleteShe talks above of loving the school, but what love has she shown it in her actions and he deeds?
Christian faith is best demonstrated by the way a school lives, its charity, kindness, helpfulness and humility, and its constant seeking to increase the intellectual, emotional and spiritual potential of every human being in it.
When these qualities are lacking, or where words become a cheap substitute for them, the human effect is withering.
The damage done is impossible to quantify, and for what? Let's not forget that one bad example shown to a young person and followed later on in their own lives could have devastating consequences. What examples have they been shown this at St Augustine's by the Headmistress?
The word 'I' appears 8 times in the paragraph quoted above. Do you see a sense of 'giving service' to the school, or does that text talk of what Mrs Gumley Mason has got out of it for herself?
ReplyDeleteFantastic news, justice has been done. No apology for her conduct over the report, just another load of flannel; at least this will be the end of her reign and the school, staff and pupils can move forward in 2012. Mr West thank you for high lighting the deceit and for caring about the pupils of St Augustines
ReplyDeleteThis is coincidental timing.
ReplyDeleteThe fall of Muammar Gaddafi and regime change at St Augustine's.
And I suspect parents still do not appreciate how Ofsted consistently failed to inspect welfare and safeguarding at the setting for decades.
The ISI had safeguarding telegraphed to them well in advance of the inspection of St Augustine's (at St Benedict's it did not and look at the abject failure of the inspectorate at that setting!) but the question remains - what are the issues that this peer review inspectorate has still failed to address at St Augustine's?
A: All one has to do is look at the ISI report. It is there, it is critical, and it remains uninvestigated as the report makes clear. Someone at the ISI is asleep as usual, this is a subject with which the inspectorate has no simpatico.
Should this serious omission come as any surprise to us when it is Ofsted that "quality assures" (no - its true don't laugh!) the inspections of the ISI. It is the lowest benchmark that any safety critical inspectorate is asked to achieve. The decades of Ofsted failing to notice safeguarding failures at St Augustine's is all the evidence you need.
Indeed 11.32. But good safeguarding needs to be structural and not rely on the judgement of individuals, who may have vested interests. Inspectorates fail because they deal only with the individuals, not the organisation. What is needed is separate and more regular inspections of welfare, as well as an end to this nonsense of one inspectorate not stepping on the toes of the other.
ReplyDeleteThe welfare of children must be paramount.
If Ofsted miss something at an independent school which is not an ISC member, but which subsequently joins and then qualifies for inspection by the Independent Schools Inspectorate, the ISI are not empowered to dig back into what happened before the period of their remit for cases which are not current. Effectively they are able to look into open books, but not those which had been closed before they arrived.
This has to be wrong.
It is also a way in which a school with something to hide could avoid detection.
Yes 11:32, coincidental timing indeed... however I believe both cases will prove disastrous in the long-run.
ReplyDeleteI give all of you brainwashed liberals about a year and a half before you realise how moronic it was to actively support the blood-mongering rebels in Lybia and to support the resignation of a woman who did so much for the school.
RIP St Augustine's
Shame she's not leaving immediately another term of having to see that spiteful and vindictive face, please tell me she's taking that man with her.
ReplyDeleteThere is an awful lot that has been hidden at this school for far too long. Still at least, going now saves the embarrassment of the police coming in and asking awkward questions! For the good of the school, her leaving is long overdue!
ReplyDelete14.50
ReplyDeleteAre you completely deluded, what has she done for the school? she has kept it in the dark ages, she has lied, she has deceived us, she is totally unapproachable.
St Auugustine's will be allowed to 'Rest in Peace' now that she is leaving, she has brought the school to its knees.
14.50 I think you are the only brainwashed one!
ReplyDelete15:04 If you have evidence that something has been going on at the school which the police ought to take an interest in, then I suggest that you tell the police about it.
ReplyDeleteI don't hesitate to report concerns to the appropriate authorities. I suspect that the safeguarding shortcomings of the school would not officially have come to light had I not tipped off the ISI and DfE about the evidence known to me.
Without such tipoffs, the ISI are quite capable of completely failing to notice any problems, as shown by the glowing November 2009 inspection report on St Benedict's, issued even though even though there had been three criminal convictions of former teachers, a successful civil action against the school and two statutory inquiries by the Charity Commission since the previous inspection.
It was only after I pointed this out to the ISI and DfE that the DfE ordered ISI to go in again and take another look. This time they came to a very different conclusion.
In the case of St Augustine's I pointed out to ISI that they needed to pay special attention to safeguarding, partly because of Fr Gregory Chillman's presence (he was already known to them via St B) and partly because of the pathetic state of the school's published safeguarding policy, which was so bad that it made the St. Benedict's policy look like a model of procedure and thoroughness in comparison.
OFSTED are no better than ISI. The ISI report on St A mentioned problems going back at least to April 2007. The last OFSTED inspection was in July 2006 and found nothing.
I find it impossible to believe for instance that the central register of appointments went from having nothing wrong with it in July 2006 to having severe problems from April 2007 onwards. The only explanation I can think of is that there were problems with it in July 2006 which OFSTED didn't notice.
15.04
ReplyDeleteIf there have been wrong doings at the school that warrant the police being involved nothing should stop this from happening regardless of her going, which by the way is the best news to be written in one of her letters for the last thirteen years.
Why has she resigned?
ReplyDelete16:12 I hope to have more info on that in due course.
ReplyDeleteNo 15:14 and 15:16 she has kept the school from becoming part of the liberal degrading trash education system we have in this country. In mine and many of my collegues experience I know she has always been perfectly approachable - and the "lying" and "deceiving" I believe are still "alleged".
ReplyDeleteMark my words, Mrs Wilson is a very efficient woman she'll do a fine job for the time being, the problems will start when some absolute newbie who doesn't know the school in the slightest steps in......it's a slippery slope down, but I sure can't wait to see the disappointment of all the parents who backstabbed Mrs G-M.
Similarly, I can't wait to see the west's reaction when they begin to uncover more atrocities caused by these pseudo "freedom fighters" and what kind of anti-Western government they will form.
12.27 makes some interesting comments and broadly I agree, but additional matters need to be addressed in safeguarding inspection.
ReplyDeleteThe notion that education and safeguarding inspection can be combined is culturally flawed. They are entirely different inspection processes and it is only a former teacher (Laming) who considered they could be combined principally for the benefit of schools, not for the benefit of the pupils please note. Educationalists are notoriously snobby about social care issues, as Professor Munro made very clear in her evidence to the Education Select Committee on 6th July 2011. Quite why therefore we have educational inspectors “bolting on” safeguarding to their inspections is beyond reason. Their ‘bolt on’ training is minimal, their understanding even less. They claim they inspect safeguarding, but in reality it is a skim across the safeguarding meniscus with an understanding and experience that bears very little picking before their credibility unravels before your eyes. One quickly becomes aware that Ofsted, the ISI, Bridge and the SIS are safeguarding illiterate organisations.
I completely agree that to limit the inspection to the period since the preceding inspection in safeguarding terms is fatuous, but here again we hit the cultural problem for educational inspectorates. Safeguarding and child protection does not operate in grids because unlike education, child abuse is freestyle and an incident or trend can start within the blink of an eye and most safeguarding reports are from years previously. The first thing that needs to be removed from the equation in order to understand the subject is adult logic which needs to be replaced with subject literacy through significant training which is built on a desire to do the job. With the schools inspectorates this is precisely what we do not have.
The majority of abusive allegations do not emerge until years after the event. When this happens all the necessary referrals must be made in the full and normal fashion. Copies of these are meant to be requested (in the case of Ofsted) or now automatically sent (by the DfE to the ISI) in the case of independent schools so the inspectorates are in possession of the information in advance of their inspection of the setting (At St Benedict’s we know the ISI made no such request, as it had to at the time, in advance of their November 2009 inspection – yes the ISI is that laissez-faire about child protection in member schools). If the date of the incident predates the preceding inspection the information is ignored by the inspectorates because it is deemed “outside the scope of the inspection.” Of course anyone with an operating brain cell realises this is reckless, but the inspectorates happily embrace this nonsense because it is another job they can conveniently remove from their "to do" list and safeguarding is not an embraced subject.
This discarded referral is likely to reveal relevant information that is now recklessly ignored. For example I am aware of a school in which multiple perpetrators over decades abused pupils in a certain room. This was finally revealed through due process. The inspectorates were put in possession of all the relevant referrals prior to their next inspection and promptly ignored the lot because the reported incidents predated the preceding inspection. Today, the same room is still being used, but of course it might also still be used to abuse pupils. We do not know because the inspectorate ignored the referrals and therefore made no inspection against the facts.
The safeguarding badge worn by the inspectorates is worn falsely, their effectiveness in this realm is hopeless, and they are trying to make safeguarding inspection conform to educational ‘snapshot‘ inspections which are culturally the opposite to social care inspection. To be effective safeguarding inspections must also be undertaken by well trained officers who want to be employed in the child protection / welfare role. Safeguarding inspection must not be a “bolt on.”
To 14.50
ReplyDeleteWell there is always a coterie of fawning sycophants which surround every dictator. They are of course no more connected to reality than the exiting leader. ”Gumley Mason's departure will be disasterous for St Augustine's” demonstrates the lala land mindset of this delusional group.
The departure of Mrs Gumley Mason is a precursor we hope to other changes at the school which will be designed to ensure effective safeguarding operates which must include the immediate reporting of all allegations to the LADO as cited in London Safeguarding Children’s Board guidelines para. 15.2.1. The LADO who is independent of the setting and needs to be involved in any incident. This action is for the benefit of the alleged perpetrator, the victim, and the management of the school. Even more importantly we hope that the future head, whoever this turns out to be and who we expect to be completely unconnected with the departing head, will ensure that safeguarding is in the blood of the setting and recognised as the priority it needs to be.
I would be interested to know if the person who wrote the following statement has actually been round the country, and how they came to the assumption that Mrs Gumley Mason has saved the school from 'Liberal Degrading Trash Education we have in this country' .
ReplyDelete02.48
ReplyDeleteI think the slippery slope down has been her doing, with people like you in the school with such a negative attitude toward change, it is just setting the school up for failure. Maybe you too are past your sell by date.
With the very strong feelings against her, why would she put off her resignation until December? The only benefit to her, would be access to the school. Now why would she need that?!!
ReplyDeleteThe departure of Gumley Mason is old news in Ealing. Strahan was talking about it a way back. And yes the gardener will go too according to the under-gardener who spills all the beans after a few stellas lol.
ReplyDelete02:48
ReplyDeleteYou are so afraid of change aren't you? 'when some absolute newbie comes in ...' An absolute newbie - as you put it , is exactly what the school needs. Not someone who is a sycophant or involved with the politics of the school. We need someone totally unconnected with the staff or school. I am delighted that they are going - where's the party?
BTW, I know several members of staff who find the Gumley-Masons totally unapproachable.
Any one who doesn't worship or adore her were made to feel very uncomfortable and i mean the staff.
ReplyDeleteWhere is the party I for one can't wait!
Why is she putting off leaving till December why can't she just go now?
ReplyDelete02.48
ReplyDeleteYou aren't by any chance the great leader herself?
12:21
ReplyDeleteI agree why indeed would they need access? Must be something very important to put up with all the angst and humiliation until December!
Ealing is buzzing with the great news. Where's the party?
ReplyDeleteIt should be at the school she had her ostrich party there, the school should hold a our heads our out of the sand party.
ReplyDeleteI hope the GMS are going to be closely monitored over the next term, I wouldn't trust them as far as I could throw them.
Is it true that Hemmingway has stepped down?
ReplyDelete02.48
ReplyDelete....."she has kept the school from becoming part of the liberal degrading trash education system we have in this country. In mine and many of my collegues (sic) experience I know she has always been perfectly approachable - and the "lying" and "deceiving" I believe are still "alleged".
Goodness 02.48 - I'm holding onto the wall ties as the hurricane passes by. Your comments have something of the Hitler Youth about them which is alarming. I do hope you are not in teaching anymore as there is something of the 'dark side' about your remarks, and rest assured I am far from being a liberal in these matters. One senses you would avoid reasoning with anyone as this would be a waste of your time. This is the default of every dictator.
As for lying and deceiving the word alleged seems unnecessary given the many comments on this blog from parents, past parents and past teachers.
Is her resignation A.K.A. being asked to leave?
ReplyDeleteIs Gumley Mason jumping or was she given am almighty push?
ReplyDeleteMy money is on the latter!
Made an offer she couldn't refuse! lol
ReplyDeleteThe comment connecting FGM with Colonel Gadaffi is one of my all-time favorites. Someone has slightly lost their sense of proportion. And look at all the sheep silent all summer but coming out to gloat the moment this blog is resurrected.
ReplyDeleteWe were abroad - what about you miller?
ReplyDeleteGREAT NEWS SHE'S OFF!!!!!!!!
ReplyDeleteVic Miller,
ReplyDeleteI watched the Andrew Marr programme this morning and enjoyed the review of the Sunday papers. One of the reviewers suggested that the Government under the leadership of Gordon Brown made Gaddafi's outfit look like 'The Walton's.'
It’s a most interesting caricature that helps one appreciate how foul this must have been for the good people in government because as has been posted on this blog, dictators do not reason with their critics. Alastair Darling has at last found his voice with devastating power. It now seems that my Gadaffi remark, far from being an overstatement, was a model of probity.
And Vic, why would anyone bother commenting on anything in the dog days of summer when all sensible people are on holiday? Even Gumley Mason went silent until the 31st August when parents return to harness.
The news contained in the letters suggests that a great deal of summer activity has been happening at St Augustine’s, and I suspect the Department for Education, as a result of the content of ISI’s long delayed report.
11:55
ReplyDeleteI can definitely say that there has been activity going on during the summer. No everything I do is immediately published on the blog. Correspondence with people does sometimes need time to progress, and I have to respect and maintain confidences, otherwise people wouldn't be willing to talk to me.
But I hope to be able to provide more details quite soon concerning a number of different stands of correspondence.
On reflection, I think that it isn't appropriate for there to be speculation on this blog concerning the reasons why individual pupils may be leaving or staying, whoever their parents may be.
ReplyDeleteI've been through the comments and deleted all such comments and do not intend allowing any more to be published.
I've had a comment come in querying my decision about deleting comments on individual pupils. The comment politely is raising a perfectly valid question about my decision. I'm not going to publish it because to do so would be to reverse the decision.
ReplyDeleteI'll simply say that I think that avoiding possible distress to the pupil, who after all is not responsible for any aspect of the issues of the school, should take precedence over questions concerning the running of the school. I'll accept questions or comments on any aspect of the running of the school so long as they don't mention individual pupils in an identifiable way.
I think it should be perfectly possible to raise valid issues concerning the management of the school while continuing to ensure that we don't harm innocent parties.
I accept your decision Jonathan.
ReplyDeleteDelighted she's going - long overdue!
ReplyDeleteDoes anyone know why she resigned? Seems very sudden but not unexpected after the shambles that have been happening in the establishment.
ReplyDeleteHopes she takes a couple of her awful admin staff with her!
ReplyDeleteI hope she takes her husband with her!
ReplyDeleteThe character defamation of people named on this blog which has been facilitated by West is something our children will be experiencing to their detriment.
ReplyDeleteIt is neither Christian nor good sense;the people posting these comments should be ashamed of themselves.
I think Mrs Gumley-Mason deserves our support.
Please explain why?
ReplyDelete20.32
ReplyDeleteThere is no character defamation, wake up IT'S ALL TRUE.
This woman failed our children and the school.
Why on earth do you think she is going?
Why on earth would that woman need our support, I don't find her behaviour at all Christian and she should be the one who is ashamed, she has lied and deceived parents, and it would have carried on if it hadn"t have been for this blog.
ReplyDeleteIf you think this is detrimental to your children, don't let them read the blog, you do have a choice it is not part of the national curriculum.
20:32 Have you fallen out of your tree?
ReplyDelete20:32
ReplyDeleteGumley-mason?!
It must be or one of her sycophants. I am not ashamed to be posting on this blog, i for one find it reassuring to know that I am not the only person who is appalled by the Headmistress's behaviour.
ReplyDeleteThe only person who should be ashamed is the almighty leader, and she should be holding her head in shame, at the disgraceful way in which she has conducted herself.
Well 20.32 Answers please, why on earth would anyone rational support that woman get your head out of the sand, you are obviously one of the loyal Ostrich's.
ReplyDeleteYou must be a bit ashamed, 13.53, or you'd not post anonymously. In my view one of the most damaging aspects of this blog has been the way that Jonathan West has allowed innuendo after innuendo to pile up by allowing people not to take responsibility for their own comments by posting as anonymous. There''s every reason to be allowed anonymity if as in the St Benedict's case they are victims of abuse but no reason to use anonymity to post spiteful and cowardly comments. Especially since many of the comments seem to be by the same individual with a rather uncertain grasp on the English language. I'll sit back now and wait for the hate responses to come, as they undoubtedly will.
ReplyDeleteI've heard plenty of stories from parents (who don't wish to be identified publicly) concerning bullying at the school, that I am perfectly confident of the truth of the comments that have been posted anonymously.
ReplyDeleteBullying is a form of abuse.
It would be purposeful if others who share Vic Miller's view about this blog would indicate by commenting anonymously or not.
ReplyDeleteI think his analysis is spot on.
Veracity of the comments by anonymous contributors,can only be assessed properly if there is supporting evidence;so far in the medium of this blog there is no evidence to date.
ReplyDeleteCouldn't agree more that bullying is a form of abuse.
ReplyDeleteHowever there is no doubt that this blog is a poweful medium in that it allows anonymous postings.
When these postings are of an undermining and damaging nature to an individual or individuals particularly when they relate to non specific issues then they are a form of bullying.
The conclusion drawn from this is obvious.
Why would there 'be hate responses', you have done me no harm and you are entitled to your opinion. I remain anonymous not because I am a coward, but because I fear repercussions.
ReplyDeleteSorry my English is questionable!!!!
Vic Miller just one question, how do you know Frances Gumley Mason?
ReplyDeleteVic
ReplyDeleteThere is bullying and intimidation of staff at the school. There have been various cases brought against the school and money has been paid out.
These were extreme cases, but there is day-to-day bullying too which makes the life of some staff very hard. This is fact.
Sometimes pupils are bullied by the headmistress too. Jonathan is right - this is a form of abuse, and in fact a form which is widespread
It is difficult to believe if you are not there.
However, I do support your concern about some comments. I believe that the comments here should deal not just with the feelings, but with the facts and events that have caused those feelings. In that way followers of this blog can make judgments based on some knowledge of events, as well as feel empathy for the feelings. This would allow a deeper understanding.
One such is that the headmistress has, without any shadow of a doubt, told lies to the staff and the parents about the ISI report. These were not little white lies in order to avoid hurting someone else's feelings - the lies which are at the heart of good manners - no, Mrs Gumley Mason's lies have had the effect of bringing a school into disrepute, alienating the staff, and debasing the confidence of the parents. They appear to have been motivated largely because she herself was unable to deal with constructive criticism or to accept that she had been wrong. They appear to be about an attempt to cover her own shame, because she was unable to process her own emotions as a normal healthy adult. Two year-olds may be allowed the odd tantrum, but grown-ups not so much.
We must accept that children learn by copying what they see around them, thus the example set by significant adults in their lives is important. Now not every teacher needs to be a saint (indeed St Augustine, himself, wasn't much of a saint in his early days), but normal, sane, decent, caring, hard-working etc. is enough.
Moreover, the girls in the school are also acutely aware of the bad example they have been set.
These children know.
As they stand in assembly and are spoken to about Christian virtues, they know.
15:43
ReplyDeleteSo speaketh the Gumley-mason!
Gumley mason IS a bully! Many will testify to that fact.
ReplyDeleteI'd like to point out that wrote to Mr Murphy, the chairman of trustees, on 7th April this year, inviting him or the school to contact me if they had any concerns about comments on the blog, and that I would be entirely amenable to any request to remove any comment that was genuinely abusive, and requested him to contact me without delay in such an event.
ReplyDeleteI have received no reply.
16.29
ReplyDeleteI agree bullying in any form is unacceptable, we post anonymously for various reasons, none of it is done to deliberately damage any individual. What you don't understand is that most of the comments are fully justified and that woman has caused such pain to individuals you cannot comprehend unless you have experienced it yourself.
She has bullied us for years and got away with it.
12:40
ReplyDeleteI agree and she would have continued if her bullyboy tactics hadn't been highlighted by this blog!
Who is Vic Miller?
ReplyDeleteBasing a judgement on knowledge of "some of the facts" is like weak tea-no good to anybody.
ReplyDeleteMaking defamatory statements about people,then expecting blog readers to believe them on
the basis of being aware of "some of the facts" is about as good as it gets.
Please
give your comments credibilty by stating all the facts as you know them.If you can't or won't do this then your comments have little value other than fuelling innuendo which produces nasty gossip but little sense.
22:41
ReplyDeleteIt is a fact that there were severe shortcomings in safeguarding and safer recruitment procedures at St Augustine's School.
It is a fact that these were uncovered by the ISI during their inspection last year.
It is a fact that the school, rather than immediately act on the report and make the necessary improvements, chose instead to dispute the report, initiate the complaints procedure at the ISI and suppress the report's publication by means of an injunction in the High Court.
It is a fact that the school's complaint failed in all significant points, and that the report was ultimately published containing all the criticisms the school originally objected to.
It is a fact that an updated child protection policy wasn't published until February 2011, about 11 months after the inspection visit in which serious shortcomings both in written procedures and their implementation were identified by the ISI.
It is a fact that the ISI identified shortcomings as dating back at least to early 2007, suggesting that the school has been running in an unsafe condition for some years.
It is a fact that safeguarding and safer recruitment are the direct responsibility of Mrs GM in her role has headmistress and as designated teacher for child protection. The shortcomings in these areas are therefore her shortcomings.
Are those enough facts for you?
22.41
ReplyDeleteIs obviously none other than Mrs GM.
What about the facts that she lied to parents and staff, she took court action to protect her failings, she phoned the police regarding this blog when it's common knowledge she contributes, the lists go on and on, so please don't asks for facts they are on this blog for all to see.
ReplyDeleteAs said before, we should thank Mr West for bringing to our attention the failings within the school, the fact is she would still be lying to us, and covering up her short comings if this blog didn't exist.
22.41
ReplyDeleteI wouldn't describe as anything on this website as gossip, very strange wording,everything can be substantiated.
Jonathan West: - It is also a FACT that you have STILL, STILL not proven any abuse in the school ever happened.
ReplyDeleteAnd I find it slightly ironic that u should suddenley be tackling bullying at St A's and not at St B's which is INFAMOUS for how much bullying goes on in classrooms.
It is also ironic that you should be allowing posts with abusive comments towards Mrs G-M and allow them to be wnonymous, yet you filter through all the comments and only select the ones which are convenient for you to upload - and then Mrs G-M is seen as a dictator?! ]
C
00:38
ReplyDeleteI'm afraid you haven't read the blog properly. Take a look at the articles on Teacher A and Teacher B.
00:38
ReplyDeleteAnd by the way, the key point is that because of the shortcomings in safeguarding procedures, the school has been running in an unsafe condition for many years, where abuse could go undetected and unreported.
Even if you were correct and there had been no abuse at the school in that time, it would have been down to the purest luck, and not as a result of Mrs GM ensuring that proper procedures were in place, which she was obliged to do by law.
West;whether it is down to luck or not you have not given any significant & important evidence that abuse took place at St A's other than hearsay.
ReplyDeleteThe reality is that by the mode of innuendo this blog gives a convincing impression that abuse was taking place at St A's.
For somebody who claims publically to pursue the truth I would have expected a higher standard.
This blog highlights the true danger of trial by innuendo.
00:38
ReplyDelete....and here speaketh a caring, full fee paying parent ?! No, I didn't think so!
09:12
ReplyDeleteThe evidence is what was found during the ISI's inspection, and included in their report and in correspondence with the school. It is not remotely classifiable as hearsay, and you are I suspect deliberately obfuscating in order to deceive people into thinking it is.
The ISI report did not include instances of abuse. Jonathon, your post at 9:21 is exactly what people are talking about when they say you use, or allow others to use innuendo as a weapon on this blog.
ReplyDeleteThe ISI report found shortcomings in safe-guarding procedures, yes. You have made your point on that and I think we all accept it and are happy that progress is being made to correct that situation.
But the ISI report did not claim abuse had happened. That claim has only been ANONYMOUSLY made here on your blog, and has never been substantiated.
13:38
ReplyDeleteCorrect, the ISI report did not state that directly, though it can esiloy be inferred from the first bullet point of clasue 2.4 of the report. There would have been no need for the ISI to require reports to the ISA of teachers considered unsuitable to work with children unless there had been instances of failure to report.
But I'm not relying solely on that. I have in my posession a copy of a letter from the ISI to the school, in which specific instances of abuse are documented, as discovered during the course of the inspection. The letter clearly states that it is on the basis of these documented instances that the ISI concluded that there had been a failure to make the statutory reports to the ISA.
So, yes, there have been instances of abuse at the school, they have not been properly reported to the authorities, and the ISI has reported accordingly.
Well answer that Gumley Mason the proof is there.
ReplyDeleteAlso abuse comes in many forms not just physical there is also mental abuse you should remember that.
Dear dear dear, you are your own worst enemy Mrs Gumley Mason, so look forward to your next response.
ReplyDeleteWhy do you write anonymously? You have the cheek to criticise us although we have good reason, what's yours?
Well, thats made you look pretty stupid, obviously you haven't a clue about who knows what.
ReplyDeleteCan't wait for your next response.
Why don't you share this letter, then, Jonathon?
ReplyDeleteI already have done. I've used parts of it in the Teacher A and Teacher B articles, and the CRB and other checks at St. Augustine's article.
ReplyDeleteI read all of these articles at the time they were posted, and have now gone back to read them again to be sure I didn't miss something.
ReplyDeleteSo just to be clear, the abuse you continue to mention as having happened at St Augustine's is the inappropriate comments made by a teacher to a group of 6th formers? Sixth formers who then wrote letters to the headteacher explaining their issue with the teacher, who was then almost immediately suspended?
Don't get me wrong, I can see that mistakes were made in not reporting this teacher to the appropriate authorities. I would not want my daughter taught by someone making comments such as the ones highlighted in your original article.
But let's just keep perspective here. You continue to state that abuses happened at St A's, and that is a very powerful accusation to make in a community with another school where truly horrible things happened. This example at St A's hardly compares, and I for one am impressed that the girls stood up for themselves, were taken seriously and the teacher removed.
Is there a reason why this letter cannot be shared and if so what is the reason ?
ReplyDeleteJonathon, why haven't you posted my last comment, re: lack of evidence of real abuse at St Augustine's?
ReplyDeleteWow, Jonathon, this speaks volumes to me that you haven't posted my last item, re: the ISI letter not really finding abuse at St Augustine's. I guess you really do only post things that fit your agenda.
ReplyDelete23:15
ReplyDeleteNot at all. I've just been busy these last few days.
As I said, I've already published quite a bit of the letter, but I don't see why I shouldn't scan it and put up the original for you to see.
I'll have to do some redaction first. For instance, there's no justification for including the names of the teachers whose CRB checks weren't properly carried out at the time, especially since I understand that they have since been properly completed.
So it'll probably be a few days before I can publish the letter.
So happy Gumley-Masons are leaving for good!!!!
ReplyDeleteGreat news - both the Gumley masons are off!!
ReplyDeleteWhen? Immediately or the end of term? The sooner the better....
ReplyDeleteGunley-mason is out at the end of term. Pity its not sooner!!
ReplyDelete14:54
ReplyDeleteI couldn't agree more why doesn't she leave now? She must realise by now that her presence in the he school is not wanted.
Is she STILL DSO?
ReplyDeleteShe should have been forced to step down as (self appointed) DSO as she has been proved to be completely incompetent! What the heck is going on?
ReplyDeleteYes does she still hold the position she gave herself, she should be removed as the DSO as she's not fit for the job.
ReplyDeleteCome on govs, do your job. Gumley-mason has proved that she is not fit for the self appointed job of DSO. Do it before she causes further harm to our children!
ReplyDeleteA lot can happen between now and Christmas!
ReplyDeleteVery happy gumley-mason has been pushed out at last!
ReplyDeleteD.S.O. D.S.O. WHY IS SHE SELF APPOINTED D.S.O.?!!!
ReplyDeleteFame at last for Gunmley-Mason!
ReplyDeleteHer antics have been reported in The Times this morning.
How does this woman survive?
The Governors and Trustees must believe all the tall stories she feeds them. What idiots these so called people have actually turned out to be.
Either they believe what Gumley-Mason is telling them or they are uncapable of seeing the facts themselves.
You could not make this up, Gumley Mason is now a complete joke and has been exposed everywhere except of the eyes of the Trustees and Governors.
Get shoot of her immediately and lets try to recover from her misconduct.
She should be made to stand down immediately, and were is her side kick?
ReplyDeleteJust go - for goodness sake Gumley mason just go now!!!
ReplyDelete10.15
ReplyDeleteYou are so right she should leave now, she has nothing to offer the school apart from bringing more shame and embarrassment upon the establishment.
Bet she sends all her Christmas cards and presents, via the school!
ReplyDeleteWell they love a freebie don't they?
ReplyDeleteHe's been free loading for years!
It's quite shocking when you think how much the pair of them have made out of us!!
ReplyDeleteIt's disgraceful, i think Mr Gumley Masons employment needs investigating
ReplyDeletewas he really necessary?
Have you any idea what he was earning? It will truly shock you when you find out!!
ReplyDeleteYes - he was the highest paid 'gardener' in the U.K.!
ReplyDeleteNo would love too no how much he was paid and for what, was he a gardner with the responsibility of writing important policy's that are there to protect our children. It's an absolute disgrace The Gumley Masons are the biggest bunch of free loaders ever. Who allowed this to happen????
ReplyDeleteThe abuses have been awful. There is no doubt about that, but there has been a network of people around these abusers who just seem to have at best turned a blind eye for the sake of their own comfort, or at worst like Gumley Mason who appear to have built their own careers on associations with these people.
ReplyDeleteLook at Gumley Mason - her early career built on associations with Kit Cunningham allowing her to move up in the Catholic writers' guild and he then married her and baptised her children, then her association with Soper and Pearce who appointed her Head of St Augustine's, where she then went on to support Chillman and allowed him there even when on restricted ministry. The email she sent out was total rubbish. I saw him at the Christmas service. Add to this the problems with CRB checks and then Teacher A and Teacher B where she had failed to act decisively, as well as all the allegations of bullying made on this blog. And the lies.
I will never understand how someone who is a mother could allow children to be put at risk.
One of the staff who turned a blind eye all the time and actually ridiculed you if you spoke to him about the subject was Mr Strahan.
ReplyDeleteStraham then moved on to St Augustine's Priory where he apparently continued to turn a blind eye on what Chillman was up to there.
Straham knew all along what was going on at St. B's but did nothing and it appears that he protected Chillman yet again at St A's.
Strahan is by no means not the only person that did nothing, but it is time to name and shame these people who made life intolerable for so many boys.
You do realise that mrs gumley Mason was an advisory governor at St Benedict's prior to being appointed as headmistress of St Augustine's?
ReplyDeleteFrances Gumley mason should not be Designated Child Protection Officer. She should be asked to stand down immediately!
ReplyDeleteWhy does she still have this title?!!
"We will be at the party and we do intend to get answers from Gumley Mason and Hemmingway.
ReplyDeleteWe will not leave till we have acceptable answers.We are fully briefed about her lies and regulatory failures from this blog and its not just hearsay, it has actually been proved and documented that she has behaved in an appauling manner.
It is unacceptable that she has been allowed to carry on regardless and we intend to take them both to task on this".21 June 2011 Fighting talk but as it is now November did you ever manage to talk to her as you have never given us a response?!
Why is Gumley Mason STILL Designated Child Protection Officer?!!!
ReplyDeleteMrs Gm is still DSO as she is still in charge, and why is she, she should have been suspended immediately following her gross failures.
ReplyDeleteWhy haven't the Governors and trustees done their jobs, you are not there for the good of GM you are there for us the parents.
Shame on all of them!!
ReplyDeleteWhat a surprise Gumley Mason an Advisory Governor at St. Benedict's, she obviously taught them well, look at all the deceit and secrecy now surrounding St. Augustine's.
ReplyDeleteMrs GM was too arrogant, employing her husband realy took the piss.
ReplyDeleteIt's more than a shame it's an absolute disgrace, I hope once she leaves the Governors who she put in place will also stand down, along with the Trustees, the have all proved themselves incompetent, and not fit for the purpose.
ReplyDeleteWe have not been told the truth about her sudden departure and on what basis her husband was employed.
Teachers suddenly disappear without prior warning half way through the term. What is going on, Governors you need to remember we the parents are your clients, without our fees there would be no St.Augustine's.
So start telling the truth.
Mrs Gumley Mason obviously turns a blind eye when it came to furthering her career, well the past has certainly come back to haunt you, I hope your life is now a misery and you understand the pain you have afflicted on others with your lying and cruelty, thank God you are going as you have been the most unsuitable Head ever.
ReplyDelete09:50
ReplyDeleteWhilst Mrs Glumly Mason obviously turned a blind eye when it came to furthering her career, the same could well be said of the sycophants at St. Augustine's! How many of them turned a blind eye to her outrageous behaviour, much to the detriment of our children, all for the sake of their own jobs? Pathetic individuals, you know we all know who you are and how you really behave behind the closed convent doors. Totally shameful behaviour!
Lets look at a New Year full of hope and put these difficult months behind us.My daughter has been very happy at the school because of her excellent teachers who have faced very difficult months and an unpleasant climate to work under.Cheers to our teachers !
ReplyDeleteHappy to cheer on the 'good un's' but some of the ones that you are cheering were more than happy to turn a blind eye in order as 15:13 said, just to further their own careers and I also will only cheer when the sycophants have gone!!!
ReplyDeleteI couldn't agree more I feel sorry for the staff working in such an oppressive environment with a dictator for a head, I hope her loyal supporters follow her example and leave, as they, by sucking up to her have fed her almighty ego and helped her to become the arrogant self obsessed spiteful person she is today.
ReplyDelete08:24 & 12:53
ReplyDeleteHear Hear!
02 September/12:21
ReplyDeleteFinally realise what you were saying. Well now we know!!
My experiences with 'that woman' were strange to say at the very least! My daughter was assaulted & G M tried to blame her.
ReplyDeleteWhat goes round......
Could not happen to a nicer person!
Ha ha