Stanbridge Earls – Child Abuse Deniers, It’s Time to Face Facts

Stanbridge Earls School

More shocking revelations from an Oftsed Advice Note about Stanbridge Earls School recently secured from an FOI request. The Report details incidents of homosexual oral rape and under age sex which went unreported, in addition to the previously reported rape allegations and other abuse at the school. 4 weeks before this report was published Caroline Nokes MP publicly backed the school.

Over the last 4 years my family and I have been the target of threats, harassment and false allegations as I continue to expose the truth about Stanbridge Earls School and the authorities involved in the child abuse cover-up.

A number of individuals, including parents from the school, continue to claim that there was nothing wrong with Stanbridge Earls School and that the content of articles on this blog are false.

I can only assume it is mixture of denial and a campaign to distract from the truth about the school, which closed in 2013.

I can understand a state of denial where the child abuse is concerned, after all no parent wants to admit they have put their child willingly in harms way or, God forbid, their child was a victim of abuse that they are not aware of. There are parents who attack me to this day who do not even know the truth about their own children because Stanbridge Earls School decided it was down to the children to tell their parents what had happened to them, and not the schools responsibility.

I have previously published the Emergency Inspection Residential Report – 30th April 2013 now, through a Freedon of Information request, I can reveal the extent of the failings of Stanbridge Earls School, Staff, Teachers and Governors through the Ofsted Advice Note For An Emergency Inspection – Welfare Only – Stanbridge Earls School.

The Report details leadership failings, staff failings, training failings and more disturbingly further examples of children engaging in unlawful sexual activity: one of a serious sexual assault (boy on boy) and the other of underage sex among children (girl aged 16 and boy aged 14). Neither case was referred to child protection or the police. This was in a school where children had severe learning difficulties and mental ages well below their actual ages.

Extract of the Ofsted Advice Note

The Report is highly critical of the Head Teacher, Peter Trythall and his running of the school, saying: The DfE rejected the school’s original action plan following the January 2013 Ofsted inspection. The school has worked to strengthen and implement an updated action plan to address safeguarding failures. In some areas progress has been made, management structures revised and practice improved. However, serious weaknesses remain.

…new houseparent who has no relevant residential experience was left in sole charge of 39 boys within a week of starting to work at the school. His induction had included basic child protection instruction, but he had not been given an overview of individual young people’s needs or directed to read risk assessments.

Going on to say: “Since the inspection in January 2013, six new staff started working at the school prior to receipt of a Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS) check. At the time of appointment for five of these staff, there was no documented risk assessment to confirm that the headteacher had given permission for them to commence working and to outline the necessary additional supervision arrangements. The continued failure here is a real concern and indicative of weakness in the leadership of the school.”

The Report was also highly critical of the Chair of the Governors.

Extract of the Ofsted Advice Note

There remains a lack of clear leadership within the school to enable them to take forward the post-inspection action plan despite the appointment of a team of consultants. This is preventing rapid improvement, clear prioritisation and resource allocation on a systematic basis. The school does not have an overarching development plan and, while there is much work underway, the two deputy headteachers are working beyond their individual and collective capacity. The school’s own performance assessment shows that, while the two deputy headteachers have potential, their ability to lead and manage the school is limited. They are unable to lead the school out of the crisis within which it is now operating.

During the inspection, the Chair of Governors accepted that the management arrangements were inadequate and would not secure the urgent improvements required. This is despite initially reporting a ‘growing confidence’ in the leadership team.

Durand Academy

It is also critical of the Deputy Head. Although not named in the report one of the Deputy Head’s at the time was Grant Taylor who was later embroiled in another scandal at Durand Boarding School in West Sussex after parents withdrew their children after his appointment when they found out about his history at Stanbridge Earls School.

In a school where a high proportion of the children had Special Educational Needs and Autism, the staff clearly did not even have the most basic of understanding of how to care for these children: “The National Autistic Society (NAS) has audited the school, identifying the need for staff to attend basic awareness training in autistic spectrum disorders. The NAS has been commissioned to deliver this training by the end of the summer term.”

In a School where the events surrounding this report stemmed from a rape allegation it is criminal that accounts of further rape allegations and sexual assaults were dealt with in such an off-hand manner. It was as if these events were so common place at the school that they did not bother the staff nor warranted the correct procedures.

On 26 April 2013, the school was informed that a boy who had previously boarded at Stanbridge Earls had made an allegation of serious sexual assault (oral rape) against another boy that occurred while they both attended the school. The alleged perpetrator is still a boarder at Stanbridge Earls. While the school worked promptly and sensitively to remove the alleged perpetrator from the establishment for the weekend, he was re-admitted as a boarder on 29 April 2013 without a full assessment of risk. This young person shares a bedroom with two other teenage boys. Until instructed to do so by inspectors, the school failed to assess the risk associated with allowing these three young people to share a bedroom. Given the wide range of needs of children who board, the failure to identify this risk factor is a significant omission. In this case, decision making, including risk assessment, was overseen by the Chair of Governors and a Deputy Headteacher; these individuals failed to fully recognise, assess and manage risk appropriately.

In another case that clearly warranted the involvement of child protection services and the police, the Deputy Head appears to simply brush the incident under the carpet. It begs the question exactly what were the parents really told about the incident as I doubt any caring parent of a 14 year old boy would have been happy to send their child back into this environment.

In a second case, the school was informed that a 14-year-old boy and 16-year-old girl had entered into a sexual relationship during the Easter holidays. On their return to school, following discussions with the parents, the Deputy Headteacher concluded that the relationship was consensual and therefore decided that it should not be referred to external agencies. There is no record of how this assessment was made and the instructions issued to staff were basic and unrealistic given staffing levels at the school.

The report concluded that in May 2013 that children remained “unsafe” at the school.

“The school has not made the urgent improvements required by Ofsted in January 2013 because leadership is not clear and incisive. Although this inspection has found evidence that there have been some improvements to safeguarding since the end of March, and particularly since the resignation of the previous headteacher, it is a concern that more significant improvement has not been secured in the three months since the last inspection. As a consequence of continuing weaknesses within leadership and governance, children remain unsafe at this residential special school.”

Caroline Nokes MP & her father Cllr Roy Perry

All this information was available to the then Head of Hampshire County Council’s Children’s Services, John Coughlan and soon to be Leader of HCC, Cllr Roy Perry. This report would have also been made available to Hampshire Police during their Operation Oregan and Flamborough investigations.

Just 4 weeks before Ofsted started this investigation, Caroline Nokes, the MP for Romsey & Southampton North, publicly backed the failing Headteacher Peter Trythall and was also campaigning to keep the school open, claiming in the press that the school had made “massive strides”.

Working on the “ice-berg principle where only the tip will be visible – there will be further examples of rape and sexual abuse that have not been reported, yet.

Read the full Report here: Ofsted Advice Note For An Emergency Inspection – Welfare Only – Stanbridge Earls School.

Further Reading: Stanbridge Earls School – A Timeline of Abuse

This entry was posted in Child Abuse, Hampshire, Hampshire Constabulary, Hampshire County Council, Hampshire Safeguarding Children's Board, Romsey, Romsey Extra, Stanbridge Earls School and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

2 Responses to Stanbridge Earls – Child Abuse Deniers, It’s Time to Face Facts

  1. Seeking Closure Too says:

    Perhaps those who still deny (on Twitter and Facebook and other forums) that there was anything wrong at this school should read what a pupil from the mid-70s wrote about his experience:-

    (Author’s Name confidential to protect the innocent here but the full unabridged text is on a social media forum)

    When I went to Stanbridge Earls School during 1975-6-7 life was miserable. I and about sixty other pupils think alike from my years. and those close to it. So much so that, during the last 15 years I have tried to host reunion forums and have received heartbreaking stories of abuse and wishes NOT to have anyone know their whereabouts but requests from several of them to be put in touch with very few fellow sufferers IF they came into the forum but to keep their email addresses secretive.
    In fact, the last forum hosted was only three years ago and it was called WyvernSocietySurvivors and AGAIN 45 years on I was phoned, called and written to not just by people wishing NOT to be listed by any other Wyvern who came by looking for them but by those who felt they had the right to threaten me with my existence coupled with a disgusting vindictively sarchastic response email from the Wyvern Secretary. So my feelings are mixed. There are half a dozen people I keep ion touch with but I deleted the third forum because the reports in it regarding abuse, bullying, victimisation, sexual abuse and torment was harrowing and as good as it was to see these people rise above their enemies at S.E. it was not something I wanted in my control AND I didn’t enjoy the calls, mail and miserable histories from those who suffered as I did.
    In my Biography I have made it quite clear regarding the who’s and why’s and as happy as I thought I would be at S.E. excaping a very dysfunctional family, actually it was out of the frying pan and into the fire.
    For those who have left with a happy history there, lucky you and we all envy you, those of us who endured what you seldom even read about in novels… but for those of you who shun S.E. and it’s memories because of disgust, our hearts are with you too.
    Dick Gould has passed away… A few weeks before he did I had a one to one with him, something I had waited a very long time for. Something like 16 years. The discussion turned to the current sexual attributes Stanbridge now wears like a deserved scar and I covered a scant few of the issues I had suffered EVEN on my last day there in 1977 where I was tied up in the back of an old lorry trailer hands and feet “X” style and suffered the trailor owners abuse, EVEN on my last day there awaiting my parents collection.
    After covering this issue and walking out to the car to get Dicks present I’d brought, interviewing him about S.E.’s past I heard quite clearly on my collar intercom recording his wife’s concerns of “What if he’s right? What if what he says is true? What will we do?” followed by a refusal thereafter to have lunch with me that theyd invited me down for. Lunch turned into a plate of half a dozen slices of salami. “How appropriate!” I thought.
    Dick accused me of fantasising the tortures and abuse I’d suffered at the school and his wife was manically ushering me out of the hosue.
    Couple this with the attitude of the Secretary who adopted the same manner from 1976 and you really have something.
    I was shocked, saddened and disappointed at Dick’s attitude towards me. He decided my Scholarship should be used at Stanbridge; that I was worth attendance.
    I had looked forwards to seeing Dick for decades to tell him how I’d progressed.
    But… in the face of it, with more and more abuse stories hitting the web and my Forum (even now) people are cringing in the background because they’re being exposed and I ASK ALL OF YOU….. EVERY ONE OF YOU who reads this….. don’t bite those who write their terrors and sufferings….. because I have played agony aunt since 1994 on the web with this.
    People in tears over the phone, heartbnreaking stories and on and on and on and I would say, be careful who you bite.
    Be more understanding; IF ANYTHING lets see if Stanbridge’s education experience adorned you with “Understanding!” please.
    If you enjoyed S.E. I am happy for you.
    If you were bitten emotionally, physically and sexually as so many were, take strength that you are absolutely NOT alone regarding S.E. miserable histories.
    If you have found friendships in reunions that’s a good thing too but never, ever scorn those who speak of elements regarding S.E. that make you unhappy.
    Just because it didnt happen to you…. doesn’t mean it didnt happen to anyone else.
    It happend to me and I would never wish Stanbridge on my or any one elses children. Its a hell potential youngsters can well do without. The victimised at least.

    There were replies to this and other accounts of similar sentiment.

  2. John Caine says:

    Mr. John Coughlan. There’s a familiar name. A public “servant” paid enough to afford a millionaire lifestyle. Evidently doing his best to cover up child sexual abuse scandals to protect unearned reputations and the extortionate salaries that come with them. He lied and attempted to cover up the systemic failings regarding the Arnewood School Teacher who kept sex dossiers on children for a decade too. Had it been left up to Mr. Coughlan and his department a child sex offender would still be at large to prey on children. As it is the now convicted child sex offender and Arnewood ex teacher Tyrone Mark went on to commit 17 offences against kids that could have been prevented if Hampshire Children’s Services had not looked the other way and Mr. Coughlan lied about the case to a member of parliament (Sir Desmond Swayne MP).

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *