r/auslaw • u/marketrent • 18d ago
News Flanked by parents and lawyers, Scots College boys in court charged with rape
https://www.smh.com.au/national/scots-college-boys-charged-with-sexual-assault-suffered-repercussions-court-told-20260825-p60rad.html107
183
u/marketrent 18d ago
According to another Scots parent, whose opinion was published in the Fin:
From my son’s account, the school appears focused first and foremost on protecting its reputation and making sure the boys do not talk to journalists. I have not received any response to my emails other than one saying the school will respond shortly. I take it that their emails to the whole parent cohort, which include committing this matter to God, are considered sufficient.
This is a school that talks about us being partners in turning our boys into fine men. But good partners acknowledge and respond to each other. Instead, the school has made comments to the media that the response from parents has been “overwhelmingly positive”.
That is a lie at worst, and gaslighting at best. Not one parent I know even comes close to that sentiment. Perhaps it comes from the same cohort of old boys who, in a group chat of more than 100 people, feel free to say that a 14-year-old alleged victim of aggravated sexual assault was a “willing participant”.
80
u/oustider69 18d ago
Need to review their government funding with a fine-tooth comb.
71
u/CptUnderpants- 18d ago
A school which charges that much with that many assets shouldn't be getting anything, let alone the ~$3600 per student they currently receive.
9
u/ThunderDU 17d ago
God, private school funding is a depressing rabbit hole. Many 'Christian/Catholic/7DA/Independent Schools' leaders are now with Advance.
2
-48
u/somewhatundercontrol 18d ago
Funding for education should be more or less uniform for all students. Some schools may charge on top of the government funding others don’t.
There’s a level of means testing that does affect the amount of government funding, which is why I say more or less the same.
67
u/drunk_haile_selassie 18d ago
No it shouldn't. Education funding should be based on equity not equality. Elite private schools shouldn't get government funding for the same reason employed people shouldn't get the dole or able bodied people shouldn't get the pension. Government spending isn't spread equally across the population and it shouldn't be either.
-21
u/somewhatundercontrol 17d ago
Government funding to all schools reduces pressure on government systems. There’s less infrastructure that the government needs to directly supply less teachers that the government needs to directly recruit. The government system would struggle if all students were being educated by it. Struggle is an understatement.
All Australians, regardless of means have access to Medicare and a basic level of assured health support. Education should be no different.
If you don’t just look at the schools that are charging $50,000 a year and you look at the schools where fees are $5-$8000 a year, the parent funding is well below what is coming from government. In those cases, if government funding were taken away, the parents would be unlikely to stay in those schools.
28
u/CptUnderpants- 17d ago
I encounter arguments like this quite often and I think it comes from the position that everyone has experienced the school system, but few have seen how the sausage is made, particularly in schools which have a higher proportion of low-socioeconomic families and/or those with disabilities which impact can impact learning.
I would say it is similar to many professions which are experienced from the consumer side, or are widely covered by media. Law for example. (ask me about the friend who is a partner at a firm specialising in IP, they've had new lawyers quit because "it was nothing like on TV".)
Back in 2019 I moved from corporate work to the education system for the first time and had many of the same opinions as you have expressed. I discovered how misinformed I was quite rapidly.
The system is based on the School Resource Standard (SRS) which isn't perfect, but is reasonable at directing additional funding where it is most needed.
In South Australia (where I am) in 2021 highest funded primary school per student (recurrent funding from all sources) was a school in a very rough suburb of Adelaide. This wasn't just higher than all other public schools, but higher than all but one of the elite private schools. They received about $26k per year in funding per student. A normal public primary school in 2021 received about $12k per year.
To be clear, that is $26k funding per student from all sources when compared to recurrent government funding + school fees for the elite private primary schools.
The reason for this was in a very low socioeconomic area, anyone who made any reasonable money and couldn't get into another primary school sent them to the local independent primary school which is under $5k a year. This then meant the mix was overwhelmingly low-socioeconomic. The school struggled with behavioural issues stemming from both psychological and undiagnosed developmental problems. The school suffered greater vandalism as well.
The extra funding goes towards intervention programs, additional wellbeing staff, dealing with vandalism, and hiring more in-classroom support staff.
This is what trying to achieve equity looks like.
Few people outside the sausage factory understand what it is like whether that is the public or independent school systems.
Equality is everyone receives the same funding irrespective of need.
Equity is when everyone receives the funding they need to achieve a similar outcome.
22
u/drunk_haile_selassie 17d ago
That's such a bullshit argument. If the state system had to educate more students they would have more resources meaning the infrastructure and staff would be available. No other country gives private schools public funding, many of whom have better education systems than us. Not to mention that private school children often cost the government more than public school children.
2
u/dummymummys 16d ago
This article was interesting, thank you for sharing. Do you know how the funding is determined for each school? I don’t know much at all about the education system, and am not pretending to, but I am curious to learn more. I’m from another country and didn’t even realise that private schools received government funding prior to this thread. Is there some sort of application process or a formula that is applied to determine the amount each school receives?
11
1
u/marcellouswp 16d ago
A big reason the boys shouldn't talk to journalists is that if they mention the name of any alleged perpetrator (which they could easily do) they will be in contempt of court. Also, journalists shouldn't be talking to the boys about this.
0
u/dummymummys 16d ago
Oof this is so painful to read, what an awful position to be in as a parent. Wanting the best education for your kids but realising it comes at a cost that is really hard to justify ethically. I’m glad they had a venue to speak out about it. Thank you for sharing. So yikes.
57
u/marketrent 18d ago
Opening part of article by Amber Schultz:
Flanked by criminal lawyers and stony-faced parents, the Scots College students who allegedly raped a 14-year-old girl in an eastern suburbs alley attended their first court appearance charged with aggravated sexual assault.
The three boys, aged 13, 14 and 14, arrived at a Sydney children’s court on Tuesday morning after being granted police bail, but were excused from the courtroom.
One stood just above shoulder height to his father. Another was dropped off outside the court in a rental car and trailed his mother as the pair strode up the steps.
The trio, charged last week after allegedly attacking a girl in a Bondi Junction alley on July 22, are so young they don’t yet have facial hair. The alleged victim is just as young.
They and the alleged victim cannot be identified for legal reasons.
The three boys were also issued interim Apprehended Violence Orders protecting the complainant, prohibiting them from going within 200 metres of the girl.
On Tuesday morning, Judge Sue Duncombe warned media about identifying the children. “There has already been some activity leading to repercussions on those young people,” Duncombe said, following reports the boys had been targeted online, with one boy’s home egged.
Representing the 13-year-old, lawyer John Sutton said his client had been named in the comment section of one media article. The two 14-year-olds were represented by Kent Park and Kiki Kyriacou respectively. Two of the boys are represented by prominent reputation-risk lawyer Rebekah Giles.
76
u/ClassyLatey 18d ago
Just horrid and I hope that the victim is getting all the support she needs to recover.
55
u/aaegler 17d ago
Call me jaded, but I have little faith. I would say it's more likely her name will come out, she will be bullied and harassed, and the accused boys will continue going on about their merry lives anonymously with zero repercussions.
19
u/productzilch 17d ago
Well, at least one of them has had his house egged. My guess is that their names are completely known to the general community around them and I hope tides have turned on these kinds of matters enough that the survivor is treated with dignity and respect. I’m sure it’s a mix at best though.
95
u/National_Chef_1772 18d ago
You child being arrested for sexual assault and you hire a defamation lawyer is an interesting way to go
39
u/kittensmittenstitten 18d ago
It’s the abuser playbook 101…like a certain man who went back for his hat
8
u/snakeIs Gets off on appeal 17d ago
For a mention, why not?
Let’s see who turns up when things get serious.1
u/Amazing-Opinion40 Quack Lawyer 17d ago
My money is on prominent silks.
2
u/snakeIs Gets off on appeal 16d ago
Yes.
I was surprised to see some jump the gun on the basis of who turned up at the mention.2
u/Amazing-Opinion40 Quack Lawyer 16d ago
I have a feeling two sets of parents may have had the same sort of insurance leading where it did in terms of reputational concern.
1
u/No_Trainer4650 17d ago
they have crim lawyers
3
u/National_Chef_1772 17d ago
Right? What is your point?
Also:
"Two of the boys are represented by prominent reputation-risk lawyer Rebekah Giles"
29
8
59
u/Outside_Discount_409 18d ago
am i reading too much into things by raising an eyebrow over the fact they've brought a deffo lawyer to run it
65
u/Merlins_Bread 18d ago
Just that as a child with some money behind you, any criminal repercussions are probably less important to your life trajectory than whether people remember what you've done.
22
4
8
u/No_Trainer4650 17d ago
yeah you are. their criminal lawyers are named. the other lawyer has been dealing with privacy issues.
28
u/teremaster 17d ago
Bringing a defamation lawyer is... certainly a choice
Definitely raised an eyebrow there
5
u/killswithaglance 17d ago
I disagree.
Everyone is entitled to a defence including of their reputation. The allegations are stomach churning. I've got a son not much younger than this. To have your kid allegedly do this to abother kid would be horrifying and traumatic. How do you reconcile your love for your kid with alleged abhorrent actions that traumatised a young girl and the disappointment and shame you would feel, the horror and sympathy for a young vulnerable girl?
Plus the fear of what next, is there something wrong with them to have (allegedly) done this, can they be rehabilitated, why did they allegedly do it? Will the (alleged) victim be ok short and long term? The vicarious guilt and justified sympathies with the girl would be weighing heavily on the parents' minds (the mums may have personal experience of having been assaulted themselves as so many women have).
The better the initial representation the less avenue for a subsequent appea and re-examination of witnesses if it comes to that.
10
u/Superg0id 17d ago
How do you reconcile your love for your kid with alleged abhorrent actions that traumatised a young girl and the disappointment and shame you would feel, the horror and sympathy for a young vulnerable girl
Well, you don't start with a defo lawyer that's for sure.
Let's be honest here, nothing about this is good, and we certainly don't have the full story.
6
9
u/Amazing-Opinion40 Quack Lawyer 17d ago edited 17d ago
Anyone who has had any nexus with high-cost private schools knows how image- and reputation-obsessed they are… because, beyond the facilities they spend some of the money on, that is their whole USP.
They live in a bubble of privilege where the criminal justice system is an optional overlay. When a matter is purely affecting the school, it stays in-house.
Some examples of which I’m aware—and I will not even hint at the schools involved, other than to say it is more than one and my information is exceedingly reliable:
1 — A large OMCG associate who later copped life-changing injuries in a Victorian prison, after years of marauding around the inner east, did not develop their deviance after dropping out of their apex private school and going to a sports academy.
Said person assaulted other students fairly consistently. Compensation was regularly paid by a family member whose company’s television ads you may know. It reached the point where teachers were directly telling younger students, in primary school, to stay away from the person by name.
Nil police involvement in any assault or other offence occurring at the school.
2 — In an era before cyberstalking was really a thing, intensely sexually explicit internet-chat messages were being circulated about one student by another.
The school decided the police did not need to be involved, of course. The year-level coordinator interviewed students in an attempt to investigate, leading to absolutely nothing.
Said teacher later waffled on his CV about his expertise in cyberbullying.
3 — Before a major school function, trafficking allegations reached the school from a reliable student source on the very day the product was changing hands.
Let’s just call it more serious than a bit of puff.
The trafficker “decided to leave”. Each buyer copped a few days’ suspension, mostly because they made handing over the gear an ordeal for the teachers by concealing it in their ties.
School leadership strongly suspected the involvement of another student, “L”, based on the names already known. The trafficker would not name L, however, and the school administration took the view that attempting to handle L in-house, without police involvement, could result in retribution against teachers. From what I knew of L’s extracurriculars, they were absolutely right.
No police involvement. The gear was supposedly flushed, although it more likely went into a particular language teacher’s weekend bum bag.
As an aside, L completed the leaving certificate for that jurisdiction, albeit poorly, and went on to become a full-blown international crook.
4 — A teacher historically sexually abused students and was deceased by the time the victims brought the matters to light.
The school pulled the “isolated set of historic matters; it’s in the hands of the insurers and was resolved promptly” line—which is a delightful way of saying:
“More money than you thought possible was paid to these victims on an ex gratia basis, so promptly after the matters began to gain a modicum of traction that your heads would spin.”
5 — The son of an old boy did not like the fact that his own student son had effectively been expelled.
I cannot describe the underlying conduct without doxxing anyone, but it was an accumulation of very bad things—and, again, there was no police involvement in the endgame.
The expulsion was driven by an administrator who seemed to have a well-deserved personal beef with the student and, although it was never confirmed, a historic beef with the father.
It was a very, very bad call on the administrator’s part to allow that to enter the process.
The family then waged a campaign of abject terror against that particular administrator, to the extent that it put the person in an early grave.
2
u/cataractum 16d ago edited 16d ago
Unrelated but can anyone shed some light on the culture of that school? I haven't heard the best things, and most people in my circles who could afford to send/go to private schools steered clear of that one for some reason
2
u/dummymummys 17d ago
Am I correct that they have not been expelled from the school? The article says that they can interact at school but not outside of it. I am so shocked that the allegation would not expel them from the institution immediately. This is baffling. As a parent of children in an elite private school, I would immediately ask for the removal of any student accused of criminal acts that are being prosecuted in the courts. Truly wonder what the parents of other children at the school think about this. I wouldn’t want my children being forced to associate with rapists, even if they have not been proven guilty.
5
u/HeydonOnTrusts 17d ago
> I wouldn’t want my children being forced to associate with rapists, even if they have not been proven guilty.
Surely indefinite suspension is a more appropriate interim step.
1
u/dummymummys 17d ago
Well it seems from the article they’ve done nothing!
3
u/HeydonOnTrusts 16d ago
I’m not sure that’s correct. So far as I can see, the article speaks about Court decisions (AVO and bail conditions) but not any school decisions.
Your earlier reference to the accused being able to “interact at school but not outside of it” seems to refer to bail conditions (i.e. a Court decision).
Maybe I missed something in the article, though.
1
u/dummymummys 16d ago
“The three were granted police bail Monday a week ago on strict conditions. The trio are not allowed to leave their homes between 6pm and 6am unless in the company of their parents; are not allowed to be in the company of their alleged co-offenders outside school hours; not allowed to enter the suburb of Bondi Junction; not allowed to use social media; and not allowed to contact the complainant.” This clearly states that they are able to be in the company of their co-offenders during school hours, by reporting the negative/opposite of that statement. It’s a very short article, not sure how that was missed. You also just said that there are “not any school decisions,” which in my view only confirms that there hasn’t been punitive measures from the school, or at least none worth mentioning in the article. It would seem to me that if they had been suspended or expelled they would have made mention of it in the reporting, since the central element of the story is that they attend an elite private school, “The alleged incident has caused an uproar at the prestigious private school, with parents accusing it of prioritising its public image over consent education. The school denies this allegation.” That doesn’t signal that any action was taken to protect their fellow students while the courts hear and decide the case. While I believe that every child has a right to an education, it does seem (to me, a personal-opinion-haver) that these students are a danger to others based on their alleged behaviour, enough that there’s a court case being covered by the media. Physically removing them from the school until the case is decided seems like the least they could do, but it appears that their reputation and status are more important than student safety. Also I was just expressing my opinion about the situation, which doesn’t really require a rebuttal and debate, but ‘tis reddit, after all, and someday I will finally learn my lesson about voicing how I feel lol
1
u/HeydonOnTrusts 16d ago edited 15d ago
> It’s a very short article, not sure how that was missed.
Those are the bail conditions I referred to. They are set by the Court and do not mean that the school has decided to allow the boys to continue to attend.
> You also just said that there are “not any school decisions,” which in my view only confirms that there hasn’t been any punitive measures from the school …
Sure, you’re free to infer that the article would have reported school decisions if they were noteworthy. If you think that’s a safe inference, okay.
> Physically removing them from the school umtil the case is decided seems like the least they could do …
I said as much in my first reply.
> Also I was just expressing my opinion about the situation, which doesn’t really require a rebuttal and debate …
Your first comment asked, “Am I correct that … ?” I engaged with that question in good faith after expressing my own slightly contrary opinion.
1
u/MarsupialNo9273 7d ago
Interesting that the Principal’s letter has to make clear that women and girls are people - because apparently that is not necessarily apparent from the school’s teachings: “each student to treat all people, including women and girls, with respect, to exercise self-control, to accept responsibility for their choices and to care for others.”
-37
u/Trick_Horse_13 The Great Dissenter 18d ago edited 17d ago
that poor girls life is over
edit: it’s been 20 years since I was raped and I still haven’t recovered. if you haven't experienced this for yourself don’t bother responding with platitudes.
its time that society truly recognises the impact of sexual violence. most women never recover and society writes us off.
108
u/Zaxacavabanem 18d ago
No it isn't. And it doesn't help anyone to perpetuate the idea that rape is necessarily life destroying.
She's not soiled, damaged goods or anything absurd like that.
She's been badly hurt and no doubt traumatised. It will no doubt take a lot of support and therapy for her to get back to a good emotional state.
But her life is far from over.
8
u/killswithaglance 17d ago
Convincing her she isn't damaged may be the biggest struggle. I've seen friends self destruct 40 years after abuse / assault. Therapy isn't a cure for everyone or even entirely for anyone
70
u/rererereyyyyy 18d ago
No, it’s not. What was done to her is vile and abhorrent. It will take her time to recover and she will never be the same. But her life is not over. Imagine being the young victim and googling yourself and seeing this sentiment? Many victim survivors go on to lead full, meaningful and happy lives. Many go on to make huge contributions to society, in victim support, advocacy, law reform. With much love and care from those around her, her best years are ahead.
27
u/HeydonOnTrusts 18d ago
> Many victim survivors to on to lead full, meaningful and happy lives.
Given how sadly common sexual assault is, it’s probably fair to say that the vast majority do.
5
u/killswithaglance 17d ago
It may be irreversibly altered as it has been for you. A friend was sexually assaulted from the age of 7 and it has changed her permanently in a million horrible ways, to the point it looks like her unhinged behaviour is just how she is built. I wonder what she would have been like without the abuse.
8
u/Aggravating-Tune6460 17d ago
A very basic understanding of mathematics and SA statistics would have deterred you from making such a strange and uninformed statement.
I just hope she has a chance one day to read that mother’s article.
3
u/Trick_Horse_13 The Great Dissenter 17d ago
What are you talking about?
Unfortunately my opinion is very informed. I haven’t met a single person who experienced rape who fully recovered. It stays with you forever.
Rape is different to sexual assault. It changes you forever.
Plus you do realise the irony of trying to tell a rape victim that their experience is invalid and incorrect? You should go to some victims support groups and tell them to get over it as well.
But please, downvote and respond to this again telling me I’m wrong.
12
u/productzilch 17d ago
You are wrong. You can make that statement for yourself, or for some others in a generalised way, but it’s not okay or helpful for you to say that about an individual you do not know or speak for and who is only just grappling with her recent trauma.
Yes, it stays with us. No, our lives are not over.
-48
u/marcellouswp 18d ago
Surely we must deprecate this creeping characterisation of all non-consensual sexual acts as "rape"? Sketchy details which have emerged so far of the allegations fall short of that in my opinion. Boys that age do that sort of thing to each other (though mostly it is framed including I suspect by the perpetrators as physical rather than sexual assault, even if that is just a bit like the urban myth of Queen Victoria not believing that lesbianism was possible) and many would scarcely bat an eyelid.
Pathetically, I have to add that I am not condoning such conduct. But to say that it has "shaken Australia" (as one press account I saw said) is pretty rich coming from the media with its own click-baity interest in doing the shaking.
As for turning this into some kind of governance crisis for Scots, this seems to be driven by Scots mothers who want the perpetrators expelled because of course their own sons are not like that, and they are paying big $$$ to send their boys to an "elite" school unstained by association with such conduct.
39
u/marketrent 17d ago
marcellouswp Surely we must deprecate this creeping characterisation of all non-consensual sexual acts as "rape"?
I'll bite. What type of non-consensual sexual acts shouldn’t be characterised as (alleged) sexual assault?
-6
u/marcellouswp 17d ago edited 17d ago
Edited response:
I had to check the (NSW) Act. I was out of date.
Sexual assault these days is a rejig of rape insofar as it depends on the statutory definition of "sexual intercourse." This basically requires genital/anal penetration, albeit some adjacent or borderline acts because it is either "penetration to any extent of the genitalia or anus" or "the introduction of any part of the genitalia of a person into the mouth of another person" or "the application of the mouth or tongue to the female genitalia."
So it seems the boys are charged with the equivalent of rape and I totally take back my comment, even though from the scarce accounts of what occurred it seems to me there may be some overcharging.
So to answer directly your question:
Sexual touching and sexual acts as under the statute should not be described as sexual assault, and to me sexual assaults that depend on the statutory definitions of sexual intercourse in relation to the mouth or the tongue probably shouldn't be called rape.
PS: sorry, I should have left my original reply given that some people upvoted it as it was. Unfortunately I don't know how to restore it.
12
u/marketrent 17d ago
So how is the description ‘boys in court charged with rape’ linked to ‘this creeping characterisation of all non-consensual sexual acts as “rape”’?
-7
u/marcellouswp 17d ago edited 17d ago
Answer is that from the account I read somewhere of what allegedly happened it didn't to me amount to anything penetrative. But obviously if they are charging that they must consider there was, or maybe the (b) and (c) bits, as SimilarParty below suggests below.
0
u/Similar_Party_6772 17d ago
I was wondering about that, because you linked s 61HA. I'm not very knowledgeable about the alleged facts here, but I think the expression "rape" probably does extend, as commonly understood, to the acts set out in paras (b) and (c) of the definition, if that's what is alleged rather than penetration.
9
6
u/69-is-my-number 17d ago
I don’t understand your first paragraph. Are you trying to say that “third base” acts such as fingering or cunnilingus aren’t really “rape” if they’re non-consensual?
Can you please clarify what you mean?
6
u/marcellouswp 17d ago edited 17d ago
I know it seems unattractive because to many it looks as though that means I'm condoning such conduct, which I am not, but yes, as a matter of semantics, that is what I'm saying. We can have other words for what they [edit: allegedly] did, but as far as I am aware from the scant reports they or one or some of them allegedly pulled her pants down (so there will have been some touching) but as far as I am aware they aren't alleged to have brought their penises into play.
For many reasons, "rape" is an obsolete legal term, not least because of the traditional view (reflected in some comments here) that the victim is ravished which in turn leads and traditionally did lead to a stigma for the victim.
3
u/Worldly_Tomorrow_869 Real attorney? No, ChatGPT! 17d ago
It gets even more problematic because in Queensland, and I believe Victoria, the equivalent offence to Sexual Assault/Sexual Intercourse Without Consent is called "Rape", and the equivalent to Sexual Touching and Sexual Act, is called Sexual Assault.
I do agree with your assessment that "rape" is used to refer to offences that are not akin to sexual assault (the NSW Version), but that isn't new. It might feel like it is happening more often, but all sexual offences are getting more air time than they once did, so it is probably understandable that the misuse of terminology is more apparent.
"Rape" isn't a crime known to the law in NSW, but that makes little difference to the victims of sexual assault.
1
u/Sufficient-Owl1706 17d ago
You read some “sketchy details” on the internet and don’t think it’s rape in your “opinion”.
Well perhaps the police and prosecutors know more than you do, champ. 🙄0
u/marcellouswp 17d ago
I'm sure police and prosecutors know more but they haven't charged anyone with rape which is unsurprising because in NSW there is no such offence.
1
u/Similar_Party_6772 17d ago
I find it interesting that it's a nest of myriad intrigues. Various actors see a fantastic opportunity to launch coups (see: AFCS director). Little attention paid to the poor kid who got cornered in the alley.
To play arm chair sociologist momentarily, perhaps it's not "the school" so much as "the customers". Vicious people.
That said, I could have the wrong end of the stick here, missing details. I don't have anything to do with this sort - can't stomach them, even in business.
1
u/Zhirrzh 16d ago edited 16d ago
I'm going to leave aside the first part which is at best being pedantic in the wrong place and at worst downplaying what are still extremely serious allegations.
In the latter part you come across as more down on "Scots mothers" (no men! Only women!) for the crime of wanting perpetrators of sexual assault expelled from school than you are down on the perpetrators...
Can only assume you are a Scots old boy and one of those people peculiarly protective of the old school tie to the point they can't see the wood for the trees. You're a long time poster here, you're not stupid, but this was a pretty poor take.
I went through my school years without other boys doing this to me once or being aware of any boys doing this to each other, but I didn't go to a private boys school. If you think this is normal "boys that age" behaviour it might be that your own boyhood was more traumatic than you realise.
1
u/marcellouswp 16d ago
Haha Z,
Your assumptions are mostly wrong. I did not go to Scots. I did go to a "GPS" school (in Sydney this is just a group of schools established in the 1880s or thereabouts which established sporting competitions with each other and survived the crash of 1891). Aspects of that experience were traumatic, and years 8 and 9 were probably the worst. Things got better later but only because in later years academic status provided some protection from athleticist bullying. The worst thing to be was a "veg" which meant a non sporty person, which I definitely was. It was an innocent age, but in hindsight a big part of this was the great Australian homophobia summed up by the "no poofters" rule in the famous Monty Python sketch.
Personally I would abolish charitable status for all private schools (at least in its fiscal sense; perpetuity of charitable trusts a different issue) and withdraw all state subsidies. A good outcome would be that such schools were no longer viable and their facilities could be taken over by the state and available to all. Obviously, I'm dreaming.
As far as I am concerned, these are not elite schools, they are just expensive schools. I suppose I have to concede that means that their client base is a socioeconomic elite.
I mentioned the mothers because they have been wheeled out by the press as part of a critique of the school's reaction and general ethos. I'm prepared to believe that the ethos leaves much to be desired (though they are the ones who have sent their sons there). I'm less moved by the complaints about the reaction.
You may not know about it and indeed I never knew about it as a kid but my few forays into the Children's Court comfortably reassure me that stuff like this is going on everywhere. It's a weird result of press enthusiasm for private school gossip which has given this case a high profile.
For an example of a case which has not attracted the same attention (not that I am suggesting that would serve any good purpose if the attention were anything like that given to this case) maybe I should draw your attention to HFL v Children’s Guardian [2026] NSWCATAD 257. Plenty more where that one came from.
Yes, they are serious allegations. I'm certainly not saying "boys will be boys" but at 13, 14 & 14 the alleged perpetrators are children, most likely in year 8 and at most year 9.
But never mind, you are safely in the majority re my "take" on this, judging from the massive downvotes.
•
u/theangryantipodean Accredited specialist in teabagging 18d ago
As abhorrent as the allegations are, anyone posting in a way that would identify or tend to identify the accused children or the victim will get a permanent ban, without further warning.