Judge's concern over school exclusion

Case has implications for exclusion appeal panels

A High Court judge has ordered an urgent hearing into the case of a 13-year-old girl afraid to return to her school because it cannot exclude a fellow pupil she alleges sexually assaulted her.

Her alleged attacker, a boy of 15, was excluded from their school in Sheffield but reinstated by an independent appeal panel on the grounds that his guilt is unproven.

The boy, who says he is innocent, is due to appear before a youth court.

The judicial review ordered by the judge could have important implications for the operation of appeal panels - recently criticised by head teachers for obliging schools to take back disruptive pupils they have expelled.

The girl - who cannot be identified for legal reasons - wants the courts to quash the appeal panel's decision.

Mr Justice Moses, sitting in London, said the principle that one was innocent until proven guilty was well understood, and the boy was entitled to the presumption of innocence.

Panel 'investigated guilt'

"Meanwhile there is a girl, who has done very well educationally, who is considerably upset because the person she perceives to be the perpetrator of the assault is attending the same school," he said.

Initially after the alleged assault she did return to the school but, despite efforts to keep them apart, it was said the two children had met, and she was now afraid to go back.

The appeal panel decided "to put their toes in the water" and investigate whether the boy was guilty of the alleged offence, the judge said.

Having heard from the boy and his father, they were not satisfied of his guilt - but had heard only half the story.

The judge said: "In these circumstances the girl stayed away from school and says: 'What about my side of the story?'

The judge said the case raised "a point of great significance" which needed clarifying by the courts.

'Startling' situation

He said the question whether an alleged attacker attending the same school as his victim and facing criminal charges should be excluded was bound to occur again.

The judge said he was told that, as a matter of law, an appeal panel was bound to consider whether the alleged attacker was guilty of an offence.

That was a "startling" proposition when a criminal trial was pending.

The best approach would be for such a panel to decide only whether it was in the best interests of the school or the pupils involved for exclusion to be ordered "bearing in mind the truth of the accusations cannot be determined until the criminal proceedings", he said.

In this case the panel had made difficulties for itself "half trying to decide the issue of guilt or innocence with its hands tied behind its back".

Witnesses, including the girl herself, might regard it as "wholly undesirable" to give evidence to the panel while criminal charges were outstanding.

The judge ordered a full hearing to take place, if possible, before the end of term on July 21, when the boy is due to leave the school anyway.

Head teachers' concerns

Appeal panel rulings are binding on schools.

Last week, a head teachers' union said it was alarmed by a rising number of cases in which panels had forced schools to reinstate pupils expelled for serious disruption.

In response, the education secretary told delegates at the National Association of Head Teachers conference that he would consider taking action.

David Blunkett said he would consider changing the regulations to make it clear to appeal panels that it was inappropriate for youngsters who had used "violence or the severe threat of violence" to be "thrust back into the same school".

But the union's general secretary, David Hart, said he still had reservations that serious disruption other than violence might not be covered by this.