Swimming coach loses appeal to clear her name

COURT appeal: Janet Hewitt

COURT appeal: Janet Hewitt

First published in News
Last updated
Dorset Echo: Photograph of the Author by , Senior Reporter

A SWIMMING coach has lost her appeal against a conviction for assaulting a child.

Janet Hewitt, the former head coach of the West Dorset Warriors, wept as she was told by Judge Peter Johnson today that the appeal had been dismissed following a hearing at Bournemouth Crown Court.

Judge Johnson said: "I'm afraid quite simply we do not believe her account.

"It's clear that this was a fleeting aberration on her part but it is our duty to apply the law in this case.

"We would hope this conviction is not something which would cause irreparable harm to her acting as a swimming coach. In our judgement, she is a fit and proper person and society would be poorer if it were deprived of her services."

The case centred on an incident after a swimming gala at the Dorchester Sports Centre in April last year, where a 10-year-old girl said she was grabbed by the arm by Hewitt, leaving a bruise.

It was witnessed by the girl's friend and both mothers of the youngsters.

Hewitt, aged 69, of Garfield Avenue, Dorchester, was convicted of the offence at Weymouth Magistrates Court in October.

At least 30 of Hewitt's friends and supporters attended court to hear the verdict.

Representing Hewitt, Rufus Taylor said: "I have never presented this level of character evidence in a case before.

"There are people who are demanding to come to court and speak up for her.

"She is a pillar of the West Dorset community and has touched thousands of lives in her volunteering."

He added: "Her evidence is that it was an accident."

The court also heard character evidence from a number of people, including Rachel Horne, headteacher of Winterbourne Valley First School, former mayor of Dorchester, Councillor David Barrett and head of PE at Thomas Hardye School Geraint Hughes.

A young witness, aged 13, gave evidence that the girls had 'bumped into' the appellant as she was picking something up off the floor.

She told the court she had not seen any 'grabbing'.

Prosecuting, Anita Gibson-Lee said the bench must decide a 'matter of fact'.

She said: "What we are talking about is a person in a position of trust and a 10-year-old child who by the appellant's own evidence is not misbehaving.

"This is not reasonable chastisement of a child.

"Nobody can suggest that anyone had an axe to grind. This is a mother who saw her child being assaulted."

She added: "This is a woman who has fantastic references and a glowing reputation.

"This is not a witch-hunt. This is a lady we say lost her temper. It does happen to the best of people.

"But in this case it affected a 10-year-old girl who ended up with a bruise and very upset."

Comments (85)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

2:20pm Fri 28 Feb 14

wurzelbasher says...

"The ten year old girl ended up with a bruise, and was very upset." Well that really is just dreadful ha ha. WHAT is wrong with this Godforsaken country?! One piffling little incident and a highly respected pillar of the community has her life in tatters. It's just as well she didn't strike the child or she might have gone to jail for longer than that fellow in Bournemouth who sucker punched and killed that autistic man.
"The ten year old girl ended up with a bruise, and was very upset." Well that really is just dreadful ha ha. WHAT is wrong with this Godforsaken country?! One piffling little incident and a highly respected pillar of the community has her life in tatters. It's just as well she didn't strike the child or she might have gone to jail for longer than that fellow in Bournemouth who sucker punched and killed that autistic man. wurzelbasher
  • Score: 82

2:40pm Fri 28 Feb 14

biker babe says...

Janet, we all know what a blooming good coach you are!! my sons had lessons with you & I've witnessed you over many years at the poolside, there's no way on Gods earth that you would intentionally hurt a child! The child's mother needs to take stock of the enormity of what she's done, it was never, ever worth it. Nothing whatsoever has been gained in any of this!
Janet, we all know what a blooming good coach you are!! my sons had lessons with you & I've witnessed you over many years at the poolside, there's no way on Gods earth that you would intentionally hurt a child! The child's mother needs to take stock of the enormity of what she's done, it was never, ever worth it. Nothing whatsoever has been gained in any of this! biker babe
  • Score: 73

3:50pm Fri 28 Feb 14

mr commonsense says...

As usual in this mad world, one word from somebody else is taken out of total context. The mother should be ashamed of herself and withdraw her accusations. Does she administer discipline in her own home, I doubt it. What a sad world when this dreadful nonsense is brought to court, it makes you wonder why anybody should work with overprotected children today.
I do not know this lady or have had anything to do with her but I wish her all the best. Please remember that what you have done for countless children is recognised by thousands and nothing changes the way your friends, colleagues, and students feel about you.
As usual in this mad world, one word from somebody else is taken out of total context. The mother should be ashamed of herself and withdraw her accusations. Does she administer discipline in her own home, I doubt it. What a sad world when this dreadful nonsense is brought to court, it makes you wonder why anybody should work with overprotected children today. I do not know this lady or have had anything to do with her but I wish her all the best. Please remember that what you have done for countless children is recognised by thousands and nothing changes the way your friends, colleagues, and students feel about you. mr commonsense
  • Score: 66

3:53pm Fri 28 Feb 14

common cence says...

wurzelbasher wrote:
"The ten year old girl ended up with a bruise, and was very upset." Well that really is just dreadful ha ha. WHAT is wrong with this Godforsaken country?! One piffling little incident and a highly respected pillar of the community has her life in tatters. It's just as well she didn't strike the child or she might have gone to jail for longer than that fellow in Bournemouth who sucker punched and killed that autistic man.
She lost her temper , she was NASTY to a child she has been punished her fault no one else,,,,,,,,,,,,,
[quote][p][bold]wurzelbasher[/bold] wrote: "The ten year old girl ended up with a bruise, and was very upset." Well that really is just dreadful ha ha. WHAT is wrong with this Godforsaken country?! One piffling little incident and a highly respected pillar of the community has her life in tatters. It's just as well she didn't strike the child or she might have gone to jail for longer than that fellow in Bournemouth who sucker punched and killed that autistic man.[/p][/quote]She lost her temper , she was NASTY to a child she has been punished her fault no one else,,,,,,,,,,,,, common cence
  • Score: -83

3:57pm Fri 28 Feb 14

common cence says...

biker babe wrote:
Janet, we all know what a blooming good coach you are!! my sons had lessons with you & I've witnessed you over many years at the poolside, there's no way on Gods earth that you would intentionally hurt a child! The child's mother needs to take stock of the enormity of what she's done, it was never, ever worth it. Nothing whatsoever has been gained in any of this!
Good on the mother for reporting this to the police well done mum for protecting your girl , Take no notice of these lot trying to blame the mother for standing up to the BULLY,,,,,,,,,,,,,
[quote][p][bold]biker babe[/bold] wrote: Janet, we all know what a blooming good coach you are!! my sons had lessons with you & I've witnessed you over many years at the poolside, there's no way on Gods earth that you would intentionally hurt a child! The child's mother needs to take stock of the enormity of what she's done, it was never, ever worth it. Nothing whatsoever has been gained in any of this![/p][/quote]Good on the mother for reporting this to the police well done mum for protecting your girl , Take no notice of these lot trying to blame the mother for standing up to the BULLY,,,,,,,,,,,,, common cence
  • Score: -80

4:01pm Fri 28 Feb 14

common cence says...

mr commonsense wrote:
As usual in this mad world, one word from somebody else is taken out of total context. The mother should be ashamed of herself and withdraw her accusations. Does she administer discipline in her own home, I doubt it. What a sad world when this dreadful nonsense is brought to court, it makes you wonder why anybody should work with overprotected children today.
I do not know this lady or have had anything to do with her but I wish her all the best. Please remember that what you have done for countless children is recognised by thousands and nothing changes the way your friends, colleagues, and students feel about you.
You dont know this woman? as you say above , so i take it you know the mother of the girl that you say should be ashamed of her self .
[quote][p][bold]mr commonsense[/bold] wrote: As usual in this mad world, one word from somebody else is taken out of total context. The mother should be ashamed of herself and withdraw her accusations. Does she administer discipline in her own home, I doubt it. What a sad world when this dreadful nonsense is brought to court, it makes you wonder why anybody should work with overprotected children today. I do not know this lady or have had anything to do with her but I wish her all the best. Please remember that what you have done for countless children is recognised by thousands and nothing changes the way your friends, colleagues, and students feel about you.[/p][/quote]You dont know this woman? as you say above , so i take it you know the mother of the girl that you say should be ashamed of her self . common cence
  • Score: -62

4:04pm Fri 28 Feb 14

common cence says...

biker babe wrote:
Janet, we all know what a blooming good coach you are!! my sons had lessons with you & I've witnessed you over many years at the poolside, there's no way on Gods earth that you would intentionally hurt a child! The child's mother needs to take stock of the enormity of what she's done, it was never, ever worth it. Nothing whatsoever has been gained in any of this!
Good on the mother for reporting this to the police well done mum for protecting your girl , Take no notice of these lot trying to blame the mother for standing up to the BULLY,,,,,,,,,,,,,
[quote][p][bold]biker babe[/bold] wrote: Janet, we all know what a blooming good coach you are!! my sons had lessons with you & I've witnessed you over many years at the poolside, there's no way on Gods earth that you would intentionally hurt a child! The child's mother needs to take stock of the enormity of what she's done, it was never, ever worth it. Nothing whatsoever has been gained in any of this![/p][/quote]Good on the mother for reporting this to the police well done mum for protecting your girl , Take no notice of these lot trying to blame the mother for standing up to the BULLY,,,,,,,,,,,,, common cence
  • Score: -84

4:23pm Fri 28 Feb 14

February1948 says...

That is so very sad, but at least Janet (Echo, please do not refer to her as "Hewitt") knows that the vast majority of people are supportive of her. One child's mother, out of many thousands of parents of those she has taught over the years, has complained and in one fell swoop ruined this poor lady's reputation and confidence and deprived children of a brilliant teacher; she taught my son many years ago and he had been terrified to get in the pool! Hold your head high Janet!
That is so very sad, but at least Janet (Echo, please do not refer to her as "Hewitt") knows that the vast majority of people are supportive of her. One child's mother, out of many thousands of parents of those she has taught over the years, has complained and in one fell swoop ruined this poor lady's reputation and confidence and deprived children of a brilliant teacher; she taught my son many years ago and he had been terrified to get in the pool! Hold your head high Janet! February1948
  • Score: 67

4:38pm Fri 28 Feb 14

PossumGoose says...

A bruised arm which will heal within days, a fleeting incident that, in a young mind, will fade within weeks. Now a young girl will grow up knowing her, and her pushy, paranoid mother, have caused the ruination of a wonderful, loved public figure. I hope you’re extremely proud of yourselves.

Shame on the family, shame on the court. Greatest respect and continued good wishes to Janet.
A bruised arm which will heal within days, a fleeting incident that, in a young mind, will fade within weeks. Now a young girl will grow up knowing her, and her pushy, paranoid mother, have caused the ruination of a wonderful, loved public figure. I hope you’re extremely proud of yourselves. Shame on the family, shame on the court. Greatest respect and continued good wishes to Janet. PossumGoose
  • Score: 72

4:51pm Fri 28 Feb 14

marabout says...

This is a clear case of Hewitt losing her temper and assaulting a child. Regardless of the good work she has done for the community of the past few years and regardless of the esteem that many people view her, it is against the law to assault children

This was not simply a bruise that will go away, this was not simply an accident - This was assault. She has been found guilty of assault. Hewitt then appealed but she lost the appeal.

Lets now move on.
This is a clear case of Hewitt losing her temper and assaulting a child. Regardless of the good work she has done for the community of the past few years and regardless of the esteem that many people view her, it is against the law to assault children This was not simply a bruise that will go away, this was not simply an accident - This was assault. She has been found guilty of assault. Hewitt then appealed but she lost the appeal. Lets now move on. marabout
  • Score: -42

5:16pm Fri 28 Feb 14

NDH says...

"We would hope this conviction is not something which would cause irreparable harm to her acting as a swimming coach. In our judgement, she is a fit and proper person and society would be poorer if it were deprived of her services."

I thought in the original hearing she got banned from coaching, but this makes it sound like she can continue?
"We would hope this conviction is not something which would cause irreparable harm to her acting as a swimming coach. In our judgement, she is a fit and proper person and society would be poorer if it were deprived of her services." I thought in the original hearing she got banned from coaching, but this makes it sound like she can continue? NDH
  • Score: 18

5:44pm Fri 28 Feb 14

toyota777 says...

It's time our judges dropped the wigs and dresses asnd grew a pair and got out into the real world instead of mamby-pambying stupid kids who can't behave themselves, SACK THE JUDGE not the innocent instructor.
It's time our judges dropped the wigs and dresses asnd grew a pair and got out into the real world instead of mamby-pambying stupid kids who can't behave themselves, SACK THE JUDGE not the innocent instructor. toyota777
  • Score: 19

5:46pm Fri 28 Feb 14

ksmain says...

wurzelbasher wrote:
"The ten year old girl ended up with a bruise, and was very upset." Well that really is just dreadful ha ha. WHAT is wrong with this Godforsaken country?! One piffling little incident and a highly respected pillar of the community has her life in tatters. It's just as well she didn't strike the child or she might have gone to jail for longer than that fellow in Bournemouth who sucker punched and killed that autistic man.
Yes bruising is a serious injury isn't it - I mean most kids get them every day of the week bumping into furniture, falling of their bikes etc. Perhaps the answer is to put them in a hard wearing inflatable suit so it doesn't happen. If it had been an injury requiring hospital treatment that would be another matter. While I wasn't there to judge the incident, a witness (13 year old) didn't spot anything untoward and it all just seems like a fuss over nothing that should have been dealt with at the time. As for those who say mothers should stand up for their kids receiving a bruise and not having the common sense or just good judgement to have dealt with this at the time in a suitable adult manner, clearly you are interested in wasting court time when there are FAR MORE SERIOUS ISSUES for them to be dealing with. What amazes me is the court didn't just throw it out for time-wasting.

The statement in this article that makes me LOL is that they hope it won't do harm to her coaching career. OF COURSE IT WILL IMO, and I would guess that she may dread going back to it again after having gone through what she has gone through. And it think it will also make others think twice about volunteering as well with possibly the though in there minds that they will possibly end up in court at the whim of some, I believe, over-protective and over-bearing parent taking them to court for, what is, IMO, a minor issue that should have been dealt with outside of it. Is it any wonder volunteers are a struggle to find these days? It certainly puts me off.
[quote][p][bold]wurzelbasher[/bold] wrote: "The ten year old girl ended up with a bruise, and was very upset." Well that really is just dreadful ha ha. WHAT is wrong with this Godforsaken country?! One piffling little incident and a highly respected pillar of the community has her life in tatters. It's just as well she didn't strike the child or she might have gone to jail for longer than that fellow in Bournemouth who sucker punched and killed that autistic man.[/p][/quote]Yes bruising is a serious injury isn't it - I mean most kids get them every day of the week bumping into furniture, falling of their bikes etc. Perhaps the answer is to put them in a hard wearing inflatable suit so it doesn't happen. If it had been an injury requiring hospital treatment that would be another matter. While I wasn't there to judge the incident, a witness (13 year old) didn't spot anything untoward and it all just seems like a fuss over nothing that should have been dealt with at the time. As for those who say mothers should stand up for their kids receiving a bruise and not having the common sense or just good judgement to have dealt with this at the time in a suitable adult manner, clearly you are interested in wasting court time when there are FAR MORE SERIOUS ISSUES for them to be dealing with. What amazes me is the court didn't just throw it out for time-wasting. The statement in this article that makes me LOL is that they hope it won't do harm to her coaching career. OF COURSE IT WILL IMO, and I would guess that she may dread going back to it again after having gone through what she has gone through. And it think it will also make others think twice about volunteering as well with possibly the though in there minds that they will possibly end up in court at the whim of some, I believe, over-protective and over-bearing parent taking them to court for, what is, IMO, a minor issue that should have been dealt with outside of it. Is it any wonder volunteers are a struggle to find these days? It certainly puts me off. ksmain
  • Score: 48

5:49pm Fri 28 Feb 14

common cence says...

February1948 wrote:
That is so very sad, but at least Janet (Echo, please do not refer to her as "Hewitt") knows that the vast majority of people are supportive of her. One child's mother, out of many thousands of parents of those she has taught over the years, has complained and in one fell swoop ruined this poor lady's reputation and confidence and deprived children of a brilliant teacher; she taught my son many years ago and he had been terrified to get in the pool! Hold your head high Janet!
Still a criminal,,,,,,,,,
[quote][p][bold]February1948[/bold] wrote: That is so very sad, but at least Janet (Echo, please do not refer to her as "Hewitt") knows that the vast majority of people are supportive of her. One child's mother, out of many thousands of parents of those she has taught over the years, has complained and in one fell swoop ruined this poor lady's reputation and confidence and deprived children of a brilliant teacher; she taught my son many years ago and he had been terrified to get in the pool! Hold your head high Janet![/p][/quote]Still a criminal,,,,,,,,, common cence
  • Score: -72

5:53pm Fri 28 Feb 14

common cence says...

marabout wrote:
This is a clear case of Hewitt losing her temper and assaulting a child. Regardless of the good work she has done for the community of the past few years and regardless of the esteem that many people view her, it is against the law to assault children

This was not simply a bruise that will go away, this was not simply an accident - This was assault. She has been found guilty of assault. Hewitt then appealed but she lost the appeal.

Lets now move on.
Well said Marabout i thought i was the only one that wanted to protect the children,,,,,,,
[quote][p][bold]marabout[/bold] wrote: This is a clear case of Hewitt losing her temper and assaulting a child. Regardless of the good work she has done for the community of the past few years and regardless of the esteem that many people view her, it is against the law to assault children This was not simply a bruise that will go away, this was not simply an accident - This was assault. She has been found guilty of assault. Hewitt then appealed but she lost the appeal. Lets now move on.[/p][/quote]Well said Marabout i thought i was the only one that wanted to protect the children,,,,,,, common cence
  • Score: -58

5:57pm Fri 28 Feb 14

common cence says...

PossumGoose wrote:
A bruised arm which will heal within days, a fleeting incident that, in a young mind, will fade within weeks. Now a young girl will grow up knowing her, and her pushy, paranoid mother, have caused the ruination of a wonderful, loved public figure. I hope you’re extremely proud of yourselves.

Shame on the family, shame on the court. Greatest respect and continued good wishes to Janet.
And shame on YOU PossumGoose,,,
[quote][p][bold]PossumGoose[/bold] wrote: A bruised arm which will heal within days, a fleeting incident that, in a young mind, will fade within weeks. Now a young girl will grow up knowing her, and her pushy, paranoid mother, have caused the ruination of a wonderful, loved public figure. I hope you’re extremely proud of yourselves. Shame on the family, shame on the court. Greatest respect and continued good wishes to Janet.[/p][/quote]And shame on YOU PossumGoose,,, common cence
  • Score: -73

6:25pm Fri 28 Feb 14

JamesYoung says...

common cence wrote:
February1948 wrote:
That is so very sad, but at least Janet (Echo, please do not refer to her as "Hewitt") knows that the vast majority of people are supportive of her. One child's mother, out of many thousands of parents of those she has taught over the years, has complained and in one fell swoop ruined this poor lady's reputation and confidence and deprived children of a brilliant teacher; she taught my son many years ago and he had been terrified to get in the pool! Hold your head high Janet!
Still a criminal,,,,,,,,,
...made a criminal by a ridiculous law introduced by the same progressives who, as we've seen in the news in recent days, also wanted to remove the age of consent and abolish the offence of paedophilia.
[quote][p][bold]common cence[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]February1948[/bold] wrote: That is so very sad, but at least Janet (Echo, please do not refer to her as "Hewitt") knows that the vast majority of people are supportive of her. One child's mother, out of many thousands of parents of those she has taught over the years, has complained and in one fell swoop ruined this poor lady's reputation and confidence and deprived children of a brilliant teacher; she taught my son many years ago and he had been terrified to get in the pool! Hold your head high Janet![/p][/quote]Still a criminal,,,,,,,,,[/p][/quote]...made a criminal by a ridiculous law introduced by the same progressives who, as we've seen in the news in recent days, also wanted to remove the age of consent and abolish the offence of paedophilia. JamesYoung
  • Score: 45

7:12pm Fri 28 Feb 14

ksmain says...

common cence wrote:
marabout wrote:
This is a clear case of Hewitt losing her temper and assaulting a child. Regardless of the good work she has done for the community of the past few years and regardless of the esteem that many people view her, it is against the law to assault children

This was not simply a bruise that will go away, this was not simply an accident - This was assault. She has been found guilty of assault. Hewitt then appealed but she lost the appeal.

Lets now move on.
Well said Marabout i thought i was the only one that wanted to protect the children,,,,,,,
Well - there is being protective and using common sense (as per your name). Neither were used well here!!!!!!!
[quote][p][bold]common cence[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]marabout[/bold] wrote: This is a clear case of Hewitt losing her temper and assaulting a child. Regardless of the good work she has done for the community of the past few years and regardless of the esteem that many people view her, it is against the law to assault children This was not simply a bruise that will go away, this was not simply an accident - This was assault. She has been found guilty of assault. Hewitt then appealed but she lost the appeal. Lets now move on.[/p][/quote]Well said Marabout i thought i was the only one that wanted to protect the children,,,,,,,[/p][/quote]Well - there is being protective and using common sense (as per your name). Neither were used well here!!!!!!! ksmain
  • Score: 10

7:25pm Fri 28 Feb 14

MaidofDorset says...

Looking on the bright side had the child had been running on the wet tiles and collided with Janet Hewitt before Mrs Hewitt had time to put her arm out, Janet might have fallen heavily on the ground and incurred a fractured hip or head injury.

I would not allow a child of mine to run on wet tiles around a swimming pool. Perhaps parents could advise their children not to charge around a swimming pool, falls can break bones etc. far more painful than a bruise.
Looking on the bright side had the child had been running on the wet tiles and collided with Janet Hewitt before Mrs Hewitt had time to put her arm out, Janet might have fallen heavily on the ground and incurred a fractured hip or head injury. I would not allow a child of mine to run on wet tiles around a swimming pool. Perhaps parents could advise their children not to charge around a swimming pool, falls can break bones etc. far more painful than a bruise. MaidofDorset
  • Score: 36

7:32pm Fri 28 Feb 14

siratb says...

Lets see if a compensation claim arises out of this.......
Lets see if a compensation claim arises out of this....... siratb
  • Score: 12

7:38pm Fri 28 Feb 14

ksmain says...

MaidofDorset wrote:
Looking on the bright side had the child had been running on the wet tiles and collided with Janet Hewitt before Mrs Hewitt had time to put her arm out, Janet might have fallen heavily on the ground and incurred a fractured hip or head injury.

I would not allow a child of mine to run on wet tiles around a swimming pool. Perhaps parents could advise their children not to charge around a swimming pool, falls can break bones etc. far more painful than a bruise.
I agree. But you will probably know as well as me that good practical parenting is existing less and less these days. Sadly there appears to be a growing number of parents who clearly have no idea and a lack of common sense to bring their kids up properly. And sadly - these kids will have never been taught these skills to be able to bring up the next generation well either.I believe that some parents lack the skills to be able to deal with an issue with another person in a decent and rational way - to approach them and sort it out in person - so instead they turn to a 3rd party and turn it into a far unnecessarily larger issue.(the making a mountain out of a molehill' scenario.

Plus we are going the US route and becoming more litigious and combative - 'we know our rights' and 'if there is blame there is a claim' ....
[quote][p][bold]MaidofDorset[/bold] wrote: Looking on the bright side had the child had been running on the wet tiles and collided with Janet Hewitt before Mrs Hewitt had time to put her arm out, Janet might have fallen heavily on the ground and incurred a fractured hip or head injury. I would not allow a child of mine to run on wet tiles around a swimming pool. Perhaps parents could advise their children not to charge around a swimming pool, falls can break bones etc. far more painful than a bruise.[/p][/quote]I agree. But you will probably know as well as me that good practical parenting is existing less and less these days. Sadly there appears to be a growing number of parents who clearly have no idea and a lack of common sense to bring their kids up properly. And sadly - these kids will have never been taught these skills to be able to bring up the next generation well either.I believe that some parents lack the skills to be able to deal with an issue with another person in a decent and rational way - to approach them and sort it out in person - so instead they turn to a 3rd party and turn it into a far unnecessarily larger issue.(the making a mountain out of a molehill' scenario. Plus we are going the US route and becoming more litigious and combative - 'we know our rights' and 'if there is blame there is a claim' .... ksmain
  • Score: 14

8:19pm Fri 28 Feb 14

Dorsetapple says...

wurzelbasher wrote:
"The ten year old girl ended up with a bruise, and was very upset." Well that really is just dreadful ha ha. WHAT is wrong with this Godforsaken country?! One piffling little incident and a highly respected pillar of the community has her life in tatters. It's just as well she didn't strike the child or she might have gone to jail for longer than that fellow in Bournemouth who sucker punched and killed that autistic man.
I dont know whether you have children, but if an adult grabbed your child by the arm causing a bruise and shouted at them, would you walk away? I dont think so
[quote][p][bold]wurzelbasher[/bold] wrote: "The ten year old girl ended up with a bruise, and was very upset." Well that really is just dreadful ha ha. WHAT is wrong with this Godforsaken country?! One piffling little incident and a highly respected pillar of the community has her life in tatters. It's just as well she didn't strike the child or she might have gone to jail for longer than that fellow in Bournemouth who sucker punched and killed that autistic man.[/p][/quote]I dont know whether you have children, but if an adult grabbed your child by the arm causing a bruise and shouted at them, would you walk away? I dont think so Dorsetapple
  • Score: 5

8:23pm Fri 28 Feb 14

I'mavoter says...

siratb wrote:
Lets see if a compensation claim arises out of this.......
I have no doubt that was the objective all along !
[quote][p][bold]siratb[/bold] wrote: Lets see if a compensation claim arises out of this.......[/p][/quote]I have no doubt that was the objective all along ! I'mavoter
  • Score: 18

9:37pm Fri 28 Feb 14

wurzelbasher says...

common cence wrote:
mr commonsense wrote:
As usual in this mad world, one word from somebody else is taken out of total context. The mother should be ashamed of herself and withdraw her accusations. Does she administer discipline in her own home, I doubt it. What a sad world when this dreadful nonsense is brought to court, it makes you wonder why anybody should work with overprotected children today.
I do not know this lady or have had anything to do with her but I wish her all the best. Please remember that what you have done for countless children is recognised by thousands and nothing changes the way your friends, colleagues, and students feel about you.
You dont know this woman? as you say above , so i take it you know the mother of the girl that you say should be ashamed of her self .
Common cence: you don't have much of it!
[quote][p][bold]common cence[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]mr commonsense[/bold] wrote: As usual in this mad world, one word from somebody else is taken out of total context. The mother should be ashamed of herself and withdraw her accusations. Does she administer discipline in her own home, I doubt it. What a sad world when this dreadful nonsense is brought to court, it makes you wonder why anybody should work with overprotected children today. I do not know this lady or have had anything to do with her but I wish her all the best. Please remember that what you have done for countless children is recognised by thousands and nothing changes the way your friends, colleagues, and students feel about you.[/p][/quote]You dont know this woman? as you say above , so i take it you know the mother of the girl that you say should be ashamed of her self .[/p][/quote]Common cence: you don't have much of it! wurzelbasher
  • Score: 14

10:06pm Fri 28 Feb 14

Tinker2 says...

Patience is a virtue, but the older we get the less patience we have. Do things start to really irritate you as you get older and do you lose your temper more easily?
Some of the aforementioned Comments prove my case?
Patience is a virtue, but the older we get the less patience we have. Do things start to really irritate you as you get older and do you lose your temper more easily? Some of the aforementioned Comments prove my case? Tinker2
  • Score: 0

10:45pm Fri 28 Feb 14

dogloverdorset says...

Sometimes people get too old to cope with youngsters and get short tempered, and should retire - behavior that may have been acceptable many years ago , i rightly no longer accepted, and if she had grabbed and bruised my child, I would have reported it as well.
Sometimes people get too old to cope with youngsters and get short tempered, and should retire - behavior that may have been acceptable many years ago , i rightly no longer accepted, and if she had grabbed and bruised my child, I would have reported it as well. dogloverdorset
  • Score: 2

10:48pm Fri 28 Feb 14

JamesYoung says...

I'mavoter wrote:
siratb wrote:
Lets see if a compensation claim arises out of this.......
I have no doubt that was the objective all along !
Personally i doubt it, unless the parent concerned wants half the county pointing at her and muttering under their breath. The comments on this page clearly shows that the vast majority of people support Janet and think this whole thing was a ridiculous waste of public money and time.
[quote][p][bold]I'mavoter[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]siratb[/bold] wrote: Lets see if a compensation claim arises out of this.......[/p][/quote]I have no doubt that was the objective all along ![/p][/quote]Personally i doubt it, unless the parent concerned wants half the county pointing at her and muttering under their breath. The comments on this page clearly shows that the vast majority of people support Janet and think this whole thing was a ridiculous waste of public money and time. JamesYoung
  • Score: 24

1:29am Sat 1 Mar 14

jamie-c says...

I think the fact it got so far as it has says that something did happen and it wasn't just a case of someone trying to ruin a reputation.... If someone handled my child and left a bruise I would do something about it..... Ok so maybe this was a one off but maybe it has happened before and nothing has been said?

I just don't think they would.of prosecuted without enough evidence being present. It's a shame that one moment can ruin a lifetimes work and reputation but it shouldn't of happened at all.
I think the fact it got so far as it has says that something did happen and it wasn't just a case of someone trying to ruin a reputation.... If someone handled my child and left a bruise I would do something about it..... Ok so maybe this was a one off but maybe it has happened before and nothing has been said? I just don't think they would.of prosecuted without enough evidence being present. It's a shame that one moment can ruin a lifetimes work and reputation but it shouldn't of happened at all. jamie-c
  • Score: 10

1:45am Sat 1 Mar 14

Hippyhooker says...

wurzelbasher wrote:
"The ten year old girl ended up with a bruise, and was very upset." Well that really is just dreadful ha ha. WHAT is wrong with this Godforsaken country?! One piffling little incident and a highly respected pillar of the community has her life in tatters. It's just as well she didn't strike the child or she might have gone to jail for longer than that fellow in Bournemouth who sucker punched and killed that autistic man.
So if you had a chils and someone grabbed them and bruised them you would be OK with that then? I would do everything I could to ensure that person was punished, most decent caring parents would.
[quote][p][bold]wurzelbasher[/bold] wrote: "The ten year old girl ended up with a bruise, and was very upset." Well that really is just dreadful ha ha. WHAT is wrong with this Godforsaken country?! One piffling little incident and a highly respected pillar of the community has her life in tatters. It's just as well she didn't strike the child or she might have gone to jail for longer than that fellow in Bournemouth who sucker punched and killed that autistic man.[/p][/quote]So if you had a chils and someone grabbed them and bruised them you would be OK with that then? I would do everything I could to ensure that person was punished, most decent caring parents would. Hippyhooker
  • Score: -5

6:38am Sat 1 Mar 14

mark@greenhill says...

Notice the "nanny state" brigade wanting this woman branded a criminal, are out in force.
Ridiculous case that should never have come to court in my opinion.

The mother of this overprotected little princess should rightly be ashamed at bringing this to anyone's attention in the first place, all she had to do was have a word with Janet Hewitt at the time.

As has been said before, why on earth would anybody in their right mind work with children if this infantile mentality exists amongst the parents?

Al children need boundaries, and at times that means physical restraint.

The people on here calling her a criminal are representative of all that is wrong with our society today.
Notice the "nanny state" brigade wanting this woman branded a criminal, are out in force. Ridiculous case that should never have come to court in my opinion. The mother of this overprotected little princess should rightly be ashamed at bringing this to anyone's attention in the first place, all she had to do was have a word with Janet Hewitt at the time. As has been said before, why on earth would anybody in their right mind work with children if this infantile mentality exists amongst the parents? Al children need boundaries, and at times that means physical restraint. The people on here calling her a criminal are representative of all that is wrong with our society today. mark@greenhill
  • Score: 30

7:41am Sat 1 Mar 14

Mrs Grumps says...

Dorsetapple wrote:
wurzelbasher wrote:
"The ten year old girl ended up with a bruise, and was very upset." Well that really is just dreadful ha ha. WHAT is wrong with this Godforsaken country?! One piffling little incident and a highly respected pillar of the community has her life in tatters. It's just as well she didn't strike the child or she might have gone to jail for longer than that fellow in Bournemouth who sucker punched and killed that autistic man.
I dont know whether you have children, but if an adult grabbed your child by the arm causing a bruise and shouted at them, would you walk away? I dont think so
No, I would not walk away but I would speak to that person who had hurt my child, demand an apology and if that was not forthcoming, I would then report it to that person's superior, saying that if it happened again, I would take it further.

If no apology and assurance were made I would then consider taking further action. Any sensible person would apologise and give such an assurance and make an extra effort to avoid such unfortunate behaviour in the future. Taking this route, the person could still lose his or her position but would not be, forever, branded a criminal for one mistake.

Nobody is allowed a second chance in this society these days but I suspect that if the boot were on the other foot and those who approve of this prosecution and conviction found themselves in a similar position because of one brief aberration, they would want leniency for themselves for their first offence.
[quote][p][bold]Dorsetapple[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]wurzelbasher[/bold] wrote: "The ten year old girl ended up with a bruise, and was very upset." Well that really is just dreadful ha ha. WHAT is wrong with this Godforsaken country?! One piffling little incident and a highly respected pillar of the community has her life in tatters. It's just as well she didn't strike the child or she might have gone to jail for longer than that fellow in Bournemouth who sucker punched and killed that autistic man.[/p][/quote]I dont know whether you have children, but if an adult grabbed your child by the arm causing a bruise and shouted at them, would you walk away? I dont think so[/p][/quote]No, I would not walk away but I would speak to that person who had hurt my child, demand an apology and if that was not forthcoming, I would then report it to that person's superior, saying that if it happened again, I would take it further. If no apology and assurance were made I would then consider taking further action. Any sensible person would apologise and give such an assurance and make an extra effort to avoid such unfortunate behaviour in the future. Taking this route, the person could still lose his or her position but would not be, forever, branded a criminal for one mistake. Nobody is allowed a second chance in this society these days but I suspect that if the boot were on the other foot and those who approve of this prosecution and conviction found themselves in a similar position because of one brief aberration, they would want leniency for themselves for their first offence. Mrs Grumps
  • Score: 17

7:52am Sat 1 Mar 14

JamesYoung says...

jamie-c wrote:
I think the fact it got so far as it has says that something did happen and it wasn't just a case of someone trying to ruin a reputation.... If someone handled my child and left a bruise I would do something about it..... Ok so maybe this was a one off but maybe it has happened before and nothing has been said?

I just don't think they would.of prosecuted without enough evidence being present. It's a shame that one moment can ruin a lifetimes work and reputation but it shouldn't of happened at all.
It went this far because Mrs Hewitt appealed.
If she had not appealed it would not have gone this far.
She appealed because she contends that it did not happen.
Therefore, I would suggest that the reason it has gone this far is more likely to be because it did not happen. And i think you can be pretty clear that this has not happened before - if it had, do you not think that the prosecution would have put parents or children affected up as witnesses? Instead, the defence was swamped with hundreds of character references.
[quote][p][bold]jamie-c[/bold] wrote: I think the fact it got so far as it has says that something did happen and it wasn't just a case of someone trying to ruin a reputation.... If someone handled my child and left a bruise I would do something about it..... Ok so maybe this was a one off but maybe it has happened before and nothing has been said? I just don't think they would.of prosecuted without enough evidence being present. It's a shame that one moment can ruin a lifetimes work and reputation but it shouldn't of happened at all.[/p][/quote]It went this far because Mrs Hewitt appealed. If she had not appealed it would not have gone this far. She appealed because she contends that it did not happen. Therefore, I would suggest that the reason it has gone this far is more likely to be because it did not happen. And i think you can be pretty clear that this has not happened before - if it had, do you not think that the prosecution would have put parents or children affected up as witnesses? Instead, the defence was swamped with hundreds of character references. JamesYoung
  • Score: 0

7:56am Sat 1 Mar 14

JamesYoung says...

Hippyhooker wrote:
wurzelbasher wrote:
"The ten year old girl ended up with a bruise, and was very upset." Well that really is just dreadful ha ha. WHAT is wrong with this Godforsaken country?! One piffling little incident and a highly respected pillar of the community has her life in tatters. It's just as well she didn't strike the child or she might have gone to jail for longer than that fellow in Bournemouth who sucker punched and killed that autistic man.
So if you had a chils and someone grabbed them and bruised them you would be OK with that then? I would do everything I could to ensure that person was punished, most decent caring parents would.
Personally, i wouldn't be happy at all, *if* my child was grabbed (the only witness who was independent said that it did not happen). However, i'd address that with the person concerned, particularly if i knew that person had given up 50 (yes, 50) years of their life to provide a service to children. Not in a million years would i seek to destroy somebody's life over what is, when you strip away all the hype, a grabbed arm...not a punch, kick or slap.
[quote][p][bold]Hippyhooker[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]wurzelbasher[/bold] wrote: "The ten year old girl ended up with a bruise, and was very upset." Well that really is just dreadful ha ha. WHAT is wrong with this Godforsaken country?! One piffling little incident and a highly respected pillar of the community has her life in tatters. It's just as well she didn't strike the child or she might have gone to jail for longer than that fellow in Bournemouth who sucker punched and killed that autistic man.[/p][/quote]So if you had a chils and someone grabbed them and bruised them you would be OK with that then? I would do everything I could to ensure that person was punished, most decent caring parents would.[/p][/quote]Personally, i wouldn't be happy at all, *if* my child was grabbed (the only witness who was independent said that it did not happen). However, i'd address that with the person concerned, particularly if i knew that person had given up 50 (yes, 50) years of their life to provide a service to children. Not in a million years would i seek to destroy somebody's life over what is, when you strip away all the hype, a grabbed arm...not a punch, kick or slap. JamesYoung
  • Score: 26

8:56am Sat 1 Mar 14

satisfecho says...

common cence wrote:
February1948 wrote:
That is so very sad, but at least Janet (Echo, please do not refer to her as "Hewitt") knows that the vast majority of people are supportive of her. One child's mother, out of many thousands of parents of those she has taught over the years, has complained and in one fell swoop ruined this poor lady's reputation and confidence and deprived children of a brilliant teacher; she taught my son many years ago and he had been terrified to get in the pool! Hold your head high Janet!
Still a criminal,,,,,,,,,
Have you ever driven 31 in a 30?

If the answer us yes then you are a criminal too.
[quote][p][bold]common cence[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]February1948[/bold] wrote: That is so very sad, but at least Janet (Echo, please do not refer to her as "Hewitt") knows that the vast majority of people are supportive of her. One child's mother, out of many thousands of parents of those she has taught over the years, has complained and in one fell swoop ruined this poor lady's reputation and confidence and deprived children of a brilliant teacher; she taught my son many years ago and he had been terrified to get in the pool! Hold your head high Janet![/p][/quote]Still a criminal,,,,,,,,,[/p][/quote]Have you ever driven 31 in a 30? If the answer us yes then you are a criminal too. satisfecho
  • Score: 6

9:20am Sat 1 Mar 14

poppy5 says...

As the judge said the court quite simply didn't believe her.

A swimming coach with 50 years experience should know better than most that it is no longer acceptable to manhandle a child, especially roughly enough to leave a bruise, in any circumstance.

Time to retire I think.
As the judge said the court quite simply didn't believe her. A swimming coach with 50 years experience should know better than most that it is no longer acceptable to manhandle a child, especially roughly enough to leave a bruise, in any circumstance. Time to retire I think. poppy5
  • Score: 0

9:31am Sat 1 Mar 14

JamesYoung says...

poppy5 wrote:
As the judge said the court quite simply didn't believe her.

A swimming coach with 50 years experience should know better than most that it is no longer acceptable to manhandle a child, especially roughly enough to leave a bruise, in any circumstance.

Time to retire I think.
The court didn't believe the Guildford Four either.
[quote][p][bold]poppy5[/bold] wrote: As the judge said the court quite simply didn't believe her. A swimming coach with 50 years experience should know better than most that it is no longer acceptable to manhandle a child, especially roughly enough to leave a bruise, in any circumstance. Time to retire I think.[/p][/quote]The court didn't believe the Guildford Four either. JamesYoung
  • Score: 9

9:41am Sat 1 Mar 14

dorch2007 says...

Oh my goodness James Young, really? a child was assaulted - regardless of if that was a grab, a punch, a kick or a hit - she physically laid her hands on someone else's child and left a mark!

To the person who has said why didn't the mother speak to Janet Hewitt - she did, she asked her to apologise and in her usual arrogant manner Janet Hewitt refused too (this is in the original article from the original hearing).

Let's not forget that TWICE a court has heard the evidence and found her to be guilty. What was the court trying to establish - did she manhandle the child. the answer (and by Janet's own admission) YES she did.

Interestingly, on the Facebook which was set up in support of Janet after the original conviction, nearly everyone who commented in support of her said that she has an aggressive manner!! Which she does. YES she has achieved results with certain swimmers - but that is because they are naturally talented swimmers and anyone would have got results with them.

I have seen Mrs Hewitt's aggressive poolside manner first hand when she taught my son to swim at first school - the children were petrified of her. I was shocked that she was speaking to 4yr olds in that manner. Being respectful to the children and talking to them nicely also works.
Oh my goodness James Young, really? a child was assaulted - regardless of if that was a grab, a punch, a kick or a hit - she physically laid her hands on someone else's child and left a mark! To the person who has said why didn't the mother speak to Janet Hewitt - she did, she asked her to apologise and in her usual arrogant manner Janet Hewitt refused too (this is in the original article from the original hearing). Let's not forget that TWICE a court has heard the evidence and found her to be guilty. What was the court trying to establish - did she manhandle the child. the answer (and by Janet's own admission) YES she did. Interestingly, on the Facebook which was set up in support of Janet after the original conviction, nearly everyone who commented in support of her said that she has an aggressive manner!! Which she does. YES she has achieved results with certain swimmers - but that is because they are naturally talented swimmers and anyone would have got results with them. I have seen Mrs Hewitt's aggressive poolside manner first hand when she taught my son to swim at first school - the children were petrified of her. I was shocked that she was speaking to 4yr olds in that manner. Being respectful to the children and talking to them nicely also works. dorch2007
  • Score: 7

10:09am Sat 1 Mar 14

Hippyhooker says...

JamesYoung wrote:
Hippyhooker wrote:
wurzelbasher wrote:
"The ten year old girl ended up with a bruise, and was very upset." Well that really is just dreadful ha ha. WHAT is wrong with this Godforsaken country?! One piffling little incident and a highly respected pillar of the community has her life in tatters. It's just as well she didn't strike the child or she might have gone to jail for longer than that fellow in Bournemouth who sucker punched and killed that autistic man.
So if you had a chils and someone grabbed them and bruised them you would be OK with that then? I would do everything I could to ensure that person was punished, most decent caring parents would.
Personally, i wouldn't be happy at all, *if* my child was grabbed (the only witness who was independent said that it did not happen). However, i'd address that with the person concerned, particularly if i knew that person had given up 50 (yes, 50) years of their life to provide a service to children. Not in a million years would i seek to destroy somebody's life over what is, when you strip away all the hype, a grabbed arm...not a punch, kick or slap.
Jimmy Saville gave up 50 years of his life entertaining the British public, do you support his actiona also ?
[quote][p][bold]JamesYoung[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Hippyhooker[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]wurzelbasher[/bold] wrote: "The ten year old girl ended up with a bruise, and was very upset." Well that really is just dreadful ha ha. WHAT is wrong with this Godforsaken country?! One piffling little incident and a highly respected pillar of the community has her life in tatters. It's just as well she didn't strike the child or she might have gone to jail for longer than that fellow in Bournemouth who sucker punched and killed that autistic man.[/p][/quote]So if you had a chils and someone grabbed them and bruised them you would be OK with that then? I would do everything I could to ensure that person was punished, most decent caring parents would.[/p][/quote]Personally, i wouldn't be happy at all, *if* my child was grabbed (the only witness who was independent said that it did not happen). However, i'd address that with the person concerned, particularly if i knew that person had given up 50 (yes, 50) years of their life to provide a service to children. Not in a million years would i seek to destroy somebody's life over what is, when you strip away all the hype, a grabbed arm...not a punch, kick or slap.[/p][/quote]Jimmy Saville gave up 50 years of his life entertaining the British public, do you support his actiona also ? Hippyhooker
  • Score: -4

10:14am Sat 1 Mar 14

Hippyhooker says...

mark@greenhill wrote:
Notice the "nanny state" brigade wanting this woman branded a criminal, are out in force.
Ridiculous case that should never have come to court in my opinion.

The mother of this overprotected little princess should rightly be ashamed at bringing this to anyone's attention in the first place, all she had to do was have a word with Janet Hewitt at the time.

As has been said before, why on earth would anybody in their right mind work with children if this infantile mentality exists amongst the parents?

Al children need boundaries, and at times that means physical restraint.

The people on here calling her a criminal are representative of all that is wrong with our society today.
So you are saying it's ok to go around grabbing OTHER peoples children, and you think other people are what's wrong with our society, yea right! If it was a male that had done what this woman did he would be branded a paedophile and put on a register and NEVER be allowed to work with children again!
[quote][p][bold]mark@greenhill[/bold] wrote: Notice the "nanny state" brigade wanting this woman branded a criminal, are out in force. Ridiculous case that should never have come to court in my opinion. The mother of this overprotected little princess should rightly be ashamed at bringing this to anyone's attention in the first place, all she had to do was have a word with Janet Hewitt at the time. As has been said before, why on earth would anybody in their right mind work with children if this infantile mentality exists amongst the parents? Al children need boundaries, and at times that means physical restraint. The people on here calling her a criminal are representative of all that is wrong with our society today.[/p][/quote]So you are saying it's ok to go around grabbing OTHER peoples children, and you think other people are what's wrong with our society, yea right! If it was a male that had done what this woman did he would be branded a paedophile and put on a register and NEVER be allowed to work with children again! Hippyhooker
  • Score: 3

10:26am Sat 1 Mar 14

3rdAccount says...

OK, maybe Janet does need some advice on how to handle (excuse the pun) children in-line with current laws etc. However, to destroy her career for this just seems wrong (in this case, (after all it was just a firm grab, not a punch or slap).

If you commit a speeding offence for the first time you get the option to go on a course instead of having points on your license - maybe a similar scenario could have been used in this case, offer Janet some training - she can then continue to offer her services and be a huge benefit to society.......
OK, maybe Janet does need some advice on how to handle (excuse the pun) children in-line with current laws etc. However, to destroy her career for this just seems wrong (in this case, (after all it was just a firm grab, not a punch or slap). If you commit a speeding offence for the first time you get the option to go on a course instead of having points on your license - maybe a similar scenario could have been used in this case, offer Janet some training - she can then continue to offer her services and be a huge benefit to society....... 3rdAccount
  • Score: 9

10:48am Sat 1 Mar 14

jamie-c says...

JamesYoung wrote:
jamie-c wrote:
I think the fact it got so far as it has says that something did happen and it wasn't just a case of someone trying to ruin a reputation.... If someone handled my child and left a bruise I would do something about it..... Ok so maybe this was a one off but maybe it has happened before and nothing has been said?

I just don't think they would.of prosecuted without enough evidence being present. It's a shame that one moment can ruin a lifetimes work and reputation but it shouldn't of happened at all.
It went this far because Mrs Hewitt appealed.
If she had not appealed it would not have gone this far.
She appealed because she contends that it did not happen.
Therefore, I would suggest that the reason it has gone this far is more likely to be because it did not happen. And i think you can be pretty clear that this has not happened before - if it had, do you not think that the prosecution would have put parents or children affected up as witnesses? Instead, the defence was swamped with hundreds of character references.
my point was that there must of been enough evidence for it even to get as far as the interview room.

not casting aspertions, was merely saying.

and how do you know its not happened before? i certainly don't, and neither does anyone in reality.

I got pulled by my ear at school by a teacher when in primary school..... did i say anything? no i didn't....... if my parents however saw my ear being pulled, it may of been a different story.
[quote][p][bold]JamesYoung[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]jamie-c[/bold] wrote: I think the fact it got so far as it has says that something did happen and it wasn't just a case of someone trying to ruin a reputation.... If someone handled my child and left a bruise I would do something about it..... Ok so maybe this was a one off but maybe it has happened before and nothing has been said? I just don't think they would.of prosecuted without enough evidence being present. It's a shame that one moment can ruin a lifetimes work and reputation but it shouldn't of happened at all.[/p][/quote]It went this far because Mrs Hewitt appealed. If she had not appealed it would not have gone this far. She appealed because she contends that it did not happen. Therefore, I would suggest that the reason it has gone this far is more likely to be because it did not happen. And i think you can be pretty clear that this has not happened before - if it had, do you not think that the prosecution would have put parents or children affected up as witnesses? Instead, the defence was swamped with hundreds of character references.[/p][/quote]my point was that there must of been enough evidence for it even to get as far as the interview room. not casting aspertions, was merely saying. and how do you know its not happened before? i certainly don't, and neither does anyone in reality. I got pulled by my ear at school by a teacher when in primary school..... did i say anything? no i didn't....... if my parents however saw my ear being pulled, it may of been a different story. jamie-c
  • Score: 12

11:03am Sat 1 Mar 14

Dorsetapple says...

MaidofDorset wrote:
Looking on the bright side had the child had been running on the wet tiles and collided with Janet Hewitt before Mrs Hewitt had time to put her arm out, Janet might have fallen heavily on the ground and incurred a fractured hip or head injury. I would not allow a child of mine to run on wet tiles around a swimming pool. Perhaps parents could advise their children not to charge around a swimming pool, falls can break bones etc. far more painful than a bruise.
If you read the report properly Janet Hewitt said that the child was NOT misbehaving and she NEVER said that the girl was running.
[quote][p][bold]MaidofDorset[/bold] wrote: Looking on the bright side had the child had been running on the wet tiles and collided with Janet Hewitt before Mrs Hewitt had time to put her arm out, Janet might have fallen heavily on the ground and incurred a fractured hip or head injury. I would not allow a child of mine to run on wet tiles around a swimming pool. Perhaps parents could advise their children not to charge around a swimming pool, falls can break bones etc. far more painful than a bruise.[/p][/quote]If you read the report properly Janet Hewitt said that the child was NOT misbehaving and she NEVER said that the girl was running. Dorsetapple
  • Score: 7

11:05am Sat 1 Mar 14

ksmain says...

Hippyhooker wrote:
mark@greenhill wrote:
Notice the "nanny state" brigade wanting this woman branded a criminal, are out in force.
Ridiculous case that should never have come to court in my opinion.

The mother of this overprotected little princess should rightly be ashamed at bringing this to anyone's attention in the first place, all she had to do was have a word with Janet Hewitt at the time.

As has been said before, why on earth would anybody in their right mind work with children if this infantile mentality exists amongst the parents?

Al children need boundaries, and at times that means physical restraint.

The people on here calling her a criminal are representative of all that is wrong with our society today.
So you are saying it's ok to go around grabbing OTHER peoples children, and you think other people are what's wrong with our society, yea right! If it was a male that had done what this woman did he would be branded a paedophile and put on a register and NEVER be allowed to work with children again!
No - I think that most of us on here are saying that parents should use a bit of common sense and deal with the matter with the person concerned on the spot, in a polite and adult manner. There is a bit of a tendency amongst parents these days to adopt a 'knee-jerk' reaction and to take extreme measures to a situation that doesn't demand one. If it was my daughter I would have wanted an audience with the person concerned first and try to resolve it on the spot by making my feelings clear. The resultant injury was NOT SERIOUS and did not appear to require hospital treatment. IMO this did not require the intervention of a Court and all the upset and bad feeling it just required a more common-sense approach.

I have to say that virtually every week I see parents, in public, bellow and shout and manhandle their kids very often as a reaction to their own inadequacy at controlling them. Should we take them to Court as well and waste more judicial time or perhaps a more common-sense approach is to put them on parenting courses to enable them to deal with the parenting situation better.
[quote][p][bold]Hippyhooker[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]mark@greenhill[/bold] wrote: Notice the "nanny state" brigade wanting this woman branded a criminal, are out in force. Ridiculous case that should never have come to court in my opinion. The mother of this overprotected little princess should rightly be ashamed at bringing this to anyone's attention in the first place, all she had to do was have a word with Janet Hewitt at the time. As has been said before, why on earth would anybody in their right mind work with children if this infantile mentality exists amongst the parents? Al children need boundaries, and at times that means physical restraint. The people on here calling her a criminal are representative of all that is wrong with our society today.[/p][/quote]So you are saying it's ok to go around grabbing OTHER peoples children, and you think other people are what's wrong with our society, yea right! If it was a male that had done what this woman did he would be branded a paedophile and put on a register and NEVER be allowed to work with children again![/p][/quote]No - I think that most of us on here are saying that parents should use a bit of common sense and deal with the matter with the person concerned on the spot, in a polite and adult manner. There is a bit of a tendency amongst parents these days to adopt a 'knee-jerk' reaction and to take extreme measures to a situation that doesn't demand one. If it was my daughter I would have wanted an audience with the person concerned first and try to resolve it on the spot by making my feelings clear. The resultant injury was NOT SERIOUS and did not appear to require hospital treatment. IMO this did not require the intervention of a Court and all the upset and bad feeling it just required a more common-sense approach. I have to say that virtually every week I see parents, in public, bellow and shout and manhandle their kids very often as a reaction to their own inadequacy at controlling them. Should we take them to Court as well and waste more judicial time or perhaps a more common-sense approach is to put them on parenting courses to enable them to deal with the parenting situation better. ksmain
  • Score: 11

11:50am Sat 1 Mar 14

Micke12 says...

Don't get me wrong, any assault on a child is serious, but can any of you say that you have not shouted at a child in any way, and how many of you have 'assaulted' your child in the home.

What this woman did was wrong and she has been charged, pleaded and found guilty by a court of law. The Crown Court upheld the conviction, but accepted that this lady has a great antecedent history.

Whether or not she has shouted at or assaulted anyone before is purely speculation and has no place on this forum, as we should only deal with the facts. However, I don't think that in the normal course of events in years gone by, that this would have been entertained in a court of law as this was a first offence. It would and should have been dealt with by way of either a caution or a conditional caution under today's legislation. Bringing this case to court in the first place was just the CPS posturing to the peoples complaints on how soft the CPS are in normally bringing prosecutions. As it stands now, this woman's volunteering assistance has been tarnished by something that could have been dealt with outside of court, thereby saving court time and legal fees.

I have no sympathy for anyone who breaks the law, but the CPS should balance the system of public interest alongside common sense. The use of a caution would have been much better use of the legal process.

As someone said earlier, hands up anyone who has not broken the law in some way or another.

We have a duty to protect our children, that is an inarguable fact, but this must be done with common sense and logical use of the legal system, not based on political expediency or the CPS making up the numbers to justify their existence.
Don't get me wrong, any assault on a child is serious, but can any of you say that you have not shouted at a child in any way, and how many of you have 'assaulted' your child in the home. What this woman did was wrong and she has been charged, pleaded and found guilty by a court of law. The Crown Court upheld the conviction, but accepted that this lady has a great antecedent history. Whether or not she has shouted at or assaulted anyone before is purely speculation and has no place on this forum, as we should only deal with the facts. However, I don't think that in the normal course of events in years gone by, that this would have been entertained in a court of law as this was a first offence. It would and should have been dealt with by way of either a caution or a conditional caution under today's legislation. Bringing this case to court in the first place was just the CPS posturing to the peoples complaints on how soft the CPS are in normally bringing prosecutions. As it stands now, this woman's volunteering assistance has been tarnished by something that could have been dealt with outside of court, thereby saving court time and legal fees. I have no sympathy for anyone who breaks the law, but the CPS should balance the system of public interest alongside common sense. The use of a caution would have been much better use of the legal process. As someone said earlier, hands up anyone who has not broken the law in some way or another. We have a duty to protect our children, that is an inarguable fact, but this must be done with common sense and logical use of the legal system, not based on political expediency or the CPS making up the numbers to justify their existence. Micke12
  • Score: 8

12:29pm Sat 1 Mar 14

The man with the badge says...

toyota777 wrote:
It's time our judges dropped the wigs and dresses asnd grew a pair and got out into the real world instead of mamby-pambying stupid kids who can't behave themselves, SACK THE JUDGE not the innocent instructor.
She's not innocent. Found guilty at Magistrates court and appeal dismissed.
[quote][p][bold]toyota777[/bold] wrote: It's time our judges dropped the wigs and dresses asnd grew a pair and got out into the real world instead of mamby-pambying stupid kids who can't behave themselves, SACK THE JUDGE not the innocent instructor.[/p][/quote]She's not innocent. Found guilty at Magistrates court and appeal dismissed. The man with the badge
  • Score: 5

12:51pm Sat 1 Mar 14

peskykat says...

I only know about this story that has been written in the paper but i
personally fail to understand why any person would want to volunteer to
work with children whether it is in a sports club, after school club or any other such club because gone are the days when the local bobbie could clip a youngster around the ear for example stealing apples off a neighbours tree, ringing a neighbours doorbell and running away - often happen back in the 60's, 70's, or when a teacher would tap a ruler on a childs hand because
that child wasn't paying attention, etc, now that child can going running to mummy and daddy and tell them for an (example) teacher has told them off ,then parent goes all nasty and has a go a for that (example) teacher
. I often worry about what the next generation is going to turn out like judging by the amount of parents that often use bad language, etc at their child.
I only know about this story that has been written in the paper but i personally fail to understand why any person would want to volunteer to work with children whether it is in a sports club, after school club or any other such club because gone are the days when the local bobbie could clip a youngster around the ear for example stealing apples off a neighbours tree, ringing a neighbours doorbell and running away - often happen back in the 60's, 70's, or when a teacher would tap a ruler on a childs hand because that child wasn't paying attention, etc, now that child can going running to mummy and daddy and tell them for an (example) teacher has told them off ,then parent goes all nasty and has a go a for that (example) teacher . I often worry about what the next generation is going to turn out like judging by the amount of parents that often use bad language, etc at their child. peskykat
  • Score: 11

2:06pm Sat 1 Mar 14

JamesYoung says...

Hippyhooker wrote:
JamesYoung wrote:
Hippyhooker wrote:
wurzelbasher wrote:
"The ten year old girl ended up with a bruise, and was very upset." Well that really is just dreadful ha ha. WHAT is wrong with this Godforsaken country?! One piffling little incident and a highly respected pillar of the community has her life in tatters. It's just as well she didn't strike the child or she might have gone to jail for longer than that fellow in Bournemouth who sucker punched and killed that autistic man.
So if you had a chils and someone grabbed them and bruised them you would be OK with that then? I would do everything I could to ensure that person was punished, most decent caring parents would.
Personally, i wouldn't be happy at all, *if* my child was grabbed (the only witness who was independent said that it did not happen). However, i'd address that with the person concerned, particularly if i knew that person had given up 50 (yes, 50) years of their life to provide a service to children. Not in a million years would i seek to destroy somebody's life over what is, when you strip away all the hype, a grabbed arm...not a punch, kick or slap.
Jimmy Saville gave up 50 years of his life entertaining the British public, do you support his actiona also ?
Top marks for possibly the most ridiculous and irrelevant comment. Nobody in this case would have come to any harm at all, had it not been for an overprotective mother thinking, at best, "she won't apologise, so i'll destroy her career" and at worst "i'll lie, and destroy her career".
I went to private school. Caning was a common occurrence. To my knowledge, every one of my class mates is an upstanding citizen and nobody came to any harm. You have only to look at the hordes of feral kids crawling around Littlemoor, Portland, Westham and large swathes of London to realise the abject failure of the current child rearing philosophies.
[quote][p][bold]Hippyhooker[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]JamesYoung[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Hippyhooker[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]wurzelbasher[/bold] wrote: "The ten year old girl ended up with a bruise, and was very upset." Well that really is just dreadful ha ha. WHAT is wrong with this Godforsaken country?! One piffling little incident and a highly respected pillar of the community has her life in tatters. It's just as well she didn't strike the child or she might have gone to jail for longer than that fellow in Bournemouth who sucker punched and killed that autistic man.[/p][/quote]So if you had a chils and someone grabbed them and bruised them you would be OK with that then? I would do everything I could to ensure that person was punished, most decent caring parents would.[/p][/quote]Personally, i wouldn't be happy at all, *if* my child was grabbed (the only witness who was independent said that it did not happen). However, i'd address that with the person concerned, particularly if i knew that person had given up 50 (yes, 50) years of their life to provide a service to children. Not in a million years would i seek to destroy somebody's life over what is, when you strip away all the hype, a grabbed arm...not a punch, kick or slap.[/p][/quote]Jimmy Saville gave up 50 years of his life entertaining the British public, do you support his actiona also ?[/p][/quote]Top marks for possibly the most ridiculous and irrelevant comment. Nobody in this case would have come to any harm at all, had it not been for an overprotective mother thinking, at best, "she won't apologise, so i'll destroy her career" and at worst "i'll lie, and destroy her career". I went to private school. Caning was a common occurrence. To my knowledge, every one of my class mates is an upstanding citizen and nobody came to any harm. You have only to look at the hordes of feral kids crawling around Littlemoor, Portland, Westham and large swathes of London to realise the abject failure of the current child rearing philosophies. JamesYoung
  • Score: 7

2:12pm Sat 1 Mar 14

JamesYoung says...

dorch2007 wrote:
Oh my goodness James Young, really? a child was assaulted - regardless of if that was a grab, a punch, a kick or a hit - she physically laid her hands on someone else's child and left a mark!

To the person who has said why didn't the mother speak to Janet Hewitt - she did, she asked her to apologise and in her usual arrogant manner Janet Hewitt refused too (this is in the original article from the original hearing).

Let's not forget that TWICE a court has heard the evidence and found her to be guilty. What was the court trying to establish - did she manhandle the child. the answer (and by Janet's own admission) YES she did.

Interestingly, on the Facebook which was set up in support of Janet after the original conviction, nearly everyone who commented in support of her said that she has an aggressive manner!! Which she does. YES she has achieved results with certain swimmers - but that is because they are naturally talented swimmers and anyone would have got results with them.

I have seen Mrs Hewitt's aggressive poolside manner first hand when she taught my son to swim at first school - the children were petrified of her. I was shocked that she was speaking to 4yr olds in that manner. Being respectful to the children and talking to them nicely also works.
It is an "assault" because a minority group in this country made it so. Most people are of the view that children need discipline and strong role models. Janet is a strong role model. Everybody that knows her knows that she is a rough diamond, but there are a thousand people out there who think she is wonderful, as evidence by the Facebook group that you referred to.
What you seem to be saying, though, is that the parent concerned thought "she won't apologise, i hold all the cards, i'll report her to the police, get her convicted and destroy her career". And let's not forget that the only independent witness (as in, not related to, or best friends with, the child or mother concerned) was emphatic that this event never happened. The mother concerned is quite the role model isn't she? You seem to know her, so you'll probably be aware that she is not tremendously respected by those who know her, because of her bullying manner. Ironically, she'll probably be the first to complain when all of the people who give up their valuable time to teach her children valuable life skills, decide that the risks in this litigious culture are too great, and pack it all in.
[quote][p][bold]dorch2007[/bold] wrote: Oh my goodness James Young, really? a child was assaulted - regardless of if that was a grab, a punch, a kick or a hit - she physically laid her hands on someone else's child and left a mark! To the person who has said why didn't the mother speak to Janet Hewitt - she did, she asked her to apologise and in her usual arrogant manner Janet Hewitt refused too (this is in the original article from the original hearing). Let's not forget that TWICE a court has heard the evidence and found her to be guilty. What was the court trying to establish - did she manhandle the child. the answer (and by Janet's own admission) YES she did. Interestingly, on the Facebook which was set up in support of Janet after the original conviction, nearly everyone who commented in support of her said that she has an aggressive manner!! Which she does. YES she has achieved results with certain swimmers - but that is because they are naturally talented swimmers and anyone would have got results with them. I have seen Mrs Hewitt's aggressive poolside manner first hand when she taught my son to swim at first school - the children were petrified of her. I was shocked that she was speaking to 4yr olds in that manner. Being respectful to the children and talking to them nicely also works.[/p][/quote]It is an "assault" because a minority group in this country made it so. Most people are of the view that children need discipline and strong role models. Janet is a strong role model. Everybody that knows her knows that she is a rough diamond, but there are a thousand people out there who think she is wonderful, as evidence by the Facebook group that you referred to. What you seem to be saying, though, is that the parent concerned thought "she won't apologise, i hold all the cards, i'll report her to the police, get her convicted and destroy her career". And let's not forget that the only independent witness (as in, not related to, or best friends with, the child or mother concerned) was emphatic that this event never happened. The mother concerned is quite the role model isn't she? You seem to know her, so you'll probably be aware that she is not tremendously respected by those who know her, because of her bullying manner. Ironically, she'll probably be the first to complain when all of the people who give up their valuable time to teach her children valuable life skills, decide that the risks in this litigious culture are too great, and pack it all in. JamesYoung
  • Score: 10

2:25pm Sat 1 Mar 14

JamesYoung says...

The man with the badge wrote:
toyota777 wrote:
It's time our judges dropped the wigs and dresses asnd grew a pair and got out into the real world instead of mamby-pambying stupid kids who can't behave themselves, SACK THE JUDGE not the innocent instructor.
She's not innocent. Found guilty at Magistrates court and appeal dismissed.
On that basis:
Stephen Downing - guilty (served 27 years after appeal failed, conviction overturned in 2002)
Andrew Evans - served 25 years for murder of a 14 year old. Conviction overturned in 1997.
Birmingham Six - served 16 years, after appeal, for a bombing attack that they did not commit
Judith Ward - served 18 years, released in 1992, for an IRA bombing that she was not involved with.
Guildford six - served 15 years after failed appeal. Innocent.
Maguire Seven - served similar period. Innocent.
Stefan Kiszko - 16 years, released 1992, died a year later. In 2007, the real murderer was found.
John Boyle - served 12 years. Innocent.
Paul Blackburn - served 25 years. Conviction overturned in 2005.
Bridgewater Four - 1 died in jail, 3 released after 18 years. Convcitions overturned.
Peter Fell - 17 years. Innocent and released in 2001
Sean Hodgson - 27 years for murder. Innocent, released in 2009 only after DNA evidence proved he wasn't there.
Cardiff Newsagent Three - served 11 years before being released and paid 6 figure compensation
Sally Clark - jailed for murdering her kids in 1996, released in 2003. Expert evidence turned out to be lies and the expert concerned was eventually found guilty of professional misconduct
Donna Anthony - 7 years for murdering her child. Innocent.
Barry George - didn't kill Jill Dando
David Carrington-Jones - 7 years for rape of his step daughters. Released in 2007 after one step daughter admitted they'd made the whole thing up, and it came to light that they'd made allegations against others but the jury was not told.
I could go on and on and on, but your belief in justice is admirable, given that everybody lies in court, even the police on occasion, and in the absence of hard DNA evidence, truth is discerned depending on who is the best liar. And as i say, there was only one truly independent witness in this trial.....
[quote][p][bold]The man with the badge[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]toyota777[/bold] wrote: It's time our judges dropped the wigs and dresses asnd grew a pair and got out into the real world instead of mamby-pambying stupid kids who can't behave themselves, SACK THE JUDGE not the innocent instructor.[/p][/quote]She's not innocent. Found guilty at Magistrates court and appeal dismissed.[/p][/quote]On that basis: Stephen Downing - guilty (served 27 years after appeal failed, conviction overturned in 2002) Andrew Evans - served 25 years for murder of a 14 year old. Conviction overturned in 1997. Birmingham Six - served 16 years, after appeal, for a bombing attack that they did not commit Judith Ward - served 18 years, released in 1992, for an IRA bombing that she was not involved with. Guildford six - served 15 years after failed appeal. Innocent. Maguire Seven - served similar period. Innocent. Stefan Kiszko - 16 years, released 1992, died a year later. In 2007, the real murderer was found. John Boyle - served 12 years. Innocent. Paul Blackburn - served 25 years. Conviction overturned in 2005. Bridgewater Four - 1 died in jail, 3 released after 18 years. Convcitions overturned. Peter Fell - 17 years. Innocent and released in 2001 Sean Hodgson - 27 years for murder. Innocent, released in 2009 only after DNA evidence proved he wasn't there. Cardiff Newsagent Three - served 11 years before being released and paid 6 figure compensation Sally Clark - jailed for murdering her kids in 1996, released in 2003. Expert evidence turned out to be lies and the expert concerned was eventually found guilty of professional misconduct Donna Anthony - 7 years for murdering her child. Innocent. Barry George - didn't kill Jill Dando David Carrington-Jones - 7 years for rape of his step daughters. Released in 2007 after one step daughter admitted they'd made the whole thing up, and it came to light that they'd made allegations against others but the jury was not told. I could go on and on and on, but your belief in justice is admirable, given that everybody lies in court, even the police on occasion, and in the absence of hard DNA evidence, truth is discerned depending on who is the best liar. And as i say, there was only one truly independent witness in this trial..... JamesYoung
  • Score: 14

3:24pm Sat 1 Mar 14

skye2491 says...

Don't know Janet but I wish her all the best for the future its coming to the stage there won't be any volunteers to work people are always looking to pick fault in wat you do and wat you say you can not correct children as parent's don't like there little angles being told off.I work around children so I know how rude some can be I'm not saying all children
Don't know Janet but I wish her all the best for the future its coming to the stage there won't be any volunteers to work people are always looking to pick fault in wat you do and wat you say you can not correct children as parent's don't like there little angles being told off.I work around children so I know how rude some can be I'm not saying all children skye2491
  • Score: 9

4:28pm Sat 1 Mar 14

andywhitt says...

Mr Young you are at it again wild accusations and gross distortion of the facts - you seem not to know what independent means, the witness of which you speak is well known to Janet as she stated in the court so cannot be independent.The only independent people involved have been the 5 magistrates and one senior crown court judge who simply disbelieved Janets versions of events, and I use the word versions on purpose as she changed them from witness statement to court appearances and at times within the same court appearance.
last time this occurred you ignored the restrictions around the case this time you can now add libel to your list of offences.I do know all the people involved in the case and the mother is exceptionally well respected by those who know her. She is one of the most fair minded, grounded and caring persons I know, her child is also one of the best behaved and well mannered children I have had the pleasure to help coach (not in a swimming club to clarify). this is not a princess who is molly coddled - far from it and as Janet stated in court herself was neither running nor misbehaving in any way whatsoever, unless of course you believe Janet is lying about that in her testimony. The mother does a massive amount of volunteering with children - I very much doubt you do.The only person in this case who is a bully is Janet (and her supporters who have added many disgracefully insulting comments on these pages, and who behaved poorly in court. As for your line that everyone lies in court are you for real? Are you really that stupid or just plain ignorant? You might have advised Janet and her witness to lie but I can assure you the four witnesses for the prosecution told the truth of what they observed. You are obviously a plainly unpleasant and nasty individual who sees nothing wrong in hurting and scaring a small child then abusing her and her mother online - is there not a word for that?. I wonder when the police will come knocking on your door to ask you to explain yourself and the statements you make.
And finally this whole sad affair could have been prevented had Janet simply apologised for hurting the child something she refused to do on several occasions. She and only she is responsible for this going to court and having this very unfortunate stain on her character.
Mr Young you are at it again wild accusations and gross distortion of the facts - you seem not to know what independent means, the witness of which you speak is well known to Janet as she stated in the court so cannot be independent.The only independent people involved have been the 5 magistrates and one senior crown court judge who simply disbelieved Janets versions of events, and I use the word versions on purpose as she changed them from witness statement to court appearances and at times within the same court appearance. last time this occurred you ignored the restrictions around the case this time you can now add libel to your list of offences.I do know all the people involved in the case and the mother is exceptionally well respected by those who know her. She is one of the most fair minded, grounded and caring persons I know, her child is also one of the best behaved and well mannered children I have had the pleasure to help coach (not in a swimming club to clarify). this is not a princess who is molly coddled - far from it and as Janet stated in court herself was neither running nor misbehaving in any way whatsoever, unless of course you believe Janet is lying about that in her testimony. The mother does a massive amount of volunteering with children - I very much doubt you do.The only person in this case who is a bully is Janet (and her supporters who have added many disgracefully insulting comments on these pages, and who behaved poorly in court. As for your line that everyone lies in court are you for real? Are you really that stupid or just plain ignorant? You might have advised Janet and her witness to lie but I can assure you the four witnesses for the prosecution told the truth of what they observed. You are obviously a plainly unpleasant and nasty individual who sees nothing wrong in hurting and scaring a small child then abusing her and her mother online - is there not a word for that?. I wonder when the police will come knocking on your door to ask you to explain yourself and the statements you make. And finally this whole sad affair could have been prevented had Janet simply apologised for hurting the child something she refused to do on several occasions. She and only she is responsible for this going to court and having this very unfortunate stain on her character. andywhitt
  • Score: 17

5:18pm Sat 1 Mar 14

ksmain says...

Interpreting the like votes on here and the general comments the majority consensus of opinion here appears to be that the matter should have been better handled without going to Court, that the incident appears to be way out of proportion to the way it was dealt with, and taking it to Court was a waste of time creating bad feeling and achieving nothing for either side.

Give what I have said above it does at least restore my faith a little in that most parents still appear not to want to resort to a 'knee jerk' reaction to a really minor incident. It is just a shame that there appears to be a minority that still want to overreact - I just hope that when their kids grow up and become parents there are still people around wanting to volunteer to run things and teach their kids that may not be put off by this kind of incident.
Interpreting the like votes on here and the general comments the majority consensus of opinion here appears to be that the matter should have been better handled without going to Court, that the incident appears to be way out of proportion to the way it was dealt with, and taking it to Court was a waste of time creating bad feeling and achieving nothing for either side. Give what I have said above it does at least restore my faith a little in that most parents still appear not to want to resort to a 'knee jerk' reaction to a really minor incident. It is just a shame that there appears to be a minority that still want to overreact - I just hope that when their kids grow up and become parents there are still people around wanting to volunteer to run things and teach their kids that may not be put off by this kind of incident. ksmain
  • Score: 5

5:48pm Sat 1 Mar 14

marabout says...

skye2491 wrote:
Don't know Janet but I wish her all the best for the future its coming to the stage there won't be any volunteers to work people are always looking to pick fault in wat you do and wat you say you can not correct children as parent's don't like there little angles being told off.I work around children so I know how rude some can be I'm not saying all children
Fella,

Would you like to borrow some punctuation?

Here, have some commas,,,,,,

And here a few full stops…………

If you add them to your comment then it would make sense.
[quote][p][bold]skye2491[/bold] wrote: Don't know Janet but I wish her all the best for the future its coming to the stage there won't be any volunteers to work people are always looking to pick fault in wat you do and wat you say you can not correct children as parent's don't like there little angles being told off.I work around children so I know how rude some can be I'm not saying all children[/p][/quote]Fella, Would you like to borrow some punctuation? Here, have some commas,,,,,, And here a few full stops………… If you add them to your comment then it would make sense. marabout
  • Score: -3

6:06pm Sat 1 Mar 14

That is enough says...

I think people ON BOTH SIDES should stop commenting. You are accusing each other of lying in court, accusing supporters of poor behaviour, name calling, there are some instances of defamation of character and a couple of you are coming dangerously close to identifying underage 'victims' and witnesses. It is helping no one, on either side.
Two Echo reporters sat in court with just one seat between them. They watched the same proceedings and even they have written from two different angles in this paper and the Bournemouth version.
This incident took place over ten months ago. It should have been long forgotten. I think most people will agree it should never have come this far, although we will never agree on the reasons it did. Let it rest now and let those involved get on with their lives. Janet, I hope you get back to poolside very soon and to the kids on the other side, I hope you can forget it and move on too.
If you MUST carry on commenting, please remember there are family members on both sides INCLUDING CHILDREN who will be very upset at this, many of whom had nothing to do with it, but are seeing their family members repeatedly publicly slated. Consider the effects on them, especially the kids when other kids in the school playground decide to air their views with them on Monday.
Opinions on both sides are strong, people on both sides are angry and upset. We will never agree, so please let's all at least agree to let it go and move on now.
I think people ON BOTH SIDES should stop commenting. You are accusing each other of lying in court, accusing supporters of poor behaviour, name calling, there are some instances of defamation of character and a couple of you are coming dangerously close to identifying underage 'victims' and witnesses. It is helping no one, on either side. Two Echo reporters sat in court with just one seat between them. They watched the same proceedings and even they have written from two different angles in this paper and the Bournemouth version. This incident took place over ten months ago. It should have been long forgotten. I think most people will agree it should never have come this far, although we will never agree on the reasons it did. Let it rest now and let those involved get on with their lives. Janet, I hope you get back to poolside very soon and to the kids on the other side, I hope you can forget it and move on too. If you MUST carry on commenting, please remember there are family members on both sides INCLUDING CHILDREN who will be very upset at this, many of whom had nothing to do with it, but are seeing their family members repeatedly publicly slated. Consider the effects on them, especially the kids when other kids in the school playground decide to air their views with them on Monday. Opinions on both sides are strong, people on both sides are angry and upset. We will never agree, so please let's all at least agree to let it go and move on now. That is enough
  • Score: 8

7:24pm Sat 1 Mar 14

osmington4 says...

This incident has clearly been blown up out of all proportion.......som
eone is lying and at the end of the day they know who they are. Let them live with their conscience.
This incident has clearly been blown up out of all proportion.......som eone is lying and at the end of the day they know who they are. Let them live with their conscience. osmington4
  • Score: 5

7:29pm Sat 1 Mar 14

mark@greenhill says...

Hippyhooker wrote:
mark@greenhill wrote:
Notice the "nanny state" brigade wanting this woman branded a criminal, are out in force.
Ridiculous case that should never have come to court in my opinion.

The mother of this overprotected little princess should rightly be ashamed at bringing this to anyone's attention in the first place, all she had to do was have a word with Janet Hewitt at the time.

As has been said before, why on earth would anybody in their right mind work with children if this infantile mentality exists amongst the parents?

Al children need boundaries, and at times that means physical restraint.

The people on here calling her a criminal are representative of all that is wrong with our society today.
So you are saying it's ok to go around grabbing OTHER peoples children, and you think other people are what's wrong with our society, yea right! If it was a male that had done what this woman did he would be branded a paedophile and put on a register and NEVER be allowed to work with children again!
On the other side, you seem to think it's fine to ruin a perfectly good reputation of someone who has given many years of good service to helping children, simply on one neurotic mothers say so?

Simply put, this was a non case that should never had gone to court.

The woman who made this ridiculous accusation should be named and made to pay for the cost of the trial.
[quote][p][bold]Hippyhooker[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]mark@greenhill[/bold] wrote: Notice the "nanny state" brigade wanting this woman branded a criminal, are out in force. Ridiculous case that should never have come to court in my opinion. The mother of this overprotected little princess should rightly be ashamed at bringing this to anyone's attention in the first place, all she had to do was have a word with Janet Hewitt at the time. As has been said before, why on earth would anybody in their right mind work with children if this infantile mentality exists amongst the parents? Al children need boundaries, and at times that means physical restraint. The people on here calling her a criminal are representative of all that is wrong with our society today.[/p][/quote]So you are saying it's ok to go around grabbing OTHER peoples children, and you think other people are what's wrong with our society, yea right! If it was a male that had done what this woman did he would be branded a paedophile and put on a register and NEVER be allowed to work with children again![/p][/quote]On the other side, you seem to think it's fine to ruin a perfectly good reputation of someone who has given many years of good service to helping children, simply on one neurotic mothers say so? Simply put, this was a non case that should never had gone to court. The woman who made this ridiculous accusation should be named and made to pay for the cost of the trial. mark@greenhill
  • Score: -4

8:28pm Sat 1 Mar 14

biker babe says...

mark@greenhill wrote:
Notice the "nanny state" brigade wanting this woman branded a criminal, are out in force.
Ridiculous case that should never have come to court in my opinion.

The mother of this overprotected little princess should rightly be ashamed at bringing this to anyone's attention in the first place, all she had to do was have a word with Janet Hewitt at the time.

As has been said before, why on earth would anybody in their right mind work with children if this infantile mentality exists amongst the parents?

Al children need boundaries, and at times that means physical restraint.

The people on here calling her a criminal are representative of all that is wrong with our society today.
Well said!
[quote][p][bold]mark@greenhill[/bold] wrote: Notice the "nanny state" brigade wanting this woman branded a criminal, are out in force. Ridiculous case that should never have come to court in my opinion. The mother of this overprotected little princess should rightly be ashamed at bringing this to anyone's attention in the first place, all she had to do was have a word with Janet Hewitt at the time. As has been said before, why on earth would anybody in their right mind work with children if this infantile mentality exists amongst the parents? Al children need boundaries, and at times that means physical restraint. The people on here calling her a criminal are representative of all that is wrong with our society today.[/p][/quote]Well said! biker babe
  • Score: 2

8:28pm Sat 1 Mar 14

biker babe says...

mark@greenhill wrote:
Notice the "nanny state" brigade wanting this woman branded a criminal, are out in force.
Ridiculous case that should never have come to court in my opinion.

The mother of this overprotected little princess should rightly be ashamed at bringing this to anyone's attention in the first place, all she had to do was have a word with Janet Hewitt at the time.

As has been said before, why on earth would anybody in their right mind work with children if this infantile mentality exists amongst the parents?

Al children need boundaries, and at times that means physical restraint.

The people on here calling her a criminal are representative of all that is wrong with our society today.
Well said!
[quote][p][bold]mark@greenhill[/bold] wrote: Notice the "nanny state" brigade wanting this woman branded a criminal, are out in force. Ridiculous case that should never have come to court in my opinion. The mother of this overprotected little princess should rightly be ashamed at bringing this to anyone's attention in the first place, all she had to do was have a word with Janet Hewitt at the time. As has been said before, why on earth would anybody in their right mind work with children if this infantile mentality exists amongst the parents? Al children need boundaries, and at times that means physical restraint. The people on here calling her a criminal are representative of all that is wrong with our society today.[/p][/quote]Well said! biker babe
  • Score: 0

8:31pm Sat 1 Mar 14

wurzelbasher says...

Hippyhooker wrote:
wurzelbasher wrote:
"The ten year old girl ended up with a bruise, and was very upset." Well that really is just dreadful ha ha. WHAT is wrong with this Godforsaken country?! One piffling little incident and a highly respected pillar of the community has her life in tatters. It's just as well she didn't strike the child or she might have gone to jail for longer than that fellow in Bournemouth who sucker punched and killed that autistic man.
So if you had a chils and someone grabbed them and bruised them you would be OK with that then? I would do everything I could to ensure that person was punished, most decent caring parents would.
Nonsense; all that was required was an apology and that would have been the end of it!
[quote][p][bold]Hippyhooker[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]wurzelbasher[/bold] wrote: "The ten year old girl ended up with a bruise, and was very upset." Well that really is just dreadful ha ha. WHAT is wrong with this Godforsaken country?! One piffling little incident and a highly respected pillar of the community has her life in tatters. It's just as well she didn't strike the child or she might have gone to jail for longer than that fellow in Bournemouth who sucker punched and killed that autistic man.[/p][/quote]So if you had a chils and someone grabbed them and bruised them you would be OK with that then? I would do everything I could to ensure that person was punished, most decent caring parents would.[/p][/quote]Nonsense; all that was required was an apology and that would have been the end of it! wurzelbasher
  • Score: 2

9:05pm Sat 1 Mar 14

oldbrock says...

common cence wrote:
wurzelbasher wrote:
"The ten year old girl ended up with a bruise, and was very upset." Well that really is just dreadful ha ha. WHAT is wrong with this Godforsaken country?! One piffling little incident and a highly respected pillar of the community has her life in tatters. It's just as well she didn't strike the child or she might have gone to jail for longer than that fellow in Bournemouth who sucker punched and killed that autistic man.
She lost her temper , she was NASTY to a child she has been punished her fault no one else,,,,,,,,,,,,,
and by the same virtue, SOME children are nasty and uncontrollable due to indulgence of "parental control"? have you never been in a supermarket and seen the performances of some children and the corresponding lack of interest of the "parent" its all TOO easy to create a life but a real vocation to be a parent
[quote][p][bold]common cence[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]wurzelbasher[/bold] wrote: "The ten year old girl ended up with a bruise, and was very upset." Well that really is just dreadful ha ha. WHAT is wrong with this Godforsaken country?! One piffling little incident and a highly respected pillar of the community has her life in tatters. It's just as well she didn't strike the child or she might have gone to jail for longer than that fellow in Bournemouth who sucker punched and killed that autistic man.[/p][/quote]She lost her temper , she was NASTY to a child she has been punished her fault no one else,,,,,,,,,,,,,[/p][/quote]and by the same virtue, SOME children are nasty and uncontrollable due to indulgence of "parental control"? have you never been in a supermarket and seen the performances of some children and the corresponding lack of interest of the "parent" its all TOO easy to create a life but a real vocation to be a parent oldbrock
  • Score: 6

9:11pm Sat 1 Mar 14

osmington4 says...

For goodness sake, this whole case has been completely blown up out of proportion....it`s completely ridiculous that it even made it to the courts. If I was the mother in question, of course I would protect my child, but was there really any need to take it to the enth degree?
Surely a quiet word with Janet Hewett would have surficed instead of a whole full blown court case that will probably do more damage in the long run to the child in questions` mental well being. You can just imagine it can`t you......years of bed wetting and nightmares to come all triggered by Mummys over protectiveness instead of weighing the future up....she`s a very silly woman and has done her poor kid no favours whatsoever.
For goodness sake, this whole case has been completely blown up out of proportion....it`s completely ridiculous that it even made it to the courts. If I was the mother in question, of course I would protect my child, but was there really any need to take it to the enth degree? Surely a quiet word with Janet Hewett would have surficed instead of a whole full blown court case that will probably do more damage in the long run to the child in questions` mental well being. You can just imagine it can`t you......years of bed wetting and nightmares to come all triggered by Mummys over protectiveness instead of weighing the future up....she`s a very silly woman and has done her poor kid no favours whatsoever. osmington4
  • Score: 5

9:43pm Sat 1 Mar 14

siratb says...

Waste of time and money. Sometimes adults in charge of kids have to exercise their authority, be it by pulling, pushing, shouting, whatever. The trouble is kids don't like it these days as they have been brought up in a nanny state where they can do whatever they want. As such when someone does do it, they go running and crying to their mum to plead child abuse.

The worst bit is the CPS allow these incidents to come to court. I wonder how many 40+'s were slippered by the PE teacher for messing around in class? And I wonder how many of them turned out alright with zero mental anguish? And I wonder if you compare behavior in class today with back then, how different it is?

Get over it. If you don't want to send your child to a particular class because you feel the teacher is too tough, then fine, withdraw them. But don't go kicking and screaming to the police about something which is a non issue, but that will cost the tax payer a bundle.

I still reckon that there will be lawyers on the back of this advising that there is now a case for civil damages for "mental anguish" or some other carp. Lets see if the family pursue that avenue as this will tell the real tale.
Waste of time and money. Sometimes adults in charge of kids have to exercise their authority, be it by pulling, pushing, shouting, whatever. The trouble is kids don't like it these days as they have been brought up in a nanny state where they can do whatever they want. As such when someone does do it, they go running and crying to their mum to plead child abuse. The worst bit is the CPS allow these incidents to come to court. I wonder how many 40+'s were slippered by the PE teacher for messing around in class? And I wonder how many of them turned out alright with zero mental anguish? And I wonder if you compare behavior in class today with back then, how different it is? Get over it. If you don't want to send your child to a particular class because you feel the teacher is too tough, then fine, withdraw them. But don't go kicking and screaming to the police about something which is a non issue, but that will cost the tax payer a bundle. I still reckon that there will be lawyers on the back of this advising that there is now a case for civil damages for "mental anguish" or some other carp. Lets see if the family pursue that avenue as this will tell the real tale. siratb
  • Score: 5

9:58pm Sat 1 Mar 14

osmington4 says...

siratb wrote:
Waste of time and money. Sometimes adults in charge of kids have to exercise their authority, be it by pulling, pushing, shouting, whatever. The trouble is kids don't like it these days as they have been brought up in a nanny state where they can do whatever they want. As such when someone does do it, they go running and crying to their mum to plead child abuse.

The worst bit is the CPS allow these incidents to come to court. I wonder how many 40+'s were slippered by the PE teacher for messing around in class? And I wonder how many of them turned out alright with zero mental anguish? And I wonder if you compare behavior in class today with back then, how different it is?

Get over it. If you don't want to send your child to a particular class because you feel the teacher is too tough, then fine, withdraw them. But don't go kicking and screaming to the police about something which is a non issue, but that will cost the tax payer a bundle.

I still reckon that there will be lawyers on the back of this advising that there is now a case for civil damages for "mental anguish" or some other carp. Lets see if the family pursue that avenue as this will tell the real tale.
I completely agree with everything you say. What a great post and well said.
[quote][p][bold]siratb[/bold] wrote: Waste of time and money. Sometimes adults in charge of kids have to exercise their authority, be it by pulling, pushing, shouting, whatever. The trouble is kids don't like it these days as they have been brought up in a nanny state where they can do whatever they want. As such when someone does do it, they go running and crying to their mum to plead child abuse. The worst bit is the CPS allow these incidents to come to court. I wonder how many 40+'s were slippered by the PE teacher for messing around in class? And I wonder how many of them turned out alright with zero mental anguish? And I wonder if you compare behavior in class today with back then, how different it is? Get over it. If you don't want to send your child to a particular class because you feel the teacher is too tough, then fine, withdraw them. But don't go kicking and screaming to the police about something which is a non issue, but that will cost the tax payer a bundle. I still reckon that there will be lawyers on the back of this advising that there is now a case for civil damages for "mental anguish" or some other carp. Lets see if the family pursue that avenue as this will tell the real tale.[/p][/quote]I completely agree with everything you say. What a great post and well said. osmington4
  • Score: 10

12:08am Sun 2 Mar 14

JamesYoung says...

andywhitt wrote:
Mr Young you are at it again wild accusations and gross distortion of the facts - you seem not to know what independent means, the witness of which you speak is well known to Janet as she stated in the court so cannot be independent.The only independent people involved have been the 5 magistrates and one senior crown court judge who simply disbelieved Janets versions of events, and I use the word versions on purpose as she changed them from witness statement to court appearances and at times within the same court appearance.
last time this occurred you ignored the restrictions around the case this time you can now add libel to your list of offences.I do know all the people involved in the case and the mother is exceptionally well respected by those who know her. She is one of the most fair minded, grounded and caring persons I know, her child is also one of the best behaved and well mannered children I have had the pleasure to help coach (not in a swimming club to clarify). this is not a princess who is molly coddled - far from it and as Janet stated in court herself was neither running nor misbehaving in any way whatsoever, unless of course you believe Janet is lying about that in her testimony. The mother does a massive amount of volunteering with children - I very much doubt you do.The only person in this case who is a bully is Janet (and her supporters who have added many disgracefully insulting comments on these pages, and who behaved poorly in court. As for your line that everyone lies in court are you for real? Are you really that stupid or just plain ignorant? You might have advised Janet and her witness to lie but I can assure you the four witnesses for the prosecution told the truth of what they observed. You are obviously a plainly unpleasant and nasty individual who sees nothing wrong in hurting and scaring a small child then abusing her and her mother online - is there not a word for that?. I wonder when the police will come knocking on your door to ask you to explain yourself and the statements you make.
And finally this whole sad affair could have been prevented had Janet simply apologised for hurting the child something she refused to do on several occasions. She and only she is responsible for this going to court and having this very unfortunate stain on her character.
There is nothing libellous about saying that everybody lies in court (well, maybe not everybody, but certainly 50%!). If it were not so, then we wouldn't have most court cases, would we? If you've had any involvement in divorce/family courts or criminal cases you'll be well aware of the fact that people make oaths without the slightest intention of telling the truth. If you'd bothered to read my earlier post you'll see lots and lots of examples of situations in which people, and sometimes even the police, deliberately mislead. As people lie, the courts job is to discern truth from possibly two sets of lies. The cases i listed above show that this doesn't always happen. And from accusing me of libel, you then move on to infer, on a public forum, that i have advised Janet and her witnesses to lie. An inference such as this is as libellous as a statement, in case you didn't know, so i suspect you have as much to fear as i do (well actually, you don't, as i passionately believe in free speech and your right to say what you like). I have nothing to do with this case other than the fact that Janet has taught a relative of mine to swim. You can assure me that the prosecution witnesses told the truth all you like, but you'll get the same assurances from Janet's witnesses. Anyway, you will not change my core view that regardless of the facts of the case, this was an unnecessary action based on a ridiculous law. All this case has done is split a community and, given the names of some of the people who commented on the Facebook group, possibly even a family. Anyway, as another poster has said, this is all counter productive, since the court has made its judgement. Janet will hopefully be back doing what she loves and hopefully all the kids involved will too.
[quote][p][bold]andywhitt[/bold] wrote: Mr Young you are at it again wild accusations and gross distortion of the facts - you seem not to know what independent means, the witness of which you speak is well known to Janet as she stated in the court so cannot be independent.The only independent people involved have been the 5 magistrates and one senior crown court judge who simply disbelieved Janets versions of events, and I use the word versions on purpose as she changed them from witness statement to court appearances and at times within the same court appearance. last time this occurred you ignored the restrictions around the case this time you can now add libel to your list of offences.I do know all the people involved in the case and the mother is exceptionally well respected by those who know her. She is one of the most fair minded, grounded and caring persons I know, her child is also one of the best behaved and well mannered children I have had the pleasure to help coach (not in a swimming club to clarify). this is not a princess who is molly coddled - far from it and as Janet stated in court herself was neither running nor misbehaving in any way whatsoever, unless of course you believe Janet is lying about that in her testimony. The mother does a massive amount of volunteering with children - I very much doubt you do.The only person in this case who is a bully is Janet (and her supporters who have added many disgracefully insulting comments on these pages, and who behaved poorly in court. As for your line that everyone lies in court are you for real? Are you really that stupid or just plain ignorant? You might have advised Janet and her witness to lie but I can assure you the four witnesses for the prosecution told the truth of what they observed. You are obviously a plainly unpleasant and nasty individual who sees nothing wrong in hurting and scaring a small child then abusing her and her mother online - is there not a word for that?. I wonder when the police will come knocking on your door to ask you to explain yourself and the statements you make. And finally this whole sad affair could have been prevented had Janet simply apologised for hurting the child something she refused to do on several occasions. She and only she is responsible for this going to court and having this very unfortunate stain on her character.[/p][/quote]There is nothing libellous about saying that everybody lies in court (well, maybe not everybody, but certainly 50%!). If it were not so, then we wouldn't have most court cases, would we? If you've had any involvement in divorce/family courts or criminal cases you'll be well aware of the fact that people make oaths without the slightest intention of telling the truth. If you'd bothered to read my earlier post you'll see lots and lots of examples of situations in which people, and sometimes even the police, deliberately mislead. As people lie, the courts job is to discern truth from possibly two sets of lies. The cases i listed above show that this doesn't always happen. And from accusing me of libel, you then move on to infer, on a public forum, that i have advised Janet and her witnesses to lie. An inference such as this is as libellous as a statement, in case you didn't know, so i suspect you have as much to fear as i do (well actually, you don't, as i passionately believe in free speech and your right to say what you like). I have nothing to do with this case other than the fact that Janet has taught a relative of mine to swim. You can assure me that the prosecution witnesses told the truth all you like, but you'll get the same assurances from Janet's witnesses. Anyway, you will not change my core view that regardless of the facts of the case, this was an unnecessary action based on a ridiculous law. All this case has done is split a community and, given the names of some of the people who commented on the Facebook group, possibly even a family. Anyway, as another poster has said, this is all counter productive, since the court has made its judgement. Janet will hopefully be back doing what she loves and hopefully all the kids involved will too. JamesYoung
  • Score: -2

1:05am Sun 2 Mar 14

MarkP50 says...

andywhitt wrote:
Mr Young you are at it again wild accusations and gross distortion of the facts - you seem not to know what independent means, the witness of which you speak is well known to Janet as she stated in the court so cannot be independent.The only independent people involved have been the 5 magistrates and one senior crown court judge who simply disbelieved Janets versions of events, and I use the word versions on purpose as she changed them from witness statement to court appearances and at times within the same court appearance. last time this occurred you ignored the restrictions around the case this time you can now add libel to your list of offences.I do know all the people involved in the case and the mother is exceptionally well respected by those who know her. She is one of the most fair minded, grounded and caring persons I know, her child is also one of the best behaved and well mannered children I have had the pleasure to help coach (not in a swimming club to clarify). this is not a princess who is molly coddled - far from it and as Janet stated in court herself was neither running nor misbehaving in any way whatsoever, unless of course you believe Janet is lying about that in her testimony. The mother does a massive amount of volunteering with children - I very much doubt you do.The only person in this case who is a bully is Janet (and her supporters who have added many disgracefully insulting comments on these pages, and who behaved poorly in court. As for your line that everyone lies in court are you for real? Are you really that stupid or just plain ignorant? You might have advised Janet and her witness to lie but I can assure you the four witnesses for the prosecution told the truth of what they observed. You are obviously a plainly unpleasant and nasty individual who sees nothing wrong in hurting and scaring a small child then abusing her and her mother online - is there not a word for that?. I wonder when the police will come knocking on your door to ask you to explain yourself and the statements you make. And finally this whole sad affair could have been prevented had Janet simply apologised for hurting the child something she refused to do on several occasions. She and only she is responsible for this going to court and having this very unfortunate stain on her character.
andywhitt I totally agree with your comments. it is good to see that there is at least one person posting on here that actually knows what they are talking about !!
[quote][p][bold]andywhitt[/bold] wrote: Mr Young you are at it again wild accusations and gross distortion of the facts - you seem not to know what independent means, the witness of which you speak is well known to Janet as she stated in the court so cannot be independent.The only independent people involved have been the 5 magistrates and one senior crown court judge who simply disbelieved Janets versions of events, and I use the word versions on purpose as she changed them from witness statement to court appearances and at times within the same court appearance. last time this occurred you ignored the restrictions around the case this time you can now add libel to your list of offences.I do know all the people involved in the case and the mother is exceptionally well respected by those who know her. She is one of the most fair minded, grounded and caring persons I know, her child is also one of the best behaved and well mannered children I have had the pleasure to help coach (not in a swimming club to clarify). this is not a princess who is molly coddled - far from it and as Janet stated in court herself was neither running nor misbehaving in any way whatsoever, unless of course you believe Janet is lying about that in her testimony. The mother does a massive amount of volunteering with children - I very much doubt you do.The only person in this case who is a bully is Janet (and her supporters who have added many disgracefully insulting comments on these pages, and who behaved poorly in court. As for your line that everyone lies in court are you for real? Are you really that stupid or just plain ignorant? You might have advised Janet and her witness to lie but I can assure you the four witnesses for the prosecution told the truth of what they observed. You are obviously a plainly unpleasant and nasty individual who sees nothing wrong in hurting and scaring a small child then abusing her and her mother online - is there not a word for that?. I wonder when the police will come knocking on your door to ask you to explain yourself and the statements you make. And finally this whole sad affair could have been prevented had Janet simply apologised for hurting the child something she refused to do on several occasions. She and only she is responsible for this going to court and having this very unfortunate stain on her character.[/p][/quote]andywhitt I totally agree with your comments. it is good to see that there is at least one person posting on here that actually knows what they are talking about !! MarkP50
  • Score: 4

1:08am Sun 2 Mar 14

MarkP50 says...

siratb wrote:
Waste of time and money. Sometimes adults in charge of kids have to exercise their authority, be it by pulling, pushing, shouting, whatever. The trouble is kids don't like it these days as they have been brought up in a nanny state where they can do whatever they want. As such when someone does do it, they go running and crying to their mum to plead child abuse. The worst bit is the CPS allow these incidents to come to court. I wonder how many 40+'s were slippered by the PE teacher for messing around in class? And I wonder how many of them turned out alright with zero mental anguish? And I wonder if you compare behavior in class today with back then, how different it is? Get over it. If you don't want to send your child to a particular class because you feel the teacher is too tough, then fine, withdraw them. But don't go kicking and screaming to the police about something which is a non issue, but that will cost the tax payer a bundle. I still reckon that there will be lawyers on the back of this advising that there is now a case for civil damages for "mental anguish" or some other carp. Lets see if the family pursue that avenue as this will tell the real tale.
You are clearly ignorant and know nothing about the facts of this case.
[quote][p][bold]siratb[/bold] wrote: Waste of time and money. Sometimes adults in charge of kids have to exercise their authority, be it by pulling, pushing, shouting, whatever. The trouble is kids don't like it these days as they have been brought up in a nanny state where they can do whatever they want. As such when someone does do it, they go running and crying to their mum to plead child abuse. The worst bit is the CPS allow these incidents to come to court. I wonder how many 40+'s were slippered by the PE teacher for messing around in class? And I wonder how many of them turned out alright with zero mental anguish? And I wonder if you compare behavior in class today with back then, how different it is? Get over it. If you don't want to send your child to a particular class because you feel the teacher is too tough, then fine, withdraw them. But don't go kicking and screaming to the police about something which is a non issue, but that will cost the tax payer a bundle. I still reckon that there will be lawyers on the back of this advising that there is now a case for civil damages for "mental anguish" or some other carp. Lets see if the family pursue that avenue as this will tell the real tale.[/p][/quote]You are clearly ignorant and know nothing about the facts of this case. MarkP50
  • Score: 1

2:04am Sun 2 Mar 14

JamesYoung says...

Reading back over Andy's comments and my own I can see why mine might be interpreted as accusing the mother concerned of lying in court. I'll retract these since actually they were intended to be philosophical comments about the legal system (which I would hope would have been clear from my references to DNA and police corruption, neither of which are relevant to this case) and the way in which it has become theatre, where really only a truly independent witness can be assured to be telling the truth. Andy is also correct in that the judges in this case were the only 100% independent people involved. I stand by my statement that the laws under which this action took place are ridiculous, I stand by my statement that a court judgement of guilt or innocence does not reflect actual guilt or innocence. Lastly it was not my place to repeat rumours that I have heard about the mothers standing in the community. In the cold light of day I should be a little bit more careful about channelling my anger at this whole situation, which is actually symptomatic of my anger at the way in which our legal system is headed.
Reading back over Andy's comments and my own I can see why mine might be interpreted as accusing the mother concerned of lying in court. I'll retract these since actually they were intended to be philosophical comments about the legal system (which I would hope would have been clear from my references to DNA and police corruption, neither of which are relevant to this case) and the way in which it has become theatre, where really only a truly independent witness can be assured to be telling the truth. Andy is also correct in that the judges in this case were the only 100% independent people involved. I stand by my statement that the laws under which this action took place are ridiculous, I stand by my statement that a court judgement of guilt or innocence does not reflect actual guilt or innocence. Lastly it was not my place to repeat rumours that I have heard about the mothers standing in the community. In the cold light of day I should be a little bit more careful about channelling my anger at this whole situation, which is actually symptomatic of my anger at the way in which our legal system is headed. JamesYoung
  • Score: 3

3:04am Sun 2 Mar 14

krazikazzi says...

I would have expected my child to get disiplined if it was in the wrong NOT the person teaching them. I tried to bring my kids up ok but may have had a few problems. They are all (almost) well adjusted adults, and have respect for rules and older people, The teacher did nothing wrong
I would have expected my child to get disiplined if it was in the wrong NOT the person teaching them. I tried to bring my kids up ok but may have had a few problems. They are all (almost) well adjusted adults, and have respect for rules and older people, The teacher did nothing wrong krazikazzi
  • Score: 3

9:38am Sun 2 Mar 14

woodsedge says...

Can you imagine the public uproar if as an example a social worker ignored an injury to a child stating "oh it's only a bruise". If the person causing the injury was then left with the child in their care and there was a further injury, the posters on here defending Janet's action, would be calling for that social worker to lose there job and never work with children again. I have respect Janet for what she has given to so many children, but if she was judged to have assaulted this child then I am afraid she has to live with the consequences.
Can you imagine the public uproar if as an example a social worker ignored an injury to a child stating "oh it's only a bruise". If the person causing the injury was then left with the child in their care and there was a further injury, the posters on here defending Janet's action, would be calling for that social worker to lose there job and never work with children again. I have respect Janet for what she has given to so many children, but if she was judged to have assaulted this child then I am afraid she has to live with the consequences. woodsedge
  • Score: 8

10:17am Sun 2 Mar 14

JamesYoung says...

woodsedge wrote:
Can you imagine the public uproar if as an example a social worker ignored an injury to a child stating "oh it's only a bruise". If the person causing the injury was then left with the child in their care and there was a further injury, the posters on here defending Janet's action, would be calling for that social worker to lose there job and never work with children again. I have respect Janet for what she has given to so many children, but if she was judged to have assaulted this child then I am afraid she has to live with the consequences.
I kind of agree with you, but a social worker has a different role (as in, they are brought in after a child is deemed to be at risk). My issue with this, as i alluded to earlier, is that (regardless of who is telling the truth in this particular case) we now live in a society where extreme action is taken over minor incidents while real cases of abuse are left to run their course. We need a balance - a risk assessment if you like - rather than a legal process. Fortunately, it seems that the judge in this case was prepared to make that judgement. As i know from personal experience, that is all to rare these days.
[quote][p][bold]woodsedge[/bold] wrote: Can you imagine the public uproar if as an example a social worker ignored an injury to a child stating "oh it's only a bruise". If the person causing the injury was then left with the child in their care and there was a further injury, the posters on here defending Janet's action, would be calling for that social worker to lose there job and never work with children again. I have respect Janet for what she has given to so many children, but if she was judged to have assaulted this child then I am afraid she has to live with the consequences.[/p][/quote]I kind of agree with you, but a social worker has a different role (as in, they are brought in after a child is deemed to be at risk). My issue with this, as i alluded to earlier, is that (regardless of who is telling the truth in this particular case) we now live in a society where extreme action is taken over minor incidents while real cases of abuse are left to run their course. We need a balance - a risk assessment if you like - rather than a legal process. Fortunately, it seems that the judge in this case was prepared to make that judgement. As i know from personal experience, that is all to rare these days. JamesYoung
  • Score: 4

3:12pm Sun 2 Mar 14

jamie-c says...

JamesYoung wrote:
jamie-c wrote:
I think the fact it got so far as it has says that something did happen and it wasn't just a case of someone trying to ruin a reputation.... If someone handled my child and left a bruise I would do something about it..... Ok so maybe this was a one off but maybe it has happened before and nothing has been said?

I just don't think they would.of prosecuted without enough evidence being present. It's a shame that one moment can ruin a lifetimes work and reputation but it shouldn't of happened at all.
It went this far because Mrs Hewitt appealed.
If she had not appealed it would not have gone this far.
She appealed because she contends that it did not happen.
Therefore, I would suggest that the reason it has gone this far is more likely to be because it did not happen. And i think you can be pretty clear that this has not happened before - if it had, do you not think that the prosecution would have put parents or children affected up as witnesses? Instead, the defence was swamped with hundreds of character references.
no it went that far as there was enough evidence to prosecute, lets get that straight. If there had been no concrete evidence it wouldnt of made it as far as the cps....

the reason its been dragged on is because she appealed you are correct, and im sure in the report in the paper when it came out that she even admitted a 'moment of madness'.......

fair enough it may of been out of character or a one off (far as anyone knows), the fact remains that something happened to a child and she got a bruise from the lady in question (you dont just bruise if your a healthy human - indicating some force applied).
[quote][p][bold]JamesYoung[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]jamie-c[/bold] wrote: I think the fact it got so far as it has says that something did happen and it wasn't just a case of someone trying to ruin a reputation.... If someone handled my child and left a bruise I would do something about it..... Ok so maybe this was a one off but maybe it has happened before and nothing has been said? I just don't think they would.of prosecuted without enough evidence being present. It's a shame that one moment can ruin a lifetimes work and reputation but it shouldn't of happened at all.[/p][/quote]It went this far because Mrs Hewitt appealed. If she had not appealed it would not have gone this far. She appealed because she contends that it did not happen. Therefore, I would suggest that the reason it has gone this far is more likely to be because it did not happen. And i think you can be pretty clear that this has not happened before - if it had, do you not think that the prosecution would have put parents or children affected up as witnesses? Instead, the defence was swamped with hundreds of character references.[/p][/quote]no it went that far as there was enough evidence to prosecute, lets get that straight. If there had been no concrete evidence it wouldnt of made it as far as the cps.... the reason its been dragged on is because she appealed you are correct, and im sure in the report in the paper when it came out that she even admitted a 'moment of madness'....... fair enough it may of been out of character or a one off (far as anyone knows), the fact remains that something happened to a child and she got a bruise from the lady in question (you dont just bruise if your a healthy human - indicating some force applied). jamie-c
  • Score: 1

7:05pm Sun 2 Mar 14

ksmain says...

andywhitt wrote:
Mr Young you are at it again wild accusations and gross distortion of the facts - you seem not to know what independent means, the witness of which you speak is well known to Janet as she stated in the court so cannot be independent.The only independent people involved have been the 5 magistrates and one senior crown court judge who simply disbelieved Janets versions of events, and I use the word versions on purpose as she changed them from witness statement to court appearances and at times within the same court appearance.
last time this occurred you ignored the restrictions around the case this time you can now add libel to your list of offences.I do know all the people involved in the case and the mother is exceptionally well respected by those who know her. She is one of the most fair minded, grounded and caring persons I know, her child is also one of the best behaved and well mannered children I have had the pleasure to help coach (not in a swimming club to clarify). this is not a princess who is molly coddled - far from it and as Janet stated in court herself was neither running nor misbehaving in any way whatsoever, unless of course you believe Janet is lying about that in her testimony. The mother does a massive amount of volunteering with children - I very much doubt you do.The only person in this case who is a bully is Janet (and her supporters who have added many disgracefully insulting comments on these pages, and who behaved poorly in court. As for your line that everyone lies in court are you for real? Are you really that stupid or just plain ignorant? You might have advised Janet and her witness to lie but I can assure you the four witnesses for the prosecution told the truth of what they observed. You are obviously a plainly unpleasant and nasty individual who sees nothing wrong in hurting and scaring a small child then abusing her and her mother online - is there not a word for that?. I wonder when the police will come knocking on your door to ask you to explain yourself and the statements you make.
And finally this whole sad affair could have been prevented had Janet simply apologised for hurting the child something she refused to do on several occasions. She and only she is responsible for this going to court and having this very unfortunate stain on her character.
This person and her child may be the nicest people you know - but IMO it didn't stop her tackling the whole incident in the wrong way. As far as I am concerned the whole incident has wasted Court time over a minor incident that DID NOT MERIT IT. I just think that all this incident will do is to deter people from volunteering in future - so everyone loses in this case. Bit sad really. There are far more serious things in life that need dealing with IMO.
[quote][p][bold]andywhitt[/bold] wrote: Mr Young you are at it again wild accusations and gross distortion of the facts - you seem not to know what independent means, the witness of which you speak is well known to Janet as she stated in the court so cannot be independent.The only independent people involved have been the 5 magistrates and one senior crown court judge who simply disbelieved Janets versions of events, and I use the word versions on purpose as she changed them from witness statement to court appearances and at times within the same court appearance. last time this occurred you ignored the restrictions around the case this time you can now add libel to your list of offences.I do know all the people involved in the case and the mother is exceptionally well respected by those who know her. She is one of the most fair minded, grounded and caring persons I know, her child is also one of the best behaved and well mannered children I have had the pleasure to help coach (not in a swimming club to clarify). this is not a princess who is molly coddled - far from it and as Janet stated in court herself was neither running nor misbehaving in any way whatsoever, unless of course you believe Janet is lying about that in her testimony. The mother does a massive amount of volunteering with children - I very much doubt you do.The only person in this case who is a bully is Janet (and her supporters who have added many disgracefully insulting comments on these pages, and who behaved poorly in court. As for your line that everyone lies in court are you for real? Are you really that stupid or just plain ignorant? You might have advised Janet and her witness to lie but I can assure you the four witnesses for the prosecution told the truth of what they observed. You are obviously a plainly unpleasant and nasty individual who sees nothing wrong in hurting and scaring a small child then abusing her and her mother online - is there not a word for that?. I wonder when the police will come knocking on your door to ask you to explain yourself and the statements you make. And finally this whole sad affair could have been prevented had Janet simply apologised for hurting the child something she refused to do on several occasions. She and only she is responsible for this going to court and having this very unfortunate stain on her character.[/p][/quote]This person and her child may be the nicest people you know - but IMO it didn't stop her tackling the whole incident in the wrong way. As far as I am concerned the whole incident has wasted Court time over a minor incident that DID NOT MERIT IT. I just think that all this incident will do is to deter people from volunteering in future - so everyone loses in this case. Bit sad really. There are far more serious things in life that need dealing with IMO. ksmain
  • Score: 10

2:14am Mon 3 Mar 14

Under35andout says...

she lost her temper a kid got bruised sack the hippo
she lost her temper a kid got bruised sack the hippo Under35andout
  • Score: -3

9:55am Mon 3 Mar 14

portlandresident says...

I blame the parents. End of.
I blame the parents. End of. portlandresident
  • Score: 0

10:55am Mon 3 Mar 14

marabout says...

I have to add that swimming lessons in Dorchester have been an absolute pleasure during the past 6 months and so some good has come of this.
I have to add that swimming lessons in Dorchester have been an absolute pleasure during the past 6 months and so some good has come of this. marabout
  • Score: 5

11:02am Mon 3 Mar 14

Mr Maloney says...

This woman maybe a good coach for people that found swimming easy to learn ...BUt she is seen as a loud mouth bully(for the want of a better word) by most of the children who found it harder to swim and in a few cases her attitude put some off of swimming for years ,or perhaps that's what she wants so she can fill swimming pools with people that only want to swim in competitions (silly me I thought MOST people learn't to swim for enjoyment ). As for some of the comments on here read the report it says two children and two mothers saw the incident (oh and of course all the people on here that support Hewiitt were there to know what really happened my that really was a very full changing room) a court has found her guilty of losing her temper (something she knows she can't do) and of grabbing a child (something she also knows she can't do ) so hard that she left the child with a bruise (think how hard it must of been to have left a bruise) and a court of appeal still doesn't see the need to overturn that decision even with all her glowing references ...so perhaps she will eventually except her punishment and realise that she did do wrong whether she meant to or not until then I think it's probably better that she isn't allowed to coach children
This woman maybe a good coach for people that found swimming easy to learn ...BUt she is seen as a loud mouth bully(for the want of a better word) by most of the children who found it harder to swim and in a few cases her attitude put some off of swimming for years ,or perhaps that's what she wants so she can fill swimming pools with people that only want to swim in competitions (silly me I thought MOST people learn't to swim for enjoyment ). As for some of the comments on here read the report it says two children and two mothers saw the incident (oh and of course all the people on here that support Hewiitt were there to know what really happened my that really was a very full changing room) a court has found her guilty of losing her temper (something she knows she can't do) and of grabbing a child (something she also knows she can't do ) so hard that she left the child with a bruise (think how hard it must of been to have left a bruise) and a court of appeal still doesn't see the need to overturn that decision even with all her glowing references ...so perhaps she will eventually except her punishment and realise that she did do wrong whether she meant to or not until then I think it's probably better that she isn't allowed to coach children Mr Maloney
  • Score: 13

3:47pm Mon 3 Mar 14

anika says...

common cence wrote:
biker babe wrote:
Janet, we all know what a blooming good coach you are!! my sons had lessons with you & I've witnessed you over many years at the poolside, there's no way on Gods earth that you would intentionally hurt a child! The child's mother needs to take stock of the enormity of what she's done, it was never, ever worth it. Nothing whatsoever has been gained in any of this!
Good on the mother for reporting this to the police well done mum for protecting your girl , Take no notice of these lot trying to blame the mother for standing up to the BULLY,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Is this a case of a mother over-reacting because her little darling couldn't possibly have done anything wrong/ ....................
............
[quote][p][bold]common cence[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]biker babe[/bold] wrote: Janet, we all know what a blooming good coach you are!! my sons had lessons with you & I've witnessed you over many years at the poolside, there's no way on Gods earth that you would intentionally hurt a child! The child's mother needs to take stock of the enormity of what she's done, it was never, ever worth it. Nothing whatsoever has been gained in any of this![/p][/quote]Good on the mother for reporting this to the police well done mum for protecting your girl , Take no notice of these lot trying to blame the mother for standing up to the BULLY,,,,,,,,,,,,,[/p][/quote]Is this a case of a mother over-reacting because her little darling couldn't possibly have done anything wrong/ .................... ............ anika
  • Score: -3

6:02pm Mon 3 Mar 14

mark@greenhill says...

Silly people expecting the nanny state to protect them from every single thing in this world ?
Parents protecting a child from intentional harm is one thing, this parent reacting to what was clearly unintentional is a very different matter altogether.

In this world, you should be teaching your overprotected little darlings to behave and do what they are told, rather than attempting to ruin the career of people who are volunteering to help you.

What on earth would you have done when the teachers still had the ability to keep discipline with the cane?

As has been said many times in this thread, you the parents are the ones at fault here, you have created an environment where nobody will ever offer to work with your little princesses ever again.
Silly people expecting the nanny state to protect them from every single thing in this world ? Parents protecting a child from intentional harm is one thing, this parent reacting to what was clearly unintentional is a very different matter altogether. In this world, you should be teaching your overprotected little darlings to behave and do what they are told, rather than attempting to ruin the career of people who are volunteering to help you. What on earth would you have done when the teachers still had the ability to keep discipline with the cane? As has been said many times in this thread, you the parents are the ones at fault here, you have created an environment where nobody will ever offer to work with your little princesses ever again. mark@greenhill
  • Score: -4

6:15pm Mon 3 Mar 14

JackJohnson says...

anika wrote:
common cence wrote:
biker babe wrote:
Janet, we all know what a blooming good coach you are!! my sons had lessons with you & I've witnessed you over many years at the poolside, there's no way on Gods earth that you would intentionally hurt a child! The child's mother needs to take stock of the enormity of what she's done, it was never, ever worth it. Nothing whatsoever has been gained in any of this!
Good on the mother for reporting this to the police well done mum for protecting your girl , Take no notice of these lot trying to blame the mother for standing up to the BULLY,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Is this a case of a mother over-reacting because her little darling couldn't possibly have done anything wrong/ ....................

............
More likely an adult of previous good character in a position of responsibilty who lost control and lashed out.

Will she do it again? Nobody really knows, not even her.

She might get back to teaching, but only with another trusted adult present and that other adult reponsible for maintaining discipline.
[quote][p][bold]anika[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]common cence[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]biker babe[/bold] wrote: Janet, we all know what a blooming good coach you are!! my sons had lessons with you & I've witnessed you over many years at the poolside, there's no way on Gods earth that you would intentionally hurt a child! The child's mother needs to take stock of the enormity of what she's done, it was never, ever worth it. Nothing whatsoever has been gained in any of this![/p][/quote]Good on the mother for reporting this to the police well done mum for protecting your girl , Take no notice of these lot trying to blame the mother for standing up to the BULLY,,,,,,,,,,,,,[/p][/quote]Is this a case of a mother over-reacting because her little darling couldn't possibly have done anything wrong/ .................... ............[/p][/quote]More likely an adult of previous good character in a position of responsibilty who lost control and lashed out. Will she do it again? Nobody really knows, not even her. She might get back to teaching, but only with another trusted adult present and that other adult reponsible for maintaining discipline. JackJohnson
  • Score: 2

8:25pm Mon 3 Mar 14

ksmain says...

JackJohnson wrote:
anika wrote:
common cence wrote:
biker babe wrote:
Janet, we all know what a blooming good coach you are!! my sons had lessons with you & I've witnessed you over many years at the poolside, there's no way on Gods earth that you would intentionally hurt a child! The child's mother needs to take stock of the enormity of what she's done, it was never, ever worth it. Nothing whatsoever has been gained in any of this!
Good on the mother for reporting this to the police well done mum for protecting your girl , Take no notice of these lot trying to blame the mother for standing up to the BULLY,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Is this a case of a mother over-reacting because her little darling couldn't possibly have done anything wrong/ ....................


............
More likely an adult of previous good character in a position of responsibilty who lost control and lashed out.

Will she do it again? Nobody really knows, not even her.

She might get back to teaching, but only with another trusted adult present and that other adult reponsible for maintaining discipline.
And will another adult want to maintain discipline having seen what has happened to the other volunteer and put themselves at the mercy of an over-protective parent taking any issue with something that breaches their set of values to another Court action? Us parents were discussing this at work today and we were all of the opinion that actions like this will deter volunteers in the future. Which means that clubs like this will find it harder to find volunteers and keep going. It will be a sad world seeing these clubs fade if there are not enough volunteers - it is hard enough these days having to fall in line with Health & Safety and the unnecessary levels of CRB clearance, etc, etc.A firm word in the coach's ear was what was needed in this case as a warning
[quote][p][bold]JackJohnson[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]anika[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]common cence[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]biker babe[/bold] wrote: Janet, we all know what a blooming good coach you are!! my sons had lessons with you & I've witnessed you over many years at the poolside, there's no way on Gods earth that you would intentionally hurt a child! The child's mother needs to take stock of the enormity of what she's done, it was never, ever worth it. Nothing whatsoever has been gained in any of this![/p][/quote]Good on the mother for reporting this to the police well done mum for protecting your girl , Take no notice of these lot trying to blame the mother for standing up to the BULLY,,,,,,,,,,,,,[/p][/quote]Is this a case of a mother over-reacting because her little darling couldn't possibly have done anything wrong/ .................... ............[/p][/quote]More likely an adult of previous good character in a position of responsibilty who lost control and lashed out. Will she do it again? Nobody really knows, not even her. She might get back to teaching, but only with another trusted adult present and that other adult reponsible for maintaining discipline.[/p][/quote]And will another adult want to maintain discipline having seen what has happened to the other volunteer and put themselves at the mercy of an over-protective parent taking any issue with something that breaches their set of values to another Court action? Us parents were discussing this at work today and we were all of the opinion that actions like this will deter volunteers in the future. Which means that clubs like this will find it harder to find volunteers and keep going. It will be a sad world seeing these clubs fade if there are not enough volunteers - it is hard enough these days having to fall in line with Health & Safety and the unnecessary levels of CRB clearance, etc, etc.A firm word in the coach's ear was what was needed in this case as a warning ksmain
  • Score: 2

10:21pm Mon 3 Mar 14

lifecangetbetter says...

This is typical of today's society. yet again another persons career is ruined . I have had first hand experience of the law and was convicted of child battery!! I worked with children for 25 years and because a child had a carpet burn i lost my job and any chance of anyone employing me again..I do not advocate violence and im a law abiding citizen but because the law states all children under the age of 16 are minors the circumstances are irrelevant but any mark even a scratch on a child is classed as assault! its ridiculous..in my case i pulled a child away from hurting other children whilst they kicked me and swore.I was protecting other children from being kicked and I lost my job. No wonder its harder to find skilled people to work as teachers ect..
This is typical of today's society. yet again another persons career is ruined . I have had first hand experience of the law and was convicted of child battery!! I worked with children for 25 years and because a child had a carpet burn i lost my job and any chance of anyone employing me again..I do not advocate violence and im a law abiding citizen but because the law states all children under the age of 16 are minors the circumstances are irrelevant but any mark even a scratch on a child is classed as assault! its ridiculous..in my case i pulled a child away from hurting other children whilst they kicked me and swore.I was protecting other children from being kicked and I lost my job. No wonder its harder to find skilled people to work as teachers ect.. lifecangetbetter
  • Score: 1

5:58pm Tue 4 Mar 14

JackJohnson says...

ksmain wrote:
JackJohnson wrote:
anika wrote:
common cence wrote:
biker babe wrote:
Janet, we all know what a blooming good coach you are!! my sons had lessons with you & I've witnessed you over many years at the poolside, there's no way on Gods earth that you would intentionally hurt a child! The child's mother needs to take stock of the enormity of what she's done, it was never, ever worth it. Nothing whatsoever has been gained in any of this!
Good on the mother for reporting this to the police well done mum for protecting your girl , Take no notice of these lot trying to blame the mother for standing up to the BULLY,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Is this a case of a mother over-reacting because her little darling couldn't possibly have done anything wrong/ ....................



............
More likely an adult of previous good character in a position of responsibilty who lost control and lashed out.

Will she do it again? Nobody really knows, not even her.

She might get back to teaching, but only with another trusted adult present and that other adult reponsible for maintaining discipline.
And will another adult want to maintain discipline having seen what has happened to the other volunteer and put themselves at the mercy of an over-protective parent taking any issue with something that breaches their set of values to another Court action? Us parents were discussing this at work today and we were all of the opinion that actions like this will deter volunteers in the future. Which means that clubs like this will find it harder to find volunteers and keep going. It will be a sad world seeing these clubs fade if there are not enough volunteers - it is hard enough these days having to fall in line with Health & Safety and the unnecessary levels of CRB clearance, etc, etc.A firm word in the coach's ear was what was needed in this case as a warning
That is not, evidently, what the judge who imposed the sentence, nor the judge who denied the appeal, thought - and it is their opinions that count.
[quote][p][bold]ksmain[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]JackJohnson[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]anika[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]common cence[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]biker babe[/bold] wrote: Janet, we all know what a blooming good coach you are!! my sons had lessons with you & I've witnessed you over many years at the poolside, there's no way on Gods earth that you would intentionally hurt a child! The child's mother needs to take stock of the enormity of what she's done, it was never, ever worth it. Nothing whatsoever has been gained in any of this![/p][/quote]Good on the mother for reporting this to the police well done mum for protecting your girl , Take no notice of these lot trying to blame the mother for standing up to the BULLY,,,,,,,,,,,,,[/p][/quote]Is this a case of a mother over-reacting because her little darling couldn't possibly have done anything wrong/ .................... ............[/p][/quote]More likely an adult of previous good character in a position of responsibilty who lost control and lashed out. Will she do it again? Nobody really knows, not even her. She might get back to teaching, but only with another trusted adult present and that other adult reponsible for maintaining discipline.[/p][/quote]And will another adult want to maintain discipline having seen what has happened to the other volunteer and put themselves at the mercy of an over-protective parent taking any issue with something that breaches their set of values to another Court action? Us parents were discussing this at work today and we were all of the opinion that actions like this will deter volunteers in the future. Which means that clubs like this will find it harder to find volunteers and keep going. It will be a sad world seeing these clubs fade if there are not enough volunteers - it is hard enough these days having to fall in line with Health & Safety and the unnecessary levels of CRB clearance, etc, etc.A firm word in the coach's ear was what was needed in this case as a warning[/p][/quote]That is not, evidently, what the judge who imposed the sentence, nor the judge who denied the appeal, thought - and it is their opinions that count. JackJohnson
  • Score: -1

8:18pm Tue 4 Mar 14

ksmain says...

JackJohnson wrote:
ksmain wrote:
JackJohnson wrote:
anika wrote:
common cence wrote:
biker babe wrote:
Janet, we all know what a blooming good coach you are!! my sons had lessons with you & I've witnessed you over many years at the poolside, there's no way on Gods earth that you would intentionally hurt a child! The child's mother needs to take stock of the enormity of what she's done, it was never, ever worth it. Nothing whatsoever has been gained in any of this!
Good on the mother for reporting this to the police well done mum for protecting your girl , Take no notice of these lot trying to blame the mother for standing up to the BULLY,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Is this a case of a mother over-reacting because her little darling couldn't possibly have done anything wrong/ ....................




............
More likely an adult of previous good character in a position of responsibilty who lost control and lashed out.

Will she do it again? Nobody really knows, not even her.

She might get back to teaching, but only with another trusted adult present and that other adult reponsible for maintaining discipline.
And will another adult want to maintain discipline having seen what has happened to the other volunteer and put themselves at the mercy of an over-protective parent taking any issue with something that breaches their set of values to another Court action? Us parents were discussing this at work today and we were all of the opinion that actions like this will deter volunteers in the future. Which means that clubs like this will find it harder to find volunteers and keep going. It will be a sad world seeing these clubs fade if there are not enough volunteers - it is hard enough these days having to fall in line with Health & Safety and the unnecessary levels of CRB clearance, etc, etc.A firm word in the coach's ear was what was needed in this case as a warning
That is not, evidently, what the judge who imposed the sentence, nor the judge who denied the appeal, thought - and it is their opinions that count.
Yes and a judge is always right? And these judges have run these type of clubs as volunteers? They are just applying the law and are relying on the testimony of others.

But my point is really - it should not have got that far (as I have said in my other postings) had a bit of common sense process prevailed..And it won't help entice volunteers in the future IMO.I mean, who would want to put themselves in that position. Not me.
[quote][p][bold]JackJohnson[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ksmain[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]JackJohnson[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]anika[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]common cence[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]biker babe[/bold] wrote: Janet, we all know what a blooming good coach you are!! my sons had lessons with you & I've witnessed you over many years at the poolside, there's no way on Gods earth that you would intentionally hurt a child! The child's mother needs to take stock of the enormity of what she's done, it was never, ever worth it. Nothing whatsoever has been gained in any of this![/p][/quote]Good on the mother for reporting this to the police well done mum for protecting your girl , Take no notice of these lot trying to blame the mother for standing up to the BULLY,,,,,,,,,,,,,[/p][/quote]Is this a case of a mother over-reacting because her little darling couldn't possibly have done anything wrong/ .................... ............[/p][/quote]More likely an adult of previous good character in a position of responsibilty who lost control and lashed out. Will she do it again? Nobody really knows, not even her. She might get back to teaching, but only with another trusted adult present and that other adult reponsible for maintaining discipline.[/p][/quote]And will another adult want to maintain discipline having seen what has happened to the other volunteer and put themselves at the mercy of an over-protective parent taking any issue with something that breaches their set of values to another Court action? Us parents were discussing this at work today and we were all of the opinion that actions like this will deter volunteers in the future. Which means that clubs like this will find it harder to find volunteers and keep going. It will be a sad world seeing these clubs fade if there are not enough volunteers - it is hard enough these days having to fall in line with Health & Safety and the unnecessary levels of CRB clearance, etc, etc.A firm word in the coach's ear was what was needed in this case as a warning[/p][/quote]That is not, evidently, what the judge who imposed the sentence, nor the judge who denied the appeal, thought - and it is their opinions that count.[/p][/quote]Yes and a judge is always right? And these judges have run these type of clubs as volunteers? They are just applying the law and are relying on the testimony of others. But my point is really - it should not have got that far (as I have said in my other postings) had a bit of common sense process prevailed..And it won't help entice volunteers in the future IMO.I mean, who would want to put themselves in that position. Not me. ksmain
  • Score: -1

8:22pm Tue 4 Mar 14

ksmain says...

JackJohnson wrote:
ksmain wrote:
JackJohnson wrote:
anika wrote:
common cence wrote:
biker babe wrote:
Janet, we all know what a blooming good coach you are!! my sons had lessons with you & I've witnessed you over many years at the poolside, there's no way on Gods earth that you would intentionally hurt a child! The child's mother needs to take stock of the enormity of what she's done, it was never, ever worth it. Nothing whatsoever has been gained in any of this!
Good on the mother for reporting this to the police well done mum for protecting your girl , Take no notice of these lot trying to blame the mother for standing up to the BULLY,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Is this a case of a mother over-reacting because her little darling couldn't possibly have done anything wrong/ ....................




............
More likely an adult of previous good character in a position of responsibilty who lost control and lashed out.

Will she do it again? Nobody really knows, not even her.

She might get back to teaching, but only with another trusted adult present and that other adult reponsible for maintaining discipline.
And will another adult want to maintain discipline having seen what has happened to the other volunteer and put themselves at the mercy of an over-protective parent taking any issue with something that breaches their set of values to another Court action? Us parents were discussing this at work today and we were all of the opinion that actions like this will deter volunteers in the future. Which means that clubs like this will find it harder to find volunteers and keep going. It will be a sad world seeing these clubs fade if there are not enough volunteers - it is hard enough these days having to fall in line with Health & Safety and the unnecessary levels of CRB clearance, etc, etc.A firm word in the coach's ear was what was needed in this case as a warning
That is not, evidently, what the judge who imposed the sentence, nor the judge who denied the appeal, thought - and it is their opinions that count.
Yes and a judge is always right? And these judges have run these type of clubs as volunteers? They are just applying the law and are relying on the testimony of others.

But my point is really - it should not have got that far (as I have said in my other postings) had a bit of common sense process prevailed..And it won't help entice volunteers in the future IMO.I mean, who would want to put themselves in that position. Not me.
[quote][p][bold]JackJohnson[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ksmain[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]JackJohnson[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]anika[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]common cence[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]biker babe[/bold] wrote: Janet, we all know what a blooming good coach you are!! my sons had lessons with you & I've witnessed you over many years at the poolside, there's no way on Gods earth that you would intentionally hurt a child! The child's mother needs to take stock of the enormity of what she's done, it was never, ever worth it. Nothing whatsoever has been gained in any of this![/p][/quote]Good on the mother for reporting this to the police well done mum for protecting your girl , Take no notice of these lot trying to blame the mother for standing up to the BULLY,,,,,,,,,,,,,[/p][/quote]Is this a case of a mother over-reacting because her little darling couldn't possibly have done anything wrong/ .................... ............[/p][/quote]More likely an adult of previous good character in a position of responsibilty who lost control and lashed out. Will she do it again? Nobody really knows, not even her. She might get back to teaching, but only with another trusted adult present and that other adult reponsible for maintaining discipline.[/p][/quote]And will another adult want to maintain discipline having seen what has happened to the other volunteer and put themselves at the mercy of an over-protective parent taking any issue with something that breaches their set of values to another Court action? Us parents were discussing this at work today and we were all of the opinion that actions like this will deter volunteers in the future. Which means that clubs like this will find it harder to find volunteers and keep going. It will be a sad world seeing these clubs fade if there are not enough volunteers - it is hard enough these days having to fall in line with Health & Safety and the unnecessary levels of CRB clearance, etc, etc.A firm word in the coach's ear was what was needed in this case as a warning[/p][/quote]That is not, evidently, what the judge who imposed the sentence, nor the judge who denied the appeal, thought - and it is their opinions that count.[/p][/quote]Yes and a judge is always right? And these judges have run these type of clubs as volunteers? They are just applying the law and are relying on the testimony of others. But my point is really - it should not have got that far (as I have said in my other postings) had a bit of common sense process prevailed..And it won't help entice volunteers in the future IMO.I mean, who would want to put themselves in that position. Not me. ksmain
  • Score: -1

10:34am Wed 5 Mar 14

JackJohnson says...

ksmain wrote:
JackJohnson wrote:
ksmain wrote:
JackJohnson wrote:
anika wrote:
common cence wrote:
biker babe wrote:
Janet, we all know what a blooming good coach you are!! my sons had lessons with you & I've witnessed you over many years at the poolside, there's no way on Gods earth that you would intentionally hurt a child! The child's mother needs to take stock of the enormity of what she's done, it was never, ever worth it. Nothing whatsoever has been gained in any of this!
Good on the mother for reporting this to the police well done mum for protecting your girl , Take no notice of these lot trying to blame the mother for standing up to the BULLY,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Is this a case of a mother over-reacting because her little darling couldn't possibly have done anything wrong/ ....................





............
More likely an adult of previous good character in a position of responsibilty who lost control and lashed out.

Will she do it again? Nobody really knows, not even her.

She might get back to teaching, but only with another trusted adult present and that other adult reponsible for maintaining discipline.
And will another adult want to maintain discipline having seen what has happened to the other volunteer and put themselves at the mercy of an over-protective parent taking any issue with something that breaches their set of values to another Court action? Us parents were discussing this at work today and we were all of the opinion that actions like this will deter volunteers in the future. Which means that clubs like this will find it harder to find volunteers and keep going. It will be a sad world seeing these clubs fade if there are not enough volunteers - it is hard enough these days having to fall in line with Health & Safety and the unnecessary levels of CRB clearance, etc, etc.A firm word in the coach's ear was what was needed in this case as a warning
That is not, evidently, what the judge who imposed the sentence, nor the judge who denied the appeal, thought - and it is their opinions that count.
Yes and a judge is always right? And these judges have run these type of clubs as volunteers? They are just applying the law and are relying on the testimony of others.

But my point is really - it should not have got that far (as I have said in my other postings) had a bit of common sense process prevailed..And it won't help entice volunteers in the future IMO.I mean, who would want to put themselves in that position. Not me.
It wouldn't have gone that far if she hadn't assaulted a child.
[quote][p][bold]ksmain[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]JackJohnson[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ksmain[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]JackJohnson[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]anika[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]common cence[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]biker babe[/bold] wrote: Janet, we all know what a blooming good coach you are!! my sons had lessons with you & I've witnessed you over many years at the poolside, there's no way on Gods earth that you would intentionally hurt a child! The child's mother needs to take stock of the enormity of what she's done, it was never, ever worth it. Nothing whatsoever has been gained in any of this![/p][/quote]Good on the mother for reporting this to the police well done mum for protecting your girl , Take no notice of these lot trying to blame the mother for standing up to the BULLY,,,,,,,,,,,,,[/p][/quote]Is this a case of a mother over-reacting because her little darling couldn't possibly have done anything wrong/ .................... ............[/p][/quote]More likely an adult of previous good character in a position of responsibilty who lost control and lashed out. Will she do it again? Nobody really knows, not even her. She might get back to teaching, but only with another trusted adult present and that other adult reponsible for maintaining discipline.[/p][/quote]And will another adult want to maintain discipline having seen what has happened to the other volunteer and put themselves at the mercy of an over-protective parent taking any issue with something that breaches their set of values to another Court action? Us parents were discussing this at work today and we were all of the opinion that actions like this will deter volunteers in the future. Which means that clubs like this will find it harder to find volunteers and keep going. It will be a sad world seeing these clubs fade if there are not enough volunteers - it is hard enough these days having to fall in line with Health & Safety and the unnecessary levels of CRB clearance, etc, etc.A firm word in the coach's ear was what was needed in this case as a warning[/p][/quote]That is not, evidently, what the judge who imposed the sentence, nor the judge who denied the appeal, thought - and it is their opinions that count.[/p][/quote]Yes and a judge is always right? And these judges have run these type of clubs as volunteers? They are just applying the law and are relying on the testimony of others. But my point is really - it should not have got that far (as I have said in my other postings) had a bit of common sense process prevailed..And it won't help entice volunteers in the future IMO.I mean, who would want to put themselves in that position. Not me.[/p][/quote]It wouldn't have gone that far if she hadn't assaulted a child. JackJohnson
  • Score: 1

Comments are closed on this article.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree