Last weekend, my Troop ran a successful "training camp", except for a serious event that has come to light after our return home.
It is alleged that one of the Scouts was threatened by another, to the extent of "If you tell any of the leaders, I'll wrap this mallet round your head". The threat was reported to have been made to stop the victim telling us about another incident inside the tent during the night.
The night-time incident is not the one concerning us, as leaders. As far as we know, it was just some general "mucking about" in the (all-boys) tent that involved getting into each other's sleeping bags. I suspect that we really don't need to know the finer details. However, the alleged threat, which has been independently reported to us by the victim and another Scout, as a witness, does need some action from us.
We haven't yet spoken to the alleged culprit to get his account of events - but, given the independent reports, we intend to apply some sanction because of his behaviour. We will inform him that behaviour like that could lead to action by the police, as it is "threatening behaviour", and that we are seeking advice as to what to do.
So, here I am, seeking advice. What sanctions would you, dear reader, apply?
MatSav wrote: > Last weekend, my Troop ran a successful "training camp", except > for a serious event that has come to light after our return home.
> It is alleged that one of the Scouts was threatened by another, > to the extent of "If you tell any of the leaders, I'll wrap this > mallet round your head". The threat was reported to have been > made to stop the victim telling us about another incident inside > the tent during the night.
> The night-time incident is not the one concerning us, as leaders. > As far as we know, it was just some general "mucking about" in > the (all-boys) tent that involved getting into each other's > sleeping bags. I suspect that we really don't need to know the > finer details. However, the alleged threat, which has been > independently reported to us by the victim and another Scout, as > a witness, does need some action from us.
> We haven't yet spoken to the alleged culprit to get his account > of events - but, given the independent reports, we intend to > apply some sanction because of his behaviour. We will inform him > that behaviour like that could lead to action by the police, as > it is "threatening behaviour", and that we are seeking advice as > to what to do.
> So, here I am, seeking advice. What sanctions would you, dear > reader, apply?
I would think that threatening to involve the police as a first reaction is not appropriate. The behaviour is unacceptable in scouting because it is against the ethos of scouting, not because it might be criminal or civil misbehaviour. Therefore it should be dealt with within scouting and the sanctions related to scouting, e.g. suspension for 2/3 weeks with a letter home explaining the situation.
> Last weekend, my Troop ran a successful "training camp", except > for a serious event that has come to light after our return home.
> It is alleged that one of the Scouts was threatened by another, > to the extent of "If you tell any of the leaders, I'll wrap this > mallet round your head". The threat was reported to have been > made to stop the victim telling us about another incident inside > the tent during the night.
> The night-time incident is not the one concerning us, as leaders. > As far as we know, it was just some general "mucking about" in > the (all-boys) tent that involved getting into each other's > sleeping bags. I suspect that we really don't need to know the > finer details. However, the alleged threat, which has been > independently reported to us by the victim and another Scout, as > a witness, does need some action from us.
> We haven't yet spoken to the alleged culprit to get his account > of events - but, given the independent reports, we intend to > apply some sanction because of his behaviour. We will inform him > that behaviour like that could lead to action by the police, as > it is "threatening behaviour", and that we are seeking advice as > to what to do.
> So, here I am, seeking advice. What sanctions would you, dear > reader, apply?
> -- > MatSav
Mat
I'm sure it is just me having gone on one child protection course too many, but I would start with what happened whilst they were getting into each others sleeping bags which was so aweful that the leaders shouldn't know. If it was truely nothing then treat in the same way you would normally treat threatening behaviour.
tony wrote: > On 31 Oct, 14:39, "MatSav" <matthew | dot | savage | at | dsl | dot | > pipex | dot | com> wrote: >> Last weekend, my Troop ran a successful "training camp", except >> for a serious event that has come to light after our return home.
>> It is alleged that one of the Scouts was threatened by another, >> to the extent of "If you tell any of the leaders, I'll wrap this >> mallet round your head". The threat was reported to have been >> made to stop the victim telling us about another incident inside >> the tent during the night.
>> The night-time incident is not the one concerning us, as leaders. >> As far as we know, it was just some general "mucking about" in >> the (all-boys) tent that involved getting into each other's >> sleeping bags. I suspect that we really don't need to know the >> finer details. However, the alleged threat, which has been >> independently reported to us by the victim and another Scout, as >> a witness, does need some action from us.
>> We haven't yet spoken to the alleged culprit to get his account >> of events - but, given the independent reports, we intend to >> apply some sanction because of his behaviour. We will inform him >> that behaviour like that could lead to action by the police, as >> it is "threatening behaviour", and that we are seeking advice as >> to what to do.
>> So, here I am, seeking advice. What sanctions would you, dear >> reader, apply?
>> -- >> MatSav
> Mat
> I'm sure it is just me having gone on one child protection course too > many, but I would start with what happened whilst they were getting > into each others sleeping bags which was so aweful that the leaders > shouldn't know. If it was truely nothing then treat in the same way > you would normally treat threatening behaviour.
> YIS Tony
I agree there. First thing would be to find out what happened that he was trying to cover up, most likley nothing at all but has the potential to be very serious.
after that I would firstly hear his side of things, (prehaps the threat was only made in jest but that got lost in translation) and the side of everyone else, has he made threats to anyone like this before, maybe at school rather than scouts?
only when you know the whole story can you decide on an apporpiate couse of action
In message <hcifq7$vp...@news.eternal-september.org>, Daniel Smith <dasy...@invalid.invalid> writes
>I agree there. First thing would be to find out what happened that he >was trying to cover up, most likley nothing at all but has the potential >to be very serious.
>after that >I would firstly hear his side of things, (prehaps the threat was only >made in jest but that got lost in translation) >and the side of everyone else, >has he made threats to anyone like this before, maybe at school rather >than scouts?
>only when you know the whole story can you decide on an apporpiate couse >of action
I would certainly take the individual who made the threat aside in the hall and speak to him to get his side of the story. I would firstly want to know what lead up to the threat which as has been said might not be anything more than skylarking around. But as he thinks it that important I would ask him to explain exactly what happened.
As for the actual threat I would make it clear that it is not Scouting, could easily be construed as bullying and is totally unacceptable. Personally if this is a first offence I would leave it at that having made it clear to him that if I ever heard of any one bullying I would take action immediately. I would hope that the message would get through. -- Paul Harris
> Last weekend, my Troop ran a successful "training camp", except for a > serious event that has come to light after our return home.
> It is alleged that one of the Scouts was threatened by another, to the > extent of "If you tell any of the leaders, I'll wrap this mallet round > your head". The threat was reported to have been made to stop the victim > telling us about another incident inside the tent during the night.
> The night-time incident is not the one concerning us, as leaders. As far > as we know, it was just some general "mucking about" in the (all-boys) > tent that involved getting into each other's sleeping bags. I suspect that > we really don't need to know the finer details. However, the alleged > threat, which has been independently reported to us by the victim and > another Scout, as a witness, does need some action from us.
> We haven't yet spoken to the alleged culprit to get his account of > events - but, given the independent reports, we intend to apply some > sanction because of his behaviour. We will inform him that behaviour like > that could lead to action by the police, as it is "threatening behaviour", > and that we are seeking advice as to what to do.
> So, here I am, seeking advice. What sanctions would you, dear reader, > apply?
You rather obviously have a bully in your midst. Possibly something worse.
Going to the Police is a rather drastic move, even threatening it. It will destroy any trust there is between you and the Scouts. Then if someone REALLY needs to talk to you, they probably won't because of the fear of you going to the Police.
1/ I'd deal with the bullying, this cannot just be happening out of sight.
2/ I'd be very concerned about the cause of the incident. If all were participating willingly, then maybe it was just lads being lads. If not, then were they coerced? Which does seem possible. If this is then followed by a threat of violence on making disclosure, then I have to wonder how serious this is, and should it be reported to Gilwell.
Lets consider this. You have, I guess, no access to social security records. The SS cannot call a Scout leader and say, keep an eye on X - he has a history of bullying and may be involved in peer abuse. They may have this lad on file, he may be known to them.
I would give the incident and the lad's details to the CP team at Gilwell - whilst the bullying issue was dealt with as an unrelated incident. (I've got two Scouts just now, to look at them butter wouldn't melt in their mouths, but they both are sneaky bullies, I know it, and they know that I know it and they don't like it. I'm always watching them and as soon as they start I'm in there asking them what's going on. I guess it makes me the bully, but let's see, in the feeding chain.... yup, that's the way it works. The rest know that I don't vitcimise people, that I can have a laugh, but they know that I won't tolerate bullying.
> > Last weekend, my Troop ran a successful "training camp", except for a > > serious event that has come to light after our return home.
> > It is alleged that one of the Scouts was threatened by another, to the > > extent of "If you tell any of the leaders, I'll wrap this mallet round > > your head". The threat was reported to have been made to stop the victim > > telling us about another incident inside the tent during the night.
> > The night-time incident is not the one concerning us, as leaders. As far > > as we know, it was just some general "mucking about" in the (all-boys) > > tent that involved getting into each other's sleeping bags. I suspect that > > we really don't need to know the finer details. However, the alleged > > threat, which has been independently reported to us by the victim and > > another Scout, as a witness, does need some action from us.
> > We haven't yet spoken to the alleged culprit to get his account of > > events - but, given the independent reports, we intend to apply some > > sanction because of his behaviour. We will inform him that behaviour like > > that could lead to action by the police, as it is "threatening behaviour", > > and that we are seeking advice as to what to do.
> > So, here I am, seeking advice. What sanctions would you, dear reader, > > apply?
> You rather obviously have a bully in your midst. Possibly something worse.
> Going to the Police is a rather drastic move, even threatening it. It will > destroy any trust there is between you and the Scouts. Then if someone > REALLY needs to talk to you, they probably won't because of the fear of you > going to the Police.
> 1/ I'd deal with the bullying, this cannot just be happening out of sight.
> 2/ I'd be very concerned about the cause of the incident. If all were > participating willingly, then maybe it was just lads being lads. If not, > then were they coerced? Which does seem possible. If this is then followed > by a threat of violence on making disclosure, then I have to wonder how > serious this is, and should it be reported to Gilwell.
> Lets consider this. You have, I guess, no access to social security records. > The SS cannot call a Scout leader and say, keep an eye on X - he has a > history of bullying and may be involved in peer abuse. They may have this > lad on file, he may be known to them.
> I would give the incident and the lad's details to the CP team at Gilwell - > whilst the bullying issue was dealt with as an unrelated incident. (I've > got two Scouts just now, to look at them butter wouldn't melt in their > mouths, but they both are sneaky bullies, I know it, and they know that I > know it and they don't like it. I'm always watching them and as soon as they > start I'm in there asking them what's going on. I guess it makes me the > bully, but let's see, in the feeding chain.... yup, that's the way it works. > The rest know that I don't vitcimise people, that I can have a laugh, but > they know that I won't tolerate bullying.
> Ewan Scott
Entirely agree with Ewan.
Also, the two incidents are both serious.
Sorry to ask, but how come you weren't aware of something going on in the tents? As a daft old bugger, I never go to bed while I can hear kids in tents talking, and I and my assistants do patrol until we're confident of sleep.
(Having experienced a "mucking about" incident some years ago, we make sure two of us "attend" if there is any need to enter a tent.) But in this case CP involvement seems essential to me. Bill
> You rather obviously have a bully in your midst. Possibly something worse.
> Going to the Police is a rather drastic move, even threatening it. It will > destroy any trust there is between you and the Scouts. Then if someone > REALLY needs to talk to you, they probably won't because of the fear of > you > going to the Police.
> 1/ I'd deal with the bullying, this cannot just be happening out of sight.
> 2/ I'd be very concerned about the cause of the incident. If all were > participating willingly, then maybe it was just lads being lads. If not, > then were they coerced? Which does seem possible. If this is then followed > by a threat of violence on making disclosure, then I have to wonder how > serious this is, and should it be reported to Gilwell.
> Lets consider this. You have, I guess, no access to social security > records. > The SS cannot call a Scout leader and say, keep an eye on X - he has a > history of bullying and may be involved in peer abuse. They may have this > lad on file, he may be known to them.
> I would give the incident and the lad's details to the CP team at > Gilwell - > whilst the bullying issue was dealt with as an unrelated incident. (I've > got two Scouts just now, to look at them butter wouldn't melt in their > mouths, but they both are sneaky bullies, I know it, and they know that I > know it and they don't like it. I'm always watching them and as soon as > they > start I'm in there asking them what's going on. I guess it makes me the > bully, but let's see, in the feeding chain.... yup, that's the way it > works. > The rest know that I don't vitcimise people, that I can have a laugh, but > they know that I won't tolerate bullying.
>Entirely agree with Ewan. >Also, the two incidents are both serious. >Sorry to ask, but how come you weren't aware of something going on in >the tents? >As a daft old bugger, I never go to bed while I can hear kids in tents >talking, and I and my assistants do patrol until we're confident of >sleep. >(Having experienced a "mucking about" incident some years ago, we make >sure two of us "attend" if there is any need to enter a tent.) >But in this case CP involvement seems essential to me.
I have to say that I only really understood this when a father, slightly the worse for wear and obviously concerned, let the cat out of the bag that his son was being monitored by social services as an abuser.
The reason, AIUI that the SA has centralized the CP team, is so that information can be shared between the SA and the SS etc.. Although I am given to understand that the flow of information remains one way - I stand to be corrected.
On 31 Oct, 14:39, "MatSav" <matthew | dot | savage | at | dsl | dot | pipex | dot | com> wrote:
> Last weekend, my Troop ran a successful "training camp", except > for a serious event that has come to light after our return home.
> It is alleged that one of the Scouts was threatened by another, > to the extent of "If you tell any of the leaders, I'll wrap this > mallet round your head".
Oh dear that could be serious. Of course it could be a little OTT similar to me saying 'I could murder a cup of tea' ten minutes ago!
> The threat was reported to have been > made to stop the victim telling us about another incident inside > the tent during the night.
Okay, so it's a 'shut up or else'.
> The night-time incident is not the one concerning us, as leaders.
Whoa there! The reasons underlying the threat are important. You can't ignore them.
> As far as we know, it was just some general "mucking about" in > the (all-boys) tent that involved getting into each other's > sleeping bags.
As far as you know. Was it mucking about or was it something else, something more sinister/disturbing?
> I suspect that we really don't need to know the > finer details.
You need to know some details. You need to know what lead up to the threat being made.
> However, the alleged threat, which has been > independently reported to us by the victim and another Scout, as > a witness, does need some action from us.
If it was reported to you by the victim than that's not independent.
Don't you mean: 'The alleged threat was reported to us by the victim and their report corroborated by another scout'?
> We haven't yet spoken to the alleged culprit to get his account > of events
And you must in all fairness.
- but, given the independent reports,
Where did independent reports come from? You have mentioned only one report so far (not independent). And you've given no details of the corroboration. Is the 'witness' reliable and truly independent or are they the victim's best mate?
> we intend to. > apply some sanction because of his behaviour.
You've got the report.Now investigate. If it's a sensitive issue then investigate sensitively. Gather evidence. Talk to all involved, perpetrator, victim, witnesses. Weigh up the evidence. Consider. Conclude. Then pronounce what sanctions may/may not apply.
Don't jump the gun.
(And it's not the crime of the century, but you need to be as through and as sensitive as possible, to be as fair as possible.)
> We will inform him > that behaviour like that could lead to action by the police, as > it is "threatening behaviour", and that we are seeking advice as > to what to do.
No need to go that far (yet)!
If I was reported to the authorities each and every time I said: 'I'll murder the bugger who's done...' or 'Wait until I get the **** and stuff his head down the loo for doing....' or God knows whatever, I'd be permanently in the dock.
There is 'threatening behaviour' and there is threatening behaviour. It may be an off the cuff remark. You should not dismiss it. However, keep things in proportion until you know more.
> So, here I am, seeking advice. What sanctions would you, dear > reader, apply?
> On 31 Oct, 14:39, "MatSav" <matthew | dot | savage | at | dsl | > dot | > pipex | dot | com> wrote: >> Last weekend, my Troop ran a successful "training camp", >> except >> for a serious event that has come to light after our return >> home.
>> It is alleged that one of the Scouts was threatened by >> another, >> to the extent of "If you tell any of the leaders, I'll wrap >> this >> mallet round your head".
> Oh dear that could be serious. Of course it could be a little > OTT > similar to me saying 'I could murder a cup of tea' ten minutes > ago!
>> The threat was reported to have been >> made to stop the victim telling us about another incident >> inside >> the tent during the night.
> Okay, so it's a 'shut up or else'.
It seems that way, yes.
>> The night-time incident is not the one concerning us, as >> leaders.
> Whoa there! The reasons underlying the threat are important. > You can't > ignore them.
>> As far as we know, it was just some general "mucking about" in >> the (all-boys) tent that involved getting into each other's >> sleeping bags.
> As far as you know. Was it mucking about or was it something > else, > something more sinister/disturbing?
We are hoping it's not the latter.
>> I suspect that we really don't need to know the >> finer details.
> You need to know some details. You need to know what lead up to > the > threat being made.
If it is something more sinister or disturbing, *I* don't want to know the finer details. If so, it will be time to call in the professionals, as others have said.
>> However, the alleged threat, which has been >> independently reported to us by the victim and another Scout, >> as >> a witness, does need some action from us.
> If it was reported to you by the victim than that's not > independent.
> Don't you mean: 'The alleged threat was reported to us by the > victim > and their report corroborated by another scout'?
Indeed I do.
>> We haven't yet spoken to the alleged culprit to get his >> account >> of events
> And you must in all fairness.
Indeed.
> - but, given the independent reports,
> Where did independent reports come from? You have mentioned > only one > report so far (not independent). And you've given no details of > the > corroboration. Is the 'witness' reliable and truly independent > or are > they the victim's best mate?
OK, "report". Yes, he's reliable - and no, he's not the alleged victim's best mate.
>> we intend to. >> apply some sanction because of his behaviour.
> You've got the report.Now investigate. If it's a sensitive > issue then > investigate sensitively. Gather evidence. Talk to all involved, > perpetrator, victim, witnesses. Weigh up the evidence. > Consider. > Conclude. Then pronounce what sanctions may/may not apply.
> Don't jump the gun.
> (And it's not the crime of the century, but you need to be as > through > and as sensitive as possible, to be as fair as possible.)
>> We will inform him >> that behaviour like that could lead to action by the police, >> as >> it is "threatening behaviour", and that we are seeking advice >> as >> to what to do.
> No need to go that far (yet)!
> If I was reported to the authorities each and every time I > said: 'I'll > murder the bugger who's done...' or 'Wait until I get the **** > and > stuff his head down the loo for doing....' or God knows > whatever, I'd > be permanently in the dock.
> There is 'threatening behaviour' and there is threatening > behaviour. > It may be an off the cuff remark. You should not dismiss it. > However, > keep things in proportion until you know more.
It's difficult to do, given the corroborating evidence - but yes, we need to be fair.
>> So, here I am, seeking advice. What sanctions would you, dear >> reader, apply?
> None. Yet.
> Go do some talking.
I've sought advice from my DC, in line with the YPF policy, and a course of action has been decided.
Thank you for everyone's opinions and assistance - they were very useful.
|
