Sleazy Labor soft on sleazy teachers
lynx
Rules soft on sleaze, as disgraced teachers get second chance
Article from: Herald Sun
http://tinyurl.com/3mdmn6
Karen Collier and Emily Power
October 06, 2008 12:00am
DOZENS of teachers have been dumped from Victorian classrooms because of
sex crimes involving children or sleazy moves on students.
Thirty teachers guilty of sex offences with minors have been instantly
deregistered or denied a teacher's licence in the past five years.
A Herald Sun investigation has found at least 30 more teachers have
escaped criminal action but faced disciplinary inquiries over
accusations of inappropriate acts such as kissing, groping and sending
lewd text messages.
Some have been cleared to return to classrooms if they agree to
counselling and other conditions.
The revelations come amid a state government push to soften zero
tolerance laws, allowing some teachers with less serious sex offence
histories to challenge deregistrations.
The planned policy shift was buried in a report, released in August,
that evaluated the role of the Victorian Institute of Teaching, which
regulates the state's 104,000 registered teachers.
The latest to join the teacher shame file is Paul Anthony Segar,
sentenced to at least three years' jail for molesting a student in the
darkroom of a secondary school in Melbourne's east in the 1990s..
Other former teachers jailed in recent years for sex acts include Karen
Ellis, Natalina A'ddario, Gavin Hopper, Peter Donald Carne, Stephen
Peter Morrow, Mark Andrew Hayes and David Barry Quinn.
Separate VIT misconduct cases include William Blair Hessler, banned last
year after allegedly getting intimate with a student while parked in his
car outside her parents' house.
Edward Zinovy Curov was barred in 2005 over an alleged fling with a
pupil during school holidays, while former Catholic school teacher
Michelle Alleri was banned amid accusations she pursued a 17-year-old to
satisfy her sexual desires.
Katherine Laura Nash's licence was revoked in 2004 after alleged
sex-charged chats with a female year 10 student.
VIT records reveal some teachers caught fostering unprofessional
relationships get another chance.
Teacher Sean David Grady recently had his registration suspended but
could return in 2010, despite sending filthy messages to students and
propositioning one to skinny dip at a country Victoria school.
Former teacher David Jonathan Kehagias was recently punished but could
be back by late next year after confessing to taking a year 12 student
out for dinner, and kissing and touching her breast.
Those declared fit to work after counselling include a depressed teacher
who requested sexually explicit images of a year 12 student, and another
teacher who kissed a year 12 girl, touched her chest and took her to a
hotel.
VIT chief Andrew Ius said disciplinary panels considered remorse,
psychologist views, witness statements, ages of those involved and other
circumstances.
"A balanced decision is made on case-by-case factors," Mr Ius said.
But Opposition education spokesman Martin Dixon said some penalties
insulted parents and betrayed students.
Mr Dixon also said proposals to give some teachers with sex offence
backgrounds the right to appeal against deregistration in the Victorian
Civil and Administrative Tribunal undermined public confidence.
Currently, teachers guilty of sex offences against minors such as
indecent assault, penetration and child pornography possession, are
automatically struck off or denied registration regardless of incident
timing or circumstances.
The Government now says teachers should be afforded the same natural
justice as other professions working with children, but a spokesman
insists the worst sex offenders would not get appeal rights.
Australian Education Union state president Mary Bluett agreed there was
no place for predatory teachers.
"That's the sort of action that sends an absolute shiver through the
entire profession," Ms Bluett said.
But she said those ousted under existing law included people who had
committed a relatively minor one-off offence long before they were teachers.
Mr Ius said some people who had made childhood mistakes deserved a
chance to challenge deregistration.
"Clearly, you would not be wanting pedophiles in. But if it is a matter
that . . . was in a children's court at the time, there may be a reason
to appeal," he said.
Don H
news:36kGk.3488$sc2....@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
# Nowhere does moral indignation flourish more than in defence of innocent
children - your own, and other people's.
But some sense of proportion is needed, if a realistic assessment of
possible harm is likely, and justice done.
The Reproductive urge is, second only to Self-Preservation, our
strongest instinct.
All attending school are there to learn, not indulge in secondary (sex)
activities. Temptation might be available, but it should be resisted, as
few things devalue a teacher's standing as giving way to sexual urges re
students.
Past malpractice should not mean automatic condemnation for life - if
there is no current indulgence. But it depends if it was youthful
indiscretion in the distant past, or more recent.
All accused should be entitled to a fair trial, as even accusers may
have evil intent, such as dislike of a teacher. The calling of witnesses
may not be an option, but many accusations by a variety of children points
to likelihood of evil-doing.
Are all child-molesters necessarily life-long predatory paedophiles, or
should each be judged without prejudice?
There is a case for abolition of single-sex schools, and for
sex-education to be mandatory in the teenage years.
Overall, it is necessary to ensure adults behave as adults, and be
responsible for their actions. Sex with each other is one thing; with
minors is another.