A teacher, accused of smacking a teenage female student’s bottom and allegedly making inappropriate comments to her, has won a High Court challenge against a finding of Tusla, the Child and Family Agency, that he had engaged in child sexual abuse.
The teacher, who cannot be named, was suspended after allegedly whispering in the young girl’s ear: “Call me tonight at 10:30; I have the house to myself.” He was also accused of, on the same day, having told the girl: “Stop calling me, my wife is getting worried.”
As she had then attempted to leave the room he had slapped her on her bottom in the presence of other students. Mr Justice Charles Meenan, in quashing Tusla’s decision, said the girl had also alleged her teacher had three times said to her: “Call me.”
The teacher had denied her claims but had said he may have accidentally come into contact with her.
Tusla failings
Tusla’s finding of sexual abuse had been upheld on appeal but Judge Meenan, in a reserved judgment, said the decision-making process by the child agency had been fundamentally and deeply flawed.
“The seriousness and consequences of such a finding against a teacher cannot be understated,” Judge Meenan said when quashing Tusla’s decision and that of the appeal hearing. He said one would have expected that Tusla, in reaching its conclusion following an investigation of the complaint made in late 2015, would have afforded the teacher basic fair procedures.
Unfortunately this had been far from the case and the appeal committee, having had an opportunity to remedy the situation, had failed to do so. Tusla had failed to observe the most basic rules of fair procedures.
Judger Meenan said the teacher, represented by Frank Callanan SC, had brought judicial review proceedings against Tusla and the committee that had heard his appeal, challenging the finding against him. The judge said Tusla had persisted with a version of the allegation that had been unsupported by the teenager’s written statement.
The agency had not put the teacher’s version of what had happened to the young student for comment. This had been a very clear and serious departure from fair procedures.
“I do not see how Tusla could have reached a fair conclusion about the truth of the allegation without taking this basic step,” Judge Meenan said. It had been noteworthy, he said, that a criminal prosecution against the teacher in the District Court had failed on the evidence of the girl herself.
Lack of boundaries
The judge said that in reaching its conclusions Tusla had taken into account another allegation made against the teacher in 2011, without attaching any sufficient weight to the fact that there had been a finding of no evidence of child sexual abuse made against him in the earlier incident.
In the 2011 incident another girl student had claimed the teacher had sat beside her on a bus and had made her uncomfortable by telling her he wished she was his daughter, and that he had previously rubbed her leg during a school musical. The teacher had denied improper physical conduct with that student but had accepted he had said the words.
An inquiry following the 2011 incident had found there was no evidence of sexual abuse but had expressed concern about the teacher’s lack of boundaries. Judge Meenan said Tusla had taken other alleged events into account without having informed the teacher of this or having sought a response from him about these.
“It ought to have been clear to the panel hearing the appeal that there was a failure by Tusla to observe even the most basic rules of fair procedure,” Judge Meenan said.
“The appeal panel’s decision to the effect that the teacher had been afforded fair procedures is both irrational and unreasonable,” Judge Meenan said. The matter will return before the court in October when final orders are expected to be made.