SN parents - what do you think about this?
06 June 2013, 10:45 PM
#1
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
iTrader: (9)
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: .
Posts: 20,035
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SN parents - what do you think about this?
Indecent images teacher Geoffrey Bettley cleared to work again
If I had any I am pretty sure I would not want my kids taught by someone like this!
Surprised there hasn't been a thread on this to be honest, I'm sure had he been from a certain ethnic background we'd have had one though
If I had any I am pretty sure I would not want my kids taught by someone like this!
Surprised there hasn't been a thread on this to be honest, I'm sure had he been from a certain ethnic background we'd have had one though
06 June 2013, 10:54 PM
#3
Scooby Regular
Indecent images teacher Geoffrey Bettley cleared to work again
If I had any I am pretty sure I would not want my kids taught by someone like this!
Surprised there hasn't been a thread on this to be honest, I'm sure had he been from a certain ethnic background we'd have had one though
If I had any I am pretty sure I would not want my kids taught by someone like this!
Surprised there hasn't been a thread on this to be honest, I'm sure had he been from a certain ethnic background we'd have had one though
06 June 2013, 10:58 PM
#6
Scooby Regular
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COPINE_scale
Level 1 Indicative Non-erotic and non-sexualised pictures showing children in their underwear, swimming costumes from either commercial sources or family albums. Pictures of children playing in normal settings, in which the context or organisation of pictures by the collector indicates inappropriateness.
Level 1 Indicative Non-erotic and non-sexualised pictures showing children in their underwear, swimming costumes from either commercial sources or family albums. Pictures of children playing in normal settings, in which the context or organisation of pictures by the collector indicates inappropriateness.
06 June 2013, 11:00 PM
#7
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
iTrader: (9)
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: .
Posts: 20,035
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
At the end of the day the guy was placed on the sex offenders registers. Either that was wrong and he should appeal or he should never be allowed to teach again!
Trending Topics
06 June 2013, 11:34 PM
#9
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,345
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Indecent images teacher Geoffrey Bettley cleared to work again
If I had any I am pretty sure I would not want my kids taught by someone like this!
Surprised there hasn't been a thread on this to be honest, I'm sure had he been from a certain ethnic background we'd have had one though
If I had any I am pretty sure I would not want my kids taught by someone like this!
Surprised there hasn't been a thread on this to be honest, I'm sure had he been from a certain ethnic background we'd have had one though
If you wait 2 years Sti Addict will resurrect the story.
I wouldn't be happy if he was anywhere near kids either FWIW. Who in their right mind would take a risk with this person in future?
07 June 2013, 09:15 AM
#11
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Birmingham
Posts: 2,482
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
07 June 2013, 02:23 PM
#14
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: manchester
Posts: 1,790
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Indecent images teacher Geoffrey Bettley cleared to work again
If I had any I am pretty sure I would not want my kids taught by someone like this!
Surprised there hasn't been a thread on this to be honest, I'm sure had he been from a certain ethnic background we'd have had one though
If I had any I am pretty sure I would not want my kids taught by someone like this!
Surprised there hasn't been a thread on this to be honest, I'm sure had he been from a certain ethnic background we'd have had one though
07 June 2013, 03:00 PM
#20
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
iTrader: (9)
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: .
Posts: 20,035
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Look, in all seriousness for a minute, you are the only one that chose to interpret it that way which says a lot more about you than it does about me. I know how I meant it, everyone else got it, just you interpreted it differently. I can only guess why! 
07 June 2013, 03:05 PM
#21
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: manchester
Posts: 1,790
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think you are Leslie Chow from the Hangover in disguise.
07 June 2013, 03:06 PM
#22
Pontificating
I would like to think that every teacher, head teacher, governor and any parent who sits on the school board will be well aware of this chap and his story and he'll never get anywhere near another school.
07 June 2013, 04:11 PM
#25
Moderator
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: The Terry Crews of moderation. P P P P P P POWER!!
Posts: 18,687
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"Level 1 Indicative Non-erotic and non-sexualised pictures showing children in their underwear, swimming costumes from either commercial sources or family albums. Pictures of children playing in normal settings, in which the context or organisation of pictures by the collector indicates inappropriateness."
Hang on, am I reading this correctly? Can't follow up the links - don't think it'd look good on my work history!! lol
So, strictly speaking, you could be put on the sex offenders list for lets say:
Having a picture of your dog playing in the fountain of a local park because it also contained a kid playing in said fountain in their swimsuit/underwear
Or
Having some old clips of 80s classic "We are the champions" on some video tapes in your loft???
Joking aside, that sounds a bit bit sinister!!!
Hang on, am I reading this correctly? Can't follow up the links - don't think it'd look good on my work history!! lol
So, strictly speaking, you could be put on the sex offenders list for lets say:
Having a picture of your dog playing in the fountain of a local park because it also contained a kid playing in said fountain in their swimsuit/underwear
Or
Having some old clips of 80s classic "We are the champions" on some video tapes in your loft???
Joking aside, that sounds a bit bit sinister!!!
Last edited by New_scooby_04; 07 June 2013 at 04:13 PM.
07 June 2013, 04:50 PM
#26
Why would he have pictures of kids in underwear/swimwear though ? 200 of them I think. If it was for a legitimate reason (cant think of one , maybe sports day or school trips)could he not have easily just said "look , these are from the school trip and are on display at the school" or whatever ? I have worked in loads of schools and nurseries and there are loads of pics on display , some even on a loop on a TV of the school trips etc , none of which are of kids in underwear. If say , he was the teacher who always took the kids on school trips and maybe they happen to be in swimwear , and maybe he kept them on a file on his PC , he might be innocent . But it doesnt look good either way . Even the fact the question was asked would probably loose you your job.
Its scary when you imagine if you take your kids on a summer holiday every year and take pics of them in the kids pool with other random kids (in the background) , how many pics of kids in swimwear would you have on your PC after 10 years ! In fact , how many times have you seen some random naked kid running around poolside or at the beach , imagine if they were unknowingly captured in an innocent pic and you had never paid any attention to it , until cops are sifting through your PC !
Thats kids in swimwear and naked ! Good luck persuading people you arent a peado if that got printed in the papers !
Its scary when you imagine if you take your kids on a summer holiday every year and take pics of them in the kids pool with other random kids (in the background) , how many pics of kids in swimwear would you have on your PC after 10 years ! In fact , how many times have you seen some random naked kid running around poolside or at the beach , imagine if they were unknowingly captured in an innocent pic and you had never paid any attention to it , until cops are sifting through your PC !
Thats kids in swimwear and naked ! Good luck persuading people you arent a peado if that got printed in the papers !
Last edited by CharlySkunkWeed; 07 June 2013 at 04:57 PM.
07 June 2013, 05:08 PM
#27
Moderator
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: The Terry Crews of moderation. P P P P P P POWER!!
Posts: 18,687
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Why would he have pictures of kids in underwear/swimwear though ? 200 of them I think. If it was for a legitimate reason (cant think of one , maybe sports day or school trips)could he not have easily just said "look , these are from the school trip and are on display at the school" or whatever ? I have worked in loads of schools and nurseries and there are loads of pics on display , some even on a loop on a TV of the school trips etc , none of which are of kids in underwear. If say , he was the teacher who always took the kids on school trips and maybe they happen to be in swimwear , and maybe he kept them on a file on his PC , he might be innocent . But it doesnt look good either way . Even the fact the question was asked would probably loose you your job.
Its scary when you imagine if you take your kids on a summer holiday every year and take pics of them in the kids pool with other random kids (in the background) , how many pics of kids in swimwear would you have on your PC after 10 years ! In fact , how many times have you seen some random naked kid running around poolside or at the beach , imagine if they were unknowingly captured in an innocent pic and you had never paid any attention to it , until cops are sifting through your PC !
Thats kids in swimwear and naked ! Good luck persuading people you arent a peado if that got printed in the papers !
Its scary when you imagine if you take your kids on a summer holiday every year and take pics of them in the kids pool with other random kids (in the background) , how many pics of kids in swimwear would you have on your PC after 10 years ! In fact , how many times have you seen some random naked kid running around poolside or at the beach , imagine if they were unknowingly captured in an innocent pic and you had never paid any attention to it , until cops are sifting through your PC !
Thats kids in swimwear and naked ! Good luck persuading people you arent a peado if that got printed in the papers !
It just makes me a bit uncomfortable that people are out with burning torches and pitchforks with chants of burn the kiddie fiddler, then when one examines the characterization of the material he was prosecuted for (?) it seems like something ostensibly that, as you point out, many decent people might quite legitimately have!
Problem with discussion on this topic is good sense and reason is so often replaced by hysteria and paranoia .... and we really don't want legislation based on the latter that might irrevocably ruin the reputation of people for little more than the fact that their holiday snaps include a picture of a kid playing on the beach!!
There is an old saying: throw enough s*it and it stinks/sticks. You have to throw very little sh*t with respect to this subject before it stinks/sticks!!
Last edited by New_scooby_04; 07 June 2013 at 05:16 PM.
07 June 2013, 05:19 PM
#29
Scooby Regular
and yet looking at a 18 year old girl, with (on purpose) the body of a 16 year old, get fvcked simultaneously by five 60 year old men
is perfectly legal
it is acceptable?
would you want your daughter being taught by men who watched that
is perfectly legal
it is acceptable?
would you want your daughter being taught by men who watched that
07 June 2013, 05:38 PM
#30
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
iTrader: (9)
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: .
Posts: 20,035
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Couldn't agree more. While I have no problem with **** per se I do find the whole teen/schoolgirl/young girl genre quite worrying to be honest and (rightly or wrongly) I would be wary of anyone who was into that sort of thing especially if I had kids.
Last edited by f1_fan; 07 June 2013 at 05:39 PM.