Enoch Burke turns up to school again despite sacking

well done to him

Quick, someone give this person the attention they seek!

I think that Burke's argument, about the ASTI rep, was valid. Was surprised that it needed the Court of Appeal to decide it.

I find it odd that the Burke's can (and do) follow appropriate procedures to bring forward successful legal challenges when it suits them. But then they engage in bizarre self sabotaging behaviour when they have a fighting chance were they to follow correct procedures.

I can only assume it's the publicity/martyrdom that's more attractive for them?

It's not that they're actually biased, it's just that they're on an appeals committee. They should have absolutely no skin in the game on anything that's being argued. Or, in reality, at least not publicly.

No matter how hard I've tried I just can't stop receiving updates to this thread ? any ideas ? I haven't even posted here in many months.

As a parent I'd be more inclined to use him as an example about how not to carry oneself. By 17/18 if my sons are under threat by someone like him either physically or mentally, I'll have failed.

Why would the judge add "with a great deal of reluctance" that the decision was made.

It's either how the law should work or not surely. Why is she commenting on that.

There is argument to be made that justice must not only done but be seen to be done. That does not necessarily mean that because a person, any person, has made public his positions on touchy topics, he/she is incapable of making an honest and fair judgement on something he/she was tasked to evaluate and decide on. Judges are asked to decide on matters before them daily on that basis and we allow them do so.

I reckon now that the ASTI rep has been found LIKELY to be biased against Burke, due to his public positions on issues that the Burkes do not agree with, the Burkes will change tack when whomever is to replace the ASTI rep is agreed on and found to be equal to the task the ASTI rep undertook. They'll look into the public positions and speeches of the replacement to try and get him/her disqualified SOLELY because the Burkes have opposing views.

I don't know whether there is a way to have the new person declared qualified by the courts plural to put an end to the Burkes delaying tactics so they cannot make claims of the new person being biased against them merely because he/she, like the Burkes, has positions on matters of public debate which do not agree with the Burkes positions.

They've tried this by accusing the judges hearing Burkes appeals of being biased so have a proven track record of fake "bias" allegations against anyone who is tasked with making judgements on claims the Burkes have made and continue to make.

you're going to need an old priest, a young priest, a candle, bell and bible.

What would have swayed the court is that the ASTI rep held a position of authority, and used that position of authority to make public statements on the issue.

That doesn't apply to the vast majority of ASTI nominees let alone ordinary people.

Why do you await the claimant suing the ASTI rep on the grounds of bias? There is no case to sue in that regard.

You are indeed correct that the claimant in the alleged case of wrongful dismissal and biased arbiters made public statements on the issue while a teacher, which is why there is an issue of potential bias. I don't understand the purpose of your question.

Well, in this particular case, the court agreed that the person concerned could not hold a different opinion to his and still be able to provide an unbiased service. The claimant was vindicated on this point, and while he is wrong on so many others, the courts agreed with him.

Take it up with the court. Cheers.