WOT “Web of Trust” = Web of Lies
Last minute victory
for persecuted
Dundee teacher
Linda Ross
A Depute head teacher who was sacked over false allegations has won a last minute victory against Dundee City Council.
Linda Ross won her claim for unfair dismissal against Dundee City Council in July 2011 after she was sacked for gross misconduct.The council has run up a huge legal bill fighting the decision but declared on Wednesday it had withdrawn its appeal, leaving taxpayers to pick up the cost.
Both sides are subject to a strict silence order but it is understood the council had already spent upwards of £25,000 on the appeal hearing, including around £15,000 to cover the fee of Brian Napier QC.The persecution of Mrs Ross is estimated to have cost the council a six-figure sum. The Dundee Courier created a freedom of information request asking what the value would be to the city council in terms of employees’ hours and money from Sept 2007 to the conclusion of the judgement in June 2011. The council's reply: ''This information is not recorded''.
Politicians and tax campaigners last night criticised the council for its “unacceptable” decision to squander thousands of pounds of public money on an appeal hearing – only to surrender its case at the last minute.Linda Ross’s solicitor John Muir said Mrs Ross, former depute at Sidlaw View and Longhaugh Primary, and her husband Vic were “delighted” that the matter was concluded on the eve of the three-day appeal hearing in Edinburgh.
The former teacher made national headlines two years ago when it was alleged by council chiefs she was involved in selling inappropriate adult clothing on a website that had a direct link to pornographic material.The website showed a model wearing a white crop-top and a tartan miniskirt with matching tie and gloves. Other items for sale included a sexy policewoman’s outfit. The items were displayed as teen’s party wear on a dropshipping site owned and run by her husband. Mr Ross also owned five other websites including a furniture strore.
He said, a lot of his customers were "council employees and this accounted for most of the website hits".
The employment tribunal found the website allegations were unfounded.
Robert Oxley of Taxpayer Scotland condemned the council for its spending on the abandoned case.
Robert Oxley
He said: “It’s unacceptable that the council increased the bill to taxpayers by dragging out this case only to drop it at the eleventh hour.
“They need to stop thinking about saving face and start thinking about saving taxpayers money.”Independent councillor Ian Borthwick said: “I have made my position absolutely clear from the outset that it would have been prudent for the city council to have accepted the findings of the tribunal.
“This sorry saga has dragged on for many months and has not only cost thousands of pounds to the taxpayer of Dundee but has also caused a great deal of anxiety to a number of people involved.“The justification for this appeal appeared to be the council wanting to defend the reputations for their officials. Where is the defence of these people now?
“I’m not personally criticising anyone official but these facts should be presented to elected members.”Labour group leader Councillor Kevin Keenan added: “I don’t think the tribunal judgement in any way looked favourably on the council and I think there are clear lessons to be learned from this sorry episode, so that policies and procedures are adhered to within the council.
“The withdrawal of the appeal obviously means there is some kind of acceptance of the judgement which wasn’t there before.”Mrs Ross was suspended from her post as depute-head of Sidlaw View Primary in Dundee in 2007 after her husband acted as whistle-blower and made allegations in the press of regular attacks by pupils on teachers and of violent parents wandering the corridors of the school.
Mr Ross claimed staff had been verbally and physically attacked almost daily, and that some had been bitten, struck on the head, kicked, spat on and “threatened with sharp objects”.During two disciplinary hearings, Mrs Ross was accused of breaking council rules by being the source of the allegations and distributing unauthorised material to staff.
She was suspended for five months before being told by senior education officials that she would keep her post as depute head under condition that she transferred to Longhaugh Primary.Mrs Ross was transferred to the school as depute head but was suspended again in June 2008 and dismissed for gross misconduct four months later.
She told the tribunal she had been facing “trumped up charges with little way of defending myself.”
It later emerged that she had been sacked over fifteen allegations made by former director of education Anne Wilson, who was mentioned in the tribunal report as being an “unreliable witness”.
Giving evidence at an employment tribunal into her claim for unfair dismissal, Mrs Ross said Anne Wilson had been “judge, jury, and executioner.”
The employment tribunal found the claims to be unfounded and severely criticised Anne Wilson, the council’s HR manager Janet Robertson and Lord Provost John Letford for his part in an appeal hearing, Mrs Ross claimed he had behaved as if he was “on a jolly”.The terms and conditions of a signed agreement have yet to be finalised.
by Justin Hawk
"The whole charade was exposed at the tribunal – lies were told"
Vic Ross, husband of sacked teacher Linda Ross, who won an employment tribunal against the city council, has blasted the council for “wasting taxpayers’ money” by appealing the tribunal’s decision.
He said the council’s move is a “face-saving exercise” after several senior officials were singled out for criticism by the employment tribunal.
The appeal tribunal is due to take place in Edinburgh over three days this week, the full cost to the council is estimated to be more than £25,000 after the local authority hired a top advocate to represent it.
Following the tribunal judgment in 2012, former education director Anne Wilson, council human resources staff and Lord Provost John Letford were criticised.
The tribunal unanimously found that the ex-depute head teacher had been dismissed unfairly, describing Anne Wilson as not being a “reliable” witness and said the council’s HR department had ignored “correct legal advice” — an allegation the council have denied.
Mr Ross says council chiefs have hired the services of QC Brian Napier, which will cost taxpayers around £15,000 for the appeal hearing. Including preparation fees, the estimated overall cost of the appeal will probably exceed £25,000, when added on top of the original tribunal costs. This would far 
outweigh any award to his wife, her husband claims.
He said: “There was no value placed on her claim. Linda is now retired so any settlement would be limited. The result being they’re spending more cash on a QC than they stand to lose on her award.”
It is believed several attempts were made to have discussions with the council, but it fell on deaf ears.
Vic said: “This is about the council saving face. It’s about Janet Robertson and Anne Wilson being called liars and Dundee taxpayers are having to foot the bill for it.
“That amount of funds would pay someone’s wages for at least a year, maybe even two people. Instead they are putting £25,000 in some rich Edinburgh lawyer’s pocket.”
Vic Ross says the case has caused himself and Linda “extreme stress” and says they are “disappointed” that having gone through a very traumatic experience and won her case “the council have chosen to drag my wife through additional stress of an appeal.”
It was a letter to his MSP regarding discipline in schools that started the furore some five years ago.
Mr Ross said: “At that time an ‘independent’ inquiry was footed by the taxpayer, as have the countless man hours for council lawyers, HR people, teachers who gave statements and evidence, press people, heads of department, internal hearings, tribunal hearings.
“There was the extraordinary expense when they went to court to get an interdict on behalf of a headmaster and also installed and paid for CCTV at his house, all because of a few curt words on the telephone.
“The whole charade was exposed at the tribunal – lies were told, what does it tell you when all three members of the tribunal found the director of education to be unreliable when explaining her decision and the reasons for it?
“She said we were internet porn peddlers seeking to undermine the moral fiber of the Dundee school population – it became farcical, but at the same time it was vicious and designed to damage our reputation.
“I would have hoped that the verdict would have been cause for an internal investigation. Now further time and expense are thrown at us. Why?
“There is no great legal issue involved in this appeal, in fact it’s exactly the same as it has been from the start – Dundee City Council will not admit being wrong.
“If all this time, money and effort had been devoted to our schools perhaps the latest exam results wouldn’t have been so disappointing.”
The appeal will be heard on 13, 14, 15 February, 2013 at
54-56 Melville St, Edinburgh EH3 7HF
Linda Ross’ solicitor, John Muir, said he was unable to comment.
--------
By Justin Hawk - It's an Education.
Public outcry at blatant use of taxpayers cash by City Council
Disgraceful use of public resources
Appeal hearing to be heard in Edinburgh, 13, 14, 15 February 2013
The judgement of the employment judicature was unanimous to find that the dismissal of depute head Linda Ross was below the belt when discharged by Dundee council.
The council have since taken high-level legal consultation and on the advice of a QC decided to appeal.
Asked why the council was appealing, the spokesperson refused to expand.
After the judicature judgment was disclosed, The Dundee Courier created a freedom of information request asking what the value would be to the city council in terms of employees hours and money from Sept 2007 to the conclusion of the judgement in June 2011
The council's reply:
''This information is not recorded''
How very convenient, no accountability for taxpayers money whatsoever!
NB: The cost involved in hiring a top QC is estimated at £400 + per hour
It would be less costly to offer a settlement to Linda Ross after the unanimous decision reached by the employment tribunal in her unfair dismissal case.
Dates for the plea hearing are set down to be heard at
54-56 Melville St Edinburgh EH3 7HF
----------
By Justin Hawk - It's an Education.
Astounded and Ouraged
Many are struggling during this time of austerity. The Construction Industry, always a true barometer of the real economy, is on its knees, with good tradesmen unable to find work. Many workers struggle with the seemingly endless spiral of massive increases imposed by energy companies. Most workers have endured pay cuts or at best have seen no salary increase for some considerable time.
Against this background I’m astounded and outraged to learn the Council have engaged the services of one of the top QCs in the land, in its effort to overturn the damning Industrial tribunal verdict in favour of Linda Ross. Whilst I await confirmation via a FOI request, I’d be surprised if his services cost any less than £300 per hour, and that’s on top of my conservative estimate of the £350,000 the Council has wasted on this case so far. It is an insult to hard pressed council tax payers to witness the Council continue to waste money in what appears to me as a vendetta.
I ask the Council to accept the verdict of the tribunal, deal firmly with those officials or ex officials who were declared unreliable witnesses and end this costly charade immediately.
Iain D Cathro - Broughty Ferry
Confetti Money
It beggars belief for Dundee City Council to have failed to keep proper accounts, detailing the legal and other costs involved in their persecution of Linda Ross. Surely this is a legal duty, when public money is involved? Now they are proposing to spend confetti money appealing the Tribunal's decision.
Jennifer Helen Allan - Monifieth
Disgraceful
Yet another poor decision after a catalogue of errors. When will officials stop playing with tax payers hard earned cash? If the Council lose again who picks up the increased costs? I don't believe a full cost benefit analysis has been carried out. Disgraceful use of public funds.
Mike Barile - Dundee
Out of order
I cannot believe our inept, embarrassing, incompetent council are going to waste our money on this while jobs are being lost and cuts are being made. The council have already been highlighted as totally out of order on this one, time to put it behind them and let this poor wronged woman move on!!!
Appalled Council Tax Payer - Dundee
Egos
This looks to me like the egos past and present at the council cannot accept they were wrong and are prepared to waste our money to pursue this. Can these people not be made accountable if this appeal fails?
Ballumbie Ryan - Dundee
Stories from the Archives
By Justin Hawk - It's an Education.
Tribunal hears of “vendetta” against council
THE HUSBAND of sacked teacher Linda Ross has told an employment tribunal he had “a personal vendetta” against Dundee City Council.
Vic Ross said he believed disciplinary action against his wife had been ”payback” for him complaining about violence at the school where she previously worked.
After being served with a court order preventing him from contacting the head teacher of her new school, he decided ”enough’s enough—I have got to fight back somehow.”
He told the tribunal, “You have got to stand up for your next of kin. I knew it was going to be David against Goliath but I had to have a go.”
Mrs Ross, of Forfar, was sacked for gross misconduct from her post as deputy head teacher at Longhaugh Primary, Dundee, in 2008.
She used to work at Sidlaw View Primary, but was given a final written warning and transferred in the wake of an email her husband sent to The Courier alleging frequent violence at the school.
Recalling events at Sidlaw View, Mr Ross said he had been told by staff and parents about knives being carried into the school and a riot involving parents throwing chairs.
Mrs Ross’s solicitor John Muir asked if he had spoken out with his wife’s consent.
He replied, “She didn’t have any say in the matter. I was going to do it come hell or high water.”
Disciplinary proceedings followed for Mrs Ross and a council-commissioned independent inquiry found the claims of violence at Sidlaw View had been exaggerated.
Mr Ross said that, with his wife’s transfer to Longhaugh, “We just wanted to get back to normal and lead our lives peacefully again.”
He later became aware that Mrs Ross had been bitten by a pupil and there had been “a bit of aggro” from the boy’s parents, but he did not get involved as that would complicate matters.
By Justin Hawk - It's an Education.
Husband says there was nothing to hide
AN INQUIRY was then carried out into a claim that Mrs Ross had assaulted the boy.
She was told at a meeting with head teacher Gerard Munro the outcome of this was that she would be given advice, guidance and support, which caused her to come home upset.
Without her knowledge, Mr Ross had later telephoned Mr Munro several times to try to find out what was going on.
A few days later sheriff officers arrived at the couple’s home to serve him with an interim interdict ordering him not to contact Mr Munro.
Mr Ross said, “Within 30 minutes the BBC telephoned me.
“They already new about the interdict and asked me for my comments. I assumed there must have been a press release from the council.”
On his decision to speak to the media, he said “I am my own man. I do what I want to do. Wild horses couldn’t stop me.
“It was a personal vendetta by then. They had plastered my name over the six o’clock news with an interdict over a phone call.”
He denied having his wife’s authority or blessing to make statements to the press, or that she had done anything explicitly or implicitly to encourage him.
He said his statements were “my way of coping with it.”
On the council’s actions against his wife, he said, "I felt it was payback for Sidlaw View because I had highlighted the violence in Dundee schools.”
Various allegations were made against Mrs Ross by the council over the summer and Mr Muir suggested he must have known that his public comments were causing problems for her employment.
“What was there to hide? She’s a teacher, she’s not working for MI5,” Mr Ross said.
Mr Muir continued, “To be blunt, why not keep your trap shut?"
Mr Ross replied, “I didn’t see what there was to hide.”
In July he set up a website called lindaross.co.uk using his wife’s credit card to buy the domain name.
He told the tribunal, “It was launched by me, solely by me. Linda had nothing to do with it. It was a publicity campaign.”
One of the charges against Mrs Ross was that she was involved with a website that had links to pornography.
Mr Ross said he had an arrangement to sell copies of an e-book by an American teacher on school discipline, taking a cut of the sales. The computer source code for this included a video, but this “pointed to clean, educational sites, none of this pointed to any violence or sexual sites of any kind.”
Mr Muir asked him to look at photocopies of pages on video sharing website You Tube which formed part of the council’s case against his wife.
Mr Ross said this was an external site which had nothing to do with lindaross.co.uk.
The tribunal heard the completion of Mrs Ross’s cross-examination by council’s solicitor Madge Geddes, who referred her to a press article following her sacking which she was quoted as saying she was now able to speak for herself—the implication being her husband had been speaking on her behalf.
Mrs Ross said, “It was foolish of me to do that. I apologise for that. In retrospect I should not have done it.”
Council were “scrutinising”
lingerie site
By Justin Hawk - It's an Education.
THE HUSBAND of sacked teacher Linda Ross was “shocked” to learn that “Dundee City Council had been looking at lingerie on a website he ran, an employment tribunal heard.
Vic Ross said he had noticed an increase in the number of visitors to the site and wanted to know what was going on.
He said, “I was shocked to see that Dundee City Council were the main visitors to the site.
“The software told me they were going through lingerie. I was suspicious—I did not think it was employees, I thought it was someone scrutinising the website.”
His wife is claiming unfair dismissal from her post as deputy head of Longhaugh Primary in 2008.
Among the charges the council brought against her were running a business in her spare time without permission and having website links to inappropriate material.
Mr Ross said one of his websites sold a variety of products including beauty products, DVDs, football items, watches and lingerie.
The list included clothing under the brand Li’l Miss Naughty and Mr Ross said, ”A lot of this stuff is considered to be fancy dress costumes.”
Mr Ross referred to photocopies of items for sale on the website which were lodged as productions for the tribunal, including a DVD entitled Anne Nicole Smith Exposed, featuring the late playboy model.
He said, “Somebody has obviously gone through this with a fine tooth comb looking for dirt. The company who supply this are a reputable company.”
John Muir, his wife’s solicitor, asked if she had ever had anything to do with the websites Mr Ross ran.
The witness replied, “Not at all. She had nothing to do with the websites in any way whatsoever.”
Mr Ross added that he had never been communicated with directly by the council.
Cross-examined by council solicitor Madge Geddes, he was asked about a series of phone calls he made to Longhaugh head teacher Gerard Munro on the day his wife had been told the outcome of an inquiry into a claim she had assaulted a pupil.
He saw she was upset, he said, and added, “It concerned me and I felt I should get to the bottom of it. It may be looked upon as meddling but that’s me.”
Mr Ross said that during the first call the head teacher had hung up as soon as he found out who had phoned him.
He went on, “I was Mr Nice Guy to start with but later on I had to start tightening some screws.”
Ms Geddes listed various comments he had made during the calls, including “What the hell is going on at that school,” “I have got plenty on you,” I will take this to the top,” “You have framed my wife,” “It’s not a good idea to hang up on me my friend,” and “I am from Glasgow too.”
Did he accept that he had acted in a threatening and intimidating way to Mr Munro, she asked.
Mr Ross replied, “Not at all.”
Two days after the calls to Mr Munro, an interim interdict was served on Mr Ross preventing him from contacting the head teacher again.
Mr Ross was the final witness at the tribunal. The three-man panel will issue a judgement at a later date.
Questionable tactics behind
GTCS hearing
by Justin Hawk
THE husband of Linda Ross launched a website and because he named it after his wife the GTCS made the appalling decision to strike her off the register several years after she had officially retired from teaching and taken her pension.
The GTCS found her guilty of placing material on a website her husband fully admits to owning and operating. It is also widely known that Mrs Ross had no intention of returning to teaching. This alone is surely worthy of further investigation and questions their tactics.
Allegations
Mrs Ross's solicitor John Muir has rightly questioned whether this hearing should have taken place in the midst of an ongoing employment tribunal.
He told TESS he had been trying to persuade the GTCS to postpone its hearing pending the outcome of the tribunal, as the charges were identical to four of the allegations that led to her dismissal and all the evidence had been gathered by Dundee City Council.
“If Mrs Ross had lost the tribunal, how could she persuade the GTCS to find otherwise and what would be the point in incurring the legal expense?” Mr Muir said.
He said his client had formally retired from teaching.
Mrs Ross is currently fighting for unfair dismissal and has vowed to clear her name.
Her husband Vic Ross has always claimed his wife had no involvement with the website in question. This was just one of nine websites he operated.
Fictitious
He said: "As webmaster and administrator of the website I never on any occasion received a single complaint from the council or anyone else regarding offensive material.
The site attracted thousands of visitors and I received a large amount of letters on a daily basis via the Guestbook with no complaints referring to YouTube videos allegedly showing sexual content. That's because there weren't any, it is completely fictitious.
I have consulted a professional internet developer to prove beyond doubt that these allegations have no substance. The original source code for the website will prove who is right".
He confirmed the website in question was launched after the council released a press statement believed to be in breach of their human rights. He used the website as a means of fighting back.
Famous Quotes
The public will believe anything, so long as it is not founded on truth.
- Edith Sitwell
Fiction is obliged to stick to possibilities. Truth isn't.
- Mark Twain
Sacked teacher tells of
‘trumped up charges’
Sacked Dundee teacher Linda Ross told an employment tribunal she had been facing “trumped up charges with little way of defending myself”.
She was giving evidence at a hearing into her claim of unfair dismissal by the city council in 2008 from her post as deputy head of Longhaugh Primary.
Mrs Ross (59), Strangs Ley, Forfar, had been transferred there after being given a final written warning in relation to claims made public by her husband Vic about violence at her previous school, Sidlaw View Primary.
The tribunal heard Mrs Ross had been investigated over a complaint by parents of a child at Longhaugh that she had assaulted the child. The result of this was inconclusive and she admitted being angry at the way the case was being handled.
A few days after a meeting with head teacher Gerard Munro in June 2008 she was suspended and her husband — who had phoned Mr Munro — was served with an interim interdict banning him form further contact. The council had put out a press release saying it had taken these steps.
Mrs Ross said, “I have never heard of an employer putting out a press release about an employee. To have Vic and me on the news — what benefit was that for the people of Dundee to know that Vic had been served with an interim interdict and I was suspended?
“It made my husband out to be a thug and me out to be a troublemaker.”
Mrs Ross then received a letter from the council calling her to an investigatory meeting, at which she said she was “bombarded with questions — it was quite a shambles”.
She now understood she should have been given a copy of the notes during the meeting to sign, confirming it was an accurate account. However, this had not happened and today at the tribunal was the first time she had seen the notes.
Referring to the disciplinary charges later laid against her, Mrs Ross said, “One of the allegations was that I misled the investigatory meeting. That was one allegation I could not refute because I had no copy (of the notes). That was one allegation they could make stick.”
She was also charged with passing on details of a confidential letter relating to the family’s complaint about her. Mrs Ross denied ever being told this was confidential and added that “umpteen” complaints had been made by this family.
Mrs Ross was also said to have breached confidentiality by passing information about the inquiry into the alleged assault to her husband. She said, “This was speculation by the council. They were assuming that was what I had done. How do I refute this allegation?”
Notice
A disciplinary hearing was scheduled for June 26 — but Mrs Ross had less than the normal ten days’ notice and her EIS union representative Eric Baillie told the council this was unsustainable.
Mrs Ross told the tribunal, “It didn’t surprise me that the council was trying to get rid of me quickly before the holidays.
“It was the same old chestnut as at Sidlaw View. They were trumped up charges with little way of defending myself. The city council had never listened to my views, or even documents that were handed in — they were just not bothered.”
Mrs Ross went off sick with work-related stress and the disciplinary hearing was rearranged to take place after the summer holidays on August 26. However, Mrs Ross remained signed off sick by her GP. She told the tribunal her condition at the time was “pretty bad”.
The tribunal had earlier heard of the “absolute nightmare” Linda Ross went through as she faced two rounds of disciplinary proceedings before losing her job.
Questioned by her solicitor John Muir, she told the tribunal how her troubles began.
She said, “I knew when I was appointed deputy head at Sidlaw View that it was a difficult school, but the things I saw going on totally shocked me.”
Mrs Ross spoke about parents wandering at will through the school and a lack of procedures to deal with troubled children.
Mr Muir took her through the charges she had faced in her first disciplinary case, including making allegations about the school outwith council procedures.
She said, “I had no part in any of this.”
Mrs Ross added, “My husband wrote an anonymous email to a newspaper stating a riot had taken place. I had absolutely no idea this was going on. I went into school the next morning and I was totally shocked by the headlines.”
Mrs Ross denied having any prior knowledge of the email or encouraging her husband to send it. She explained that Mr Ross had visited the school on more than one occasion and was concerned about her welfare.
She added that the council had refused to believe her denials, believing Mr Ross could not have done it without information from her.
She also denied allegations of distributing copies of an email to staff and of refusing to co-operate with a senior education department official.
The case ended with Mrs Ross being given a final written warning
She told the tribunal, “I knew I had not done anything, I was being used as a way of getting at my husband.
“It was a nightmare, an absolute nightmare.”
Speaking about her decision to accept the written warning , she said, “ This was all new to me. I was suddenly in this maelstrom of nonsense and allegations and I just wanted to get back to work.”
Anne Wilson, the director of education at the time, had stressed to her the need for confidentiality. Her husband then sent a letter to another newspaper, which Mrs Ross said was “a rather foolish thing to do”.
She was then transferred to Longhaugh as deputy head, where she learned about family M.
There was an incident involving a child, who had bitten her finger after being told not to skip ahead in a lunch queue.
She submitted a violence report, as was standard procedure, but no action was taken against the child.
Mrs Ross explained that subsequently, “I tried to distance myself from the family.”
However, a complaint was raised against her after two further incidents involving family M.
“I was not unduly worried about it because I knew I had not done anything and I had witnesses who could back me up,” Mrs Ross said.
Outcome
She added that at one point head teacher Gerard Munro told her that everything would be all right.
At a meeting on June 3, she was told the outcome of the inquiry. One allegation had been found unsubstantiated, but there was conflicting evidence from staff about the second, in which she was said to have grabbed a pupil by the arm and face.
She had held the child’s hand as she tried to coax the child out from under a table, she explained.
At the meeting she had been told she would be given “advice, guidance and support” about how to deal with such situations in the future.
Mrs Ross said she was “flabbergasted” by this, and a lack of a firm conclusion to the investigation.
She felt this was a sanction against her, explaining, “This wishy-washy bit in the middle — to me it felt as if I was guilty.
“To me my good name is important. To be accused of assaulting a child is the worst thing I could be accused of.”
The tribunal continues.
By Justin Hawk - It's an Education.
Sacked teacher tells of 'kangaroo court'
A “KANGAROO COURT” sacked Dundee teacher Linda Ross, she claimed yesterday.
Giving evidence at an employment tribunal into her claim for unfair dismissal, Mrs Ross said the city council’s then education director Anne Wilson had been “judge, jury, and executioner.”
She added, how can she be impartial when she was making the allegations, chairing the meeting and making the decision?”
Mrs Ross (59), Strangs Ley, Forfar, was dismissed in 2008 from her post as deputy head teacher of Longhaugh Primary.
She had been transferred there after being given a final written warning in relation to claims made public by her husband Vic about violence at her previous school, Sidlaw View Primary.
During her second day of evidence, Mrs Ross told the tribunal she had been facing “trumped up charges with little way of defending myself.”
She faced 15 allegations, all of which a disciplinary hearing she did not attend found proved.
These included claims about supposedly salacious material—including a naughty schoolgirl outfit—being available on or through websites she ran.
Mrs Ross insisted that her husband owned and ran the websites and the unacceptable material—including videos on YouTube—were nothing to do with his business venture.
She said her husband had been processing orders for what was an online equivalent of a mail order catalogue, with a constantly changing stock of 10,000 items. The schoolgirl outfit was an adult fancy dress costume.
Asked by her solicitor of being accused of selling inappropriate goods, she replied “It just got completely out of control. They were throwing everything they could at me.
“The allegations were so absurd, unbelievable.”
Mr Ross wrote to the council to confirm he was the owner of the websites, but his wife said she believed the council had convinced itself that she was the owner.
The tribunal heard Mrs Ross had been investigated over a complaint by parents of a child at Longhaugh that she had assaulted him. The result of this was inconclusive and she admitted being angry at the way the case was handled.
Days after a meeting with head teacher Gerard Munro in June 2008 she was suspended and her husband, who called Mr Munro, was served with an interim interdict banning him from contact.
The council put out a press release saying it had taken these steps.
Mrs Ross said, “I have never heard of an employer putting out a press release about an employee.
Press release ‘infringed human rights’
Between the investigatory meeting and the disciplinary hearing, the council put out anther press release confirming the process was ongoing and Mrs Ross had been cleared to attend by a doctor.
“That was such an infringement of my human rights. It’s a disgrace,” Mrs Ross said.
The disciplinary hearing went ahead in her absence and she was dismissed, but decided to appeal.
Asked why she did, Mrs Ross replied, “This was a job I loved and did not want to walk away from.
“This would be in front of councillors—it was out of the education department’s hands and I had a chance of a fair hearing.”
The tribunal has been adjourned until May 31.
Mrs Ross was to appear before the General teaching Council of Scotland next week, but her solicitor said this hearing would be postponed until after the conclusion of the tribunal.
By Justin Hawk - It's an Education.
A kangaroo court or kangaroo trial is a colloquial term for a sham legal proceeding or court. The outcome of a trial by kangaroo court is essentially determined in advance, usually for the purpose of ensuring conviction, either by going through the motions of manipulated procedure or by allowing no defense at all.
A kangaroo court's proceedings deny due process rights in the name of expediency. Such rights include the right to summon witnesses, the right of cross-examination, the right not to incriminate oneself, the right not to be tried on secret evidence, the right to control one's own defense, the right to exclude evidence that is improperly obtained, irrelevant or inherently inadmissible, e.g., hearsay, the right to exclude judges or jurors on the grounds of partiality or conflict of interest, and the right of appeal.
The Secret reveals the most powerful law in the universe. The knowledge of this law has run like a golden thread through the lives and the teachings of all the prophets, seers, sages and saviors in the world's history, and through the lives of all truly great men and women. All that they have ever accomplished or attained has been done in full accordance with this most powerful law.
Without exception, every human being has the ability to transform any weakness or suffering into strength, power, perfect peace, health, and abundance.
Rhonda Byrne's discovery of The Secret began with a glimpse of the truth through a 100 year old book. She went back through centuries, tracing and uncovering a common truth that lay at the core of the most powerful philosophies, teachings and religions in the world.
What Rhonda discovered is now captured in The Secret, a film that has been viewed by millions around the world. The Secret has also been released as an audio-book and printed book with more than 16 million copies in print in over 40 languages.
The Secret reveals the natural law that is governing all lives. By applying the knowledge of this law, you can change every aspect of your life.
This is the secret to prosperity, health, relationships and happiness. This is the secret to life.
By Justin Hawk - It's an Education.
