Mrs Ibbett
177Mrs Ibbett's evidence in chief showed that between 2002 and 2005 ongoing attention was being paid by the College to its bullying policies and practices. There was evidence of in class and other activities directed to ensuring that students had a thorough understanding of what comprised bullying and that it was regarded as inappropriate behaviour, which the College would deal with and if persisted in, could finally lead to expulsion. The College conducted in-service days for staff on bullying, engaged an external consultant Dr Parada in 2003, who assisted in the further development of its bullying policy, and the student survey on bullying was conducted in 2004.
178Ms Oyston's evidence corroborated Mrs Ibbett's evidence in this respect. She had an understanding of what the College had sought to impart to its students about bullying. She claims to have reported bullying when the victim, herself, and to have been ashamed and concerned when she engaged in behaviour towards other students, which was inappropriate and might be regarded as bullying.
179Mrs Ibbett explained that as year co-coordinator, if she received a complaint of bullying from a student or parent, she would be involved in the investigation that would follow. In chief, she gave no account of ever having undertaken such an investigation in relation to Ms Oyston, other than in May 2004.
180Rather, by reference to various documents from Ms Oyston's school file and entries which she had made in her diary, Mrs Ibbett gave an account of her interaction with Ms Oyston, which suggested that they had had but relatively little cause for contact. Ms Oyston first came to her attention in year 7 for infraction of the uniform policy and inappropriate behaviour with a teacher, about which a letter was sent home. Later concerns arose about her health and she was referred to the counsellor.
181In May 2004, Ms Oyston came to see her and she was referred to the counsellor. Mrs Ibbett investigated what had occurred in class and imposed a detention on the two other students involved, warning them about bullying and intimidation. The matter was also followed up with their parents.
182There were a range of incidents reported to her in 2004, where Ms Oyston was suffering from seizures at school, but she did not witness any herself. Ambulances were called. On one occasion Mrs Ibbett spoke to Mrs Oyston about unusual behaviour on Ms Oyston's part, when she clamed to be pregnant. On another occasion there was a concern that there was an eating disorder raised by a teacher, which she raised with Ms Oyston's parents.
183That year Ms Oyston refused to attend the school camp, despite Mrs Ibbett's urging. Later Ms Oyston and two other students saw her about their concerns about what was happening to them in class. This caused her to write a note to class room teachers. Mrs Ibbett also on occasions asked Ms Oyston to write her a note of what she was concerned about. That was a practice which she adopted with all of her students.
184In 2005, Mrs Ibbett had limited contact with Ms Oyston, but was called to the counsellor's office when Ms Oyston left the College and her mother was called. She communicated her vulnerable situation to her teachers.
185Mrs Ibbett claimed that she had never received any reports from Mrs Oyston that Ms Oyston was unhappy, or being bullied by other girls and that her assistance was never sought to deal with such problems. She also denied ever being asked by Ms Oyston to help her with bullying, other than at the end of 2004, when she came to see her in the company of two other students.
186In cross-examination, quite a different picture emerged, one which provided significant corroboration of aspects of Ms Oyston's evidence, as well as that of Mrs Oyston.
187Mrs Ibbett was cross-examined at length about her understanding of the policies published in the College diaries and whether particular ongoing behaviour about which Ms Oyston complained, such as being called a slut, a dog, a whore and a drama queen, could be categorised as bullying. Mrs Ibbett insisted that this would be inappropriate conduct, rather than bullying. She explained that there was a distinction drawn by the College between sustained, targeted, ongoing behaviour amounting to bullying, as opposed to one off inappropriate behaviour.
188Mrs Ibbett had significant reservations about accepting the proposition that if Ms Oyston had been the subject of such ongoing behaviour, that it could have made her anxious. By reference to material presented to staff at the College, including her, in 2004 by Dr Parada, eventually Mrs Ibbett accepted that according to his advice, if such behaviour had continued unaddressed, it was possible for anxiety on Ms Oyston's part, or even depression, to have resulted.
189Mrs Ibbett explained that Dr Parada had begun his advice to staff with a definition of bullying, which included individual and group bullying, which could be direct or indirect, or subtle (such as exclusion and isolation), physical or verbal. Dr Parada's advice was that in order to stop bullying, you needed to identify what was actually taking place. Girls tended to form friendship groups, which could be very small, or range up to groups of 30. Groups had their own identity and form of functioning. Behaviour could move from a spectrum which commenced with teasing and ended with bullying, depending on intent and the level of impact of the behaviour. Bullying tended to peak in years 8 and 9. In Mrs Ibbett's view, Dr Parada's advice affirmed what the College was doing and gave it other things to consider. It also resulted in the conduct of the student survey.
190As to pushing and shoving, Mrs Ibbett explained that whether this was bullying would also depend on whether the behaviour was one off, or repeated and would depend on context, there being contact all the time between students. Whether such behaviour would adversely affect a student's self confidence or embarrass her, would also depend on the individual.
191Mrs Ibbett explained that the College's policies in 2002 to 2005 remained as drafts, because they were under ongoing review as to whether they were meeting the College's needs. She explained that there were gender differences in bullying, which the policies were attempting to pick up. Year co-ordinators like her had a role in the ongoing development of the policies, which envisaged a three step procedure, at the end of which expulsion could be considered by the Principal.
192It is apparent from Mrs Ibbett's further evidence, that such a three step procedure was not, however, in practical operation at the College.
193Mrs Ibbett disagreed that it was thought at the time that there was a serious problem at the school with bullying. Rather, she explained, consistently with what was happening in broader trends of education at the time, bullying was recognised as a serious issue which was not treated lightly. The College took the view that there was more to be done in relation to educating students and staff about bullying. This was a matter of good practice, rather than reflecting a recognition that bullying at the school required a response.
194That evidence was inconsistent with records of discussions at staff and co-ordinator meetings, which recorded that it was thought in 2004 that the College's policy might not be targeting unacceptable behaviour and that there was inconsistency in implementation of the policy. Those records suggest that bullying was then more of a concern to year co-ordinators in years 7 to 9, than years 10 to 12. The topic came under discussion at a number of meetings, including in May 2004 when it was noted that the problem was recurring in year 9. Mrs Ibbett could not recall herself saying this at the meeting and denied that the procedures then in place were inadequate to bring the problem into line, or to prevent bullying occurring. That it was a problem in year 9 and one which was affecting Ms Oyston, to Mrs Ibbett's knowledge, was revealed by other documents.
195There was also a discussion at the meeting of the need to ensure that bullying was documented, so that there was 'a paper trail'. Mrs Ibbett agreed that good practice included documenting the outcome of any investigation or mediation between students; any punishment imposed; information provided to parents; and the details of any meetings conducted. The evidence as to the paper trial maintained in relation to Ms Oyston established that in practice there was a failure to maintain such a paper trail, which reflected a failure to take the steps which the good practice Mrs Ibbett described, required be taken.
196Mrs Ibbett explained that it was a part of her role to investigate reports of bullying which came to her. She explained her practice in relation to such complaints, which involved questioning the students as to their experiences and speaking to other students identified in the complaint. She would make a note in her diary and the details of any investigation would be maintained on the student's file. The policy referred to incident reports being created, as well as a bullying register being kept, but the latter was not maintained. Nor, I observe, at least in Ms Oyston's case, were incident reports routinely created, or kept on her file, or diary notes made. Parents were to be notified of bullying incidents. This also did not occur in Ms Oyston's case. The process also at one stage envisaged mediation between the students, in which the year co-ordinator would be involved and a counsellor could become involved, in order to provide support, but not to be involved in discipline. In Ms Oyston's case, I again observe, it appears that there were no such mediations. Mrs Ibbett also explained that the policy did not envisage counselling for the bully, although in Ms Oyston's case, when she was involved in an incident in May 2004 in which she had behaved inappropriately and was herself found to have been bullied, she was still being counselled.
197Mrs Ibbett agreed that the policy envisaged that a second incident of bullying would result in a behaviour contract being developed for the bully by the year co-coordinator, so that the bully could understand why they were choosing to behave in that way. At this stage members of the Executive would also be involved and a range of consequences, including suspension, might be considered. Parents would also be involved.
198A third incident would involve an interview with the student, parents, the year co-ordinator and a member of the Executive. Punishment would be for the executive to determine and could include expulsion. Again, in 2004 these aspects of the policy were not implemented, so far as Ms Oyston was concerned.
199Mrs Ibbett explained how the policy altered over time, but confirmed that paperwork in relation to bullying was to be kept on the student's file. The policy also required ongoing review of the target of the bullying, with support to be provided, either by the year co-ordinator or a counsellor. The College itself employed a counsellor in 2003 to 2005. Again, it must be observed that in the latter part of 2004 particularly, these aspects of the policy were not adhered to in Ms Oyston's case.
200Mrs Ibbett confirmed that bullying could come to attention by teacher observation in the classroom, or when on supervisor duties elsewhere, or as the result of reports received from students or parents. At one point Mrs Ibbett agreed that teachers had an obligation to deal with bullying which they observed and to report it to the year co-ordinator or the Deputy Principal. Later she could not agree that when undertaking supervision duties, teachers had to look out for bullying, insisting that what they had to look out for was inappropriate student behaviour, explaining that they could not tell whether what they saw was a one off incident, or part of a bigger picture.
201Mrs Ibbett also disagreed that certain minutes in evidence noted the existence of a problem at the College that students were left unsupervised in the playground. She explained that the problem was staff coming late to undertake their duties when other staff needed to be relieved.
202Mrs Ibbett was extensively cross-examined about entries in her diaries, about her dealings with various students, including Ms Oyston. In many cases she could not identify whether matters which she had recorded involved bullying, or one off incidents. She explained that the answer was to be found in individual student files, but neither Ms Oyston's file, nor those of the students who she complained had been bullying her, were put in evidence. That would have been an obvious way to demonstrate the existence of the paper trail about which Mrs Ibbett gave evidence. Rather, various documents extracted from various files were tendered, which shed limited light on what steps were taken in relation to Ms Oyston during 2004, but sufficient to establish that good practice was not being observed in her case.
203Ms Oyston came to Mrs Ibbett's attention in 2002 when a teacher, Ms Mills, had mentioned her concern about Ms Oyston's eating patterns. Mrs Ibbett asked her to put it in writing. She was aware that eating problems could be a sign of bullying, or of other problems such as sexual abuse. Ms Oyston was then referred to the counsellor for that issue and again in 2003, for other reasons. Mrs Ibbett denied, however, that it was her role to investigate whether this could be related to bullying. She perceived her role to be to take in information which she was given, in this case by a teacher, to raise it with the student and to refer her to counselling, if she was interested in participating. She explained that she then deferred to the counsellor, who was more expert than she was.
204Mrs Ibbett said that in 2003 a situation began to develop, which continued in 2004, where Ms Oyston she was collapsing at school, which was causing staff concern and necessitating ambulances to be called. She received ongoing staff reports and was then in conversation with Mrs Oyston about a range of issues, but claimed that she had only met her in person once, at the end of 2004.
205Mrs Ibbett agreed that between February and June 2004 while Ms Oyston was being counselled, she kept no diary or other record of her discussions with the counsellor, which she admitted could have been deficient, but claimed there were things kept in Ms Oyston's student file. No records of any such discussions were tendered. Mrs Ibbett was aware that during this time, Ms Oyston was having episodes at school, for which ambulances were repeatedly being called, so that she could have medical support to determine what her needs were and what the best way to proceed was.
206Even so, Mrs Ibbett could not recall ever being aware that an anxiety attack had been triggered by bullying, even though that was the basis of Mrs Oyston's discussion with the Principal in February 2004; a meeting which the evidence suggested that Mrs Ibbett had attended, although she herself had no recollection of such a meeting. Mrs Ibbett did send a memo to classroom teachers on 12 February, advising of Ms Oyston's return to school and wanting to be kept informed of 'any unusual behaviour or interactions with others in the classroom that seem out of character'. Teachers were warned not to make an issue of this, but to raise concerns with Mrs Ibbett. Other than this note, Mrs Ibbett conducted no investigation into the concerns which either Ms Oyston or Mrs Oyston had raised with the Principal.
207In April 2004, there was an incident about which Ms Oyston was asked to hand write an account. It refers to her being whacked on the arm and humped on the leg. Mrs Ibbett also made a note which records that Ms Oyston said that she was followed into the toilets, grabbed and threatened. Mrs Ibbett explained that this could have been either inappropriate behaviour, or bullying and that she referred the matter to the year 8 co-ordinator to deal with. What became of the matter could only be gleaned by examining those student's files. It appears that no records were maintained on Ms Oyston's file, reflecting that no investigation into this complaint was conducted. No document recording that any investigation occurred, was in evidence.
208On 11 May, a teacher, Ms Barr, sent a note to Mrs Ibbett, raising with her a concern about Ms Oyston missing class time, when feeling ill or having emotional problems, which was affecting her performance. She said that she raised this with Mrs Ibbett, in case she could see a pattern. There was no evidence of any response.
209On 14 May, Mrs Ibbett made a note recording that during Mr Ashcroft's class, Ms Oyston was asked to leave and came to see her. She was then speaking to another student and she asked Ms Oyston to wait for her at the sick bay. She later found Ms Oyston being attended to there by the counsellor, who had discovered that Ms Oyston had deliberately cut herself, after a confrontation with two other students, JP and LM.
210Mrs Ibbett spoke to the three girls involved. JP was the girl Mrs Oyston had complained of to the Principal in February. The three girls each prepared handwritten notes as to what had occurred. Ms Oyston had initiated an inappropriate rumour about LM, which had resulted LM and JP raising with the teacher what disciplinary action would result for students who started rumours, which had led to a class discussion. It was admitted by the these two girls that the discussion was initiated in order to intimidate Ms Oyston. The action taken was that Ms Oyston was given an afternoon detention and the other two girls were also given a detention, after being warned about bullying and intimidation.
211At this time, Ms Oyston was receiving counselling, but there was no evidence that Mrs Ibbett kept her under ongoing review, even though it was by now apparent, even to Mrs Ibbett, that she was the target of bullying.
212In June 2004, Mrs Ibbett did write an open letter to all year 9 students which was read to them in class. It said:
"They say that Year 9 is one of the most challenging and difficult of years for students and for teachers. As we approach the half point of year 9 I would like to congratulate you on the way the majority of you are working at the moment. We see many of you wearing your uniforms well, working hard in class and participating in a wide variety of activities on offer here at school. - keep it up !!
However in the last couple of weeks I have become very concerned about the increasing number of students that are upset. The source of the upset usually relates back to gossip or rumours about them or hurtful comments that have been made. In some instances students have felt very comfortable(sic) or been left isolated not knowing where they belong.
This type of behaviour is very disappointing. Everyone needs to be very clear that rumours, gossip or making another person feel less about themselves is a form of BULLYING and in some cases INTIMIDATION. Do not try and convince me that behaviour like this was only a joke or not that big a deal. If you participate in this then know that it is wrong/unacceptable, it will be identified as bullying/intimidation and we will deal with it as per the school policy.
The school policy on bullying and intimidation is;
Verbal bullying, intimidation or harassment will result in an afternoon detention for the first instance. Intentional physical violence of any kind will result in suspension.
Included in the definition of bullying and harassment is the misuse of mobile phones and computers to send inappropriate messages. Such messages are breaking a Federal law. If you receive such a message then please save it in your phone and show it to your parents, teachers or the police.
Everyone needs to know that this type of behaviour will not be tolerated. Parents will be informed and action taken. Everyone needs to be responsible for their own behaviour. You need to be also trying to assist your friends to do the right thing. It is one thing to say we are a caring Christian community but we must also live it in what we say and do.
If you are concerned about what is happening to you or a friend then let someone know before it gets out of hand. This is not dobbing or showing weakness it is actually the reverse. It is showing inner strength and determination both of which will defeat the bully. Gets some adult advice on how to deal with a situation so that you can maintain control.
If you are aware that a friend is unhappy, stressed or at risk of any sort of harm then you have a duty to that friend to tell someone or encourage them to tell someone who is in a position to help or who can access the appropriate resources to help.
As a Year group you have great potential. In the next three years you will be leading the school in so many ways. As a Year group we need to earn the respect of each other and the school community by looking after each other and behaving in ways that encourage not harm.
I hope that you all have a really great safe break and come back ready for an equally successful semester two.
Thank you, Mrs Ibbett"
213The evidence shows that it was not only Ms Oyston who was complaining about bullying in year 9. Throughout the year Mrs Ibbett had to deal with complaints from and about a number of other students. It is unnecessary to deal with those complaints in any detail.
214The counsellor's file closure summary in June 2004 indicated that the reason for Ms Oyston's referral by Mrs Ibbett and Mrs Carroll-Fajarda for counselling had been 'anxiety attacks triggered by bullying'. Mrs Ibbett could not remember whether she had read this document at the time, although she said it was a part of the 'paper trail' maintained on Ms Oyston's file. She agreed that if she had read it, she would have been aware that the original referral had been for anxiety attacks triggered by bullying. Mrs Ibbett had difficulty in agreeing, however, that had it come to her attention, it would have required her investigation, given what she was then aware of. She insisted that she was being frank when she said 'That could have been a choice I could have made'.
215Despite having sent this open letter to all year 9 students and being made aware that Ms Oyston had been bullied, there is no evidence that Mrs Ibbett maintained any oversight on whether Ms Oyston remained a target for bullying. She had no record in her diary of ever having initiated any discussion with Ms Oyston, or her parents, about any concerns that she might have had that Ms Oyston was being bullied.
216In 2004, Mrs Ibbett took long service leave from late August, returning in October, at the beginning of term 4. Beforehand, preparations were underway for the year 9 camp. Ms Oyston was one of only a few students who were reluctant to attend. They had been encouraged to go, by adoption of various strategies, such as allowing them to have input into the cabin they would sleep in and who they would share with. Ms Oyston did not attend. Mrs Ibbett's kept a note which said of Ms Oyston:
' 'talk about self fulfilling prophecy'!!! What do we do?? see MJ before we respond. MJ HAPPY FOR HER NOT TO ATTEND'
217Mrs Ibbett accepted that this was not the best choice of words to have used, but no doubt was reflective of her attitude to Ms Oyston and her problems. There was no evidence that Mrs Ibbett investigated the reason for Ms Oyston's reluctance to attend the camp, with either her or her parents.
218In September 2004, LM, who was then the subject of a behaviour contract, which the evidence suggested was for reasons unconnected with Ms Oyston, was told by the Principal that 'one more breach of any kind would result in expulsion'. This student was involved in further incidents, including with Ms Oyston, but no such action appears to have resulted, even when in a student intervention sheet on 22 November 2004, Mrs Ibbett was advised by a teacher that she was involved with an identified group of students in 'a little bullying' of Ms Oyston over a computer. That advice seems to have generated no response at all from Mrs Ibbett.
219Earlier in October another teacher wrote to Mrs Ibbett about an approach from Ms Oyston about another student having eating problems. Ms Oyston eventually revealed that it was she who was having those problems and that she was 'hearing good and bad voices'. Mrs Ibbett contacted her parents and spoke to her father, who said that he would speak to her. Mrs Ibbett did not herself pursue the matter with Ms Oyston, even though she agreed that she was then aware that a girl exhibiting problems with eating, could be suffering from bullying. Nor did Mrs Ibbett refer Ms Oyston to the counsellor for help.
220Mrs Ibbett received another approach from Ms Mills in November 2004, raising a concern with her about Ms Oyston. Mrs Ibbett's note recorded that Ms Mills was concerned about behaviours she had observed between Ms Oyston and another student in her English class, who appeared to be ordering Ms Oyston around and that she was responding, even though the demands were unreasonable. At times Ms Mills had stepped in. Mrs Arena, Mrs Ibbett's assistant, had spoken to Ms Oyston, but she had said that that there was nothing to worry about and that every thing was fine.
221Mrs Ibbett noted that she had a concern that the student Ms Mills had identified had developed connections with some year 10's who were known for bullying and intimidating others and that this was an example of a threat, or that Ms Oyston could be behaving in 'a servant type role' in order to seek assistance from these reputed 'bullies', to assist with difficulties she was having in year 9. Mrs Ibbett noted:
"The last two points are pure conjecture and unsubstantiated but given the nature of the concerns raised by Shirley and the past issues these students have been involved in all possibilities needed to be considered."
222Despite keeping this note, Mrs Ibbett denied that a 'serious' concern was then being raised with her by Ms Mills, or that what she had raised involved bullying, or that she was being asked to act. She explained that she viewed this just as an example of a classroom teacher managing her classroom, not an incident of bullying, even though the student identified was one whom she was monitoring at the time, for a number of issues. Mrs Ibbett also denied that the response a troubled adolescent such as Ms Oyston had given to Mrs Arena, should not have been given much credence by the College, in the circumstances. Rather, she insisted that all she could do was to respond to the information provided to her. She also claimed that it was not an appropriate matter for her to raise with Ms Oyston's parents, involving as it did conjecture and unsubstantiated concerns. In her view, she used common sense to look at information provided to her by two members of staff, who were managing the situation. This evidence was difficult to credit.
223On 23 November Ms Oyston and a number of other students approached Mrs Ibbett complaining about bullying and intimidation taking the form of 'commenting, sniping, drawing attention to the victim, asking questions of teachers that appear innocent but are targeting these students'. She sent a memo to classroom teachers alerting them to the approach about these 'subtle and quite obvious forms of bullying' and asked them to allow the targeted students to sit together and identified those claimed to be the perpetrators. They included JP and LM. Mrs Ibbett requested that notes be made if such behaviour was identified. Teachers were, however, given the choice of dealing with the matter themselves, or raising it with her.
224Mrs Ibbett explained that this was the first time that she was made aware of such bullying, although the girls reporting told her that it had been going on for some time and so she had asked staff to be vigilant. Again, she could not recall raising this approach with Mr and Mrs Oyston. Mrs Ibbett acknowledged that LM, who Ms Oyston identified in these proceedings as a long term bully, had become known to her in 2004 as a bully. She was involved that year in a number of incidents with Ms Oyston and other students and had been threatened with expulsion. Mrs Ibbett also explained that at this point, Ms Oyston indicated that 'the behaviour had been something that had happened a couple of times'.
225Mrs Ibbett investigated. On 24 November she received long handwritten notes explaining their behaviour from the two girls said to be targeting Ms Oyston, LM and JP. They each claimed to be retaliating for things done to them by Ms Oyston and her friends and claimed that they were bullying each other and were all to blame. Mrs Ibbett and Mrs Carroll-Fajarda signed letters advising their parents that they had been involved in another conflict 'which had the hallmarks of teasing and bullying'. The threatened expulsion did not eventuate for LM, nor was any other step taken to protect Ms Oyston from what must, at this point have been clear even to Mrs Ibbett, namely that Ms Oyston was being targeted by ongoing misbehaviour by others who she and other students had identified.
226On 6 December Mrs Ibbett received another approach from Ms Oyston; asking her again to put her complaint in writing. Mrs Ibbett also kept a note of Ms Oyston's oral account of the behaviour to which she was being subjected. Ms Oyston handwrote her explanation of how she was being treated. It again involved two of those referred to in the November complaint, JP and LM.
227Ms Oyston explained that she had been outside a classroom dealing with a bottle which had leaked into her bag and the student identified had highlighted her absence saying 'you are always late' when she came in, as well as embarrassing her and saying 'it must be nice to have the whole class hate you'. Mrs Ibbett agreed that this was disappointing and not an appropriate thing to say, as was 'Jazmine needs an ambulance'. Ms Oyston complained that her friends were also targeted and that the real target of the behaviour was her. She also complained that as she left class to go to the bathroom, she was asked loud enough for the whole class to hear, 'How was Mrs Ibbett?' Mrs Ibbett agreed that such behaviour could have made Ms Oyston feel isolated and embarrassed.
228Ms Oyston admitted in the note she provided that she had herself said nasty things in response to things said and done to her. Mrs Ibbett agreed that this note included a statement suggesting suicidal ideation. Mrs Ibbett could not, however, agree that Ms Oyston was then complaining to her about ongoing bullying and harassment. She said:
"Q. And you have no doubt in your mind that this information being supplied to you by Jazmine Oyston was indicating to you that bullying and harassment was still going on with these two girls, isn't that correct?
A. She is indicating that there is still a situation for her.
Q. Of bullying and harassment?
A. Of behaviour that she is not happy with and given it is now another time that she has come to alert me to it, it is now leading us towards, closer to our definition of bullying and harassment.
Q. To your definition, not the school's definition, Mrs Ibbett, isn't that correct?
A. The definition that I have been sharing as in not isolated, but, more ongoing, so I now have a window in that given that she has shared this with me."
229On Mrs Ibbett's approach, this was the second example of such inappropriate behaviour towards Ms Oyston. This showed her that it was more targeted and frequent and thus 'turning into a bullying incident', which resulted in action being taken, because she had something more concrete to deal with, to support Ms Oyston. She could not, however, recall asking Ms Oyston what she meant when she wrote that 'To solve this problem was to go away and that problem is me". Nor is there any evidence that Mrs Ibbett raised this serious matter with Ms Oyston's parents, or referred her again to the counsellor. She was not then receiving counselling.
230Mrs Ibbett did speak to the parents of one of the other students involved, as well as to that student, JP, who assured her that she was keeping away from Ms Oyston. JP acknowledged that they did not like one another, but said that she felt that it was Ms Oyston who 'was provoking the situation and the rest of the class'.
231Mrs Ibbett's lack of any further action suggests that this was an explanation which she accepted, even though she took the view that this was a second offence for two students, who had been involved in this type of behaviour before. She could not remember what had resulted, other than warnings to those students as to what behaviour was not appropriate and what could result if it was not addressed. There is certainly no evidence that Ms Oyston or her parents were told that the College had taken any steps at all in relation to her ongoing complaints.
232This final complaint arose right at the end of the 2004 school year. There is no evidence that any other steps were taken by Mrs Ibbett or anyone else at the College, to ensure that Ms Oyston had no ongoing problems when school resumed. While Mrs Ibbett agreed that if inappropriate behaviour was not addressed, then it won't stop and can lead to further incidents, which would then lead down a bullying path, but still nothing was done. Ms Oyston's parents had not been informed of her further complaints at the end of 2004; and there was no referral of Ms Oyston to the counsellor, to help her deal with the behaviour of which she had complained she remained the target at the end of 2004.
233Ms Oyston's evidence was that the bullying continued in 2005, but she made no further complaints, she despaired of getting any help. She was also then clearly dealing with serious problems at home.
234In February 2005, Mrs Ibbett was contacted when Sister Julie found Ms Oyston wandering down the street, after she had seen the counsellor and been identified as being suicidal. Ms Oyston had self referred herself to the counsellor, she insisted she was concerned about her problems at home. Her mother also raised with the counsellor ongoing problems at school. This was not investigated.
235On 8 February, Mrs Ibbett sent a note to classroom teachers advising that Ms Oyston was 'fragile' and if there were any concerns, a change in her demeanour noticed, or if she was absent, she or others identified should be contacted. Mrs Ibbett took no steps to investigate whether Ms Oyston was still having difficulties with ongoing bullying at school. Despite Mrs Oyston's advice about problems at school, the College made no connection between Ms Oyston's state and her complaints about ongoing bullying at the end of 2004.
236On 2 March, Mrs Ibbett contacted Mrs Oyston, who told her that Ms Oyston's problem was that no one listens at the school. No consideration of any ongoing bullying of Ms Oyston persisting resulted. Soon afterwards Ms Oyston was withdrawn from the College.