Dear Jane et al

I didn't say using his books was a bad thing and the emotive language was the language of the local newspaper report at the time.

I work professionally with abusers and victims of abuse, and I'm pretty non-judgmental. People may recall the furore earlier this year when a PE teacher who had been cautioned under the Sexual Offences Act was found to have been cleared by the Home Office to carry on working in a school. Ministerial resignations were called for and the teacher was dismissed. It was assumed he'd been found to have downloaded child porn from the Internet. In fact, no such images were found on his computer and he accepted a caution because he thought going to trial would be a nightmare even if innocent - which he was. He didn't understand what the caution meant. Still for a week or so he was public enemy #1.

He was not in the same league as Brian Davey but you'll remember the fuss. Sure it's possible to argue that the Davey material is excellent and that it should be regarded completely separately from his crimes, but it's very difficult to have a rational debate on the subject with the great British public without being assumed to be an appeaser. It shouldn't be so, but it is.

In the event that another newspaper decides to run "Local Teacher Still Using Pervert's Material" the teacher would, of course, be able to argue that he was a sick man, he was paying the price, his crimes were 20 years old, the books are great, it's better that he earns the royalties than goes on benefits when he comes out, and he's a nice guy really. All I'm saying is that's an argument you can't win. So, unless there are no adequate alternatives, why risk it?

Best wishes

barry

http://www.bucksfreepress.co.uk/display.va..._to_imagine.php Thats the link to an article about it/

Personally if the book is as good as people have made out then i would ask the childs parent if they mind you using his book, whilst pointing out why you are aking their permission.

Horrible man though !!!!!

I, as a male teacher would not use such material however excellent The reason is that to some of my parents I am endorsing his viewpoints, attitudes and practices no matter how passively

I don't particularly like kids - I am not a parent (thank God) but I do feel they should be protected

What an interesting thread. I think I am inclined to agree with Barry T that if there are alternatives it may be wise to use these.

I know for a fact that if Schubert was proved to be a paedophile (where are these allegations from by the way, I'd never heard of them before this thread), my enjoyment of his music would DRASTICALLY diminish! All those soft tender moments of innocent beauty would suddenly take on a new and horrible reality, same for any composer who I really enjoyed.

I think whether or not Brian Davey benefits financially from the sale of his books is very much a side issue. My feeling that I would rather not use his material has nothing at all to do with his personal finances



Unfortunately, those who abuse children in the way that he has often do seem to be warm, charming people - otherwise why would you trust your child to his care? It is part of the process of getting access to his potential victims.




This is a completely different scenario. Think of it in terms a cost-benefit analysis:-

In the current scenario the cost (in my eyes) of using Brian Davey's material is firstly potential offence / trauma / distress to already vulnerable people and secondly the possibility that my judgement as a teacher may be called into question for thinking it appropriate to use material that causes this kind of strong feeling. The benefit is that this material is (allegedly) better than any other for teaching young recorder players. Where does the balance lie? Obviously debatable given the length of this thread, but for me the cost outweighs the benefits.

For the scenario Deborah proposes, what are the costs? Possibly the same, although most likely less since the names (and therefore trigger point for distress) of contributing scientists don't tend to be associated with therapeutic agents. The benefits are presumably a good deal higher (since this treatment has got through the MCA, NICE etc approvals). The balance, therefore, lies towards the benefits of using the treatment.

For an individual or parent deciding whether to use the material for their or their childrens personal use I believe that it is very much down to their own feelings and judgement. For use in teaching a wider group I don't think I'd do it. If a child of mine came home with this material I would question the judgement of the teacher. I wouldn't assume they had similar perverse tendencies, but I would feel that they had made an inappropriate choice of teaching materials.

I won't use them because I don't teach the recorder but it seems to me that as we don't have the death penalty then the guy has to continue his life. One day he may be released from prison and then he will have to make his way in life.

Would it not be better for him to have a responsible way to earn a living. And as a society should we not be more concerned with promoting good, honest behaviour rather than a vigilante attitude towards judging others.

I do not know the details of what he did and the term does seem to apply from the misinterpretation of genuine affection through to controling and sadistic cruelty, but we have a court system which is responsible for understanding the whole case and applying appropriate justice and protection to society. It may be that it needs reforming and perhaps that is what we really need to push for.

It does not help society become more just though if we take extra punishment over and above the courts does it?

What is the difference between destroying his livelihood this way or becoming a vigilante and trashing his house? I cannot see that by trading with him fairly we are endorsing what he did. Would we refuse to sell him food or not allow him shelter?

An area of puzzlement for me is - why is this an issue for discussion

If reports of his crimes are true and he has been convicted then he cannot go near children again although whether this will be policed properly is another matter


Again according to reports this was not an isolated incident - there have been a number of offences

Apparently he is very nice to deal with so the middle class professional mafia will try to protect him and make excuses for him This is how kids like VIctoria Climbie are abused and murdered because nice civillised people make nice civillised arguments and do not have the moral coourage to confront the issue

I teach kids - I have said before I don't particularly like them - given the choice and I hope it is soon I can phase them out of my teaching BUT there is no excuse for this man and no compassion or understanding in me for what he did whatever his qualities as a musician and educator

My apologies if my views offend people BUT I was approached by a state teaching colleague to dep for him in a girls school teaching 9 - 14 year olds one to one I was to forge his signature and pretend to be him to cover his job for a term This was with the active connivance of the head of his music dept When I explained that

1 I was not CRB checked and therefore not eligible #
2 I only teach children with parental supervision

This was brushed aside as irrelevant so much for child protection I was appalled and refused

Finally raising the issue of the personality of a musician relating it to their musical output is interesting - relating it to this particular case in my view treads on dangerous ground

This issue is very relevant to recorder teachers who already have davey material, like it, but feel uncomfortable with his crimes.

When I raised it originally, it was because I had just packed away my son's Brian Davey Recorder book that he likes using, and I felt very sad about the whole situation. I just wanted to know what other teachers thought.

My apologies if my views offend people BUT I was approached by a state teaching colleague to dep for him in a girls school teaching 9 - 14 year olds one to one I was to forge his signature and pretend to be him to cover his job for a term This was with the active connivance of the head of his music dept When I explained that

1 I was not CRB checked and therefore not eligible #
2 I only teach children with parental supervision

This was brushed aside as irrelevant so much for child protection I was appalled and refused

Finally raising the issue of the personality of a musician relating it to their musical output is interesting - relating it to this particular case in my view treads on dangerous ground
[/quote]


This is much more dangerous. I am horrified that people with responsibility for child protection should take this attitude.
It is why I believe that the due course of justice should be taken and not a consensus of what peple feel in a given situation depending on who they feel sympathy for.
If our justice system is not protecting children, then that is what needs reforming. Not applying further sanctions in one particular case to deprive someone of their means to earn honestly. It was not his books that hurt children. And sadly there are other peadophiles out there, even among musicians.

When and if he comes out of gaol he should not be allowed to work with children. However there is nothing to prevent him setting up as a private teacher under a pseudonim and they do not need to be vetted.

Why deprive him of his book sales which provide an alternative income to teaching?

I by no means condone what he has done, but recognise that he is a person and will need to earn a living once he has served his punishment. This is a matter of fact not a matter of sympathy. I would rather he earned it openly without the pressure to start teaching children again.

My feelings are to protect children and to do that we need a strong justice system which people adhere to.

The Victoria Climbie Enquiry found widespread incompetence both at the front line level of social workers, hospital staff and police as well as managerial incompetence and inadequate internal and inter-disciplinary systems. Those jobs all need doing, and trying to classify the people who do them as working class or middle class is missing the point. I am sure Victoria would have been just as happy to be rescued by a "nice middle class social worker", a "nice working class social worker" or a "nice upper class social worker". The issue was competence, not class.

My point being that it is "middle class professionals " the demographic groups who comprise teachers - social workers - medical staff - police - educational administrators etc have in the past either passively or actively colluded to cover abuse and worse It is not just children who are targets but the old as well It is not only a question of competence but of professional networks who cover for one another or who simply cannot be bothered to co-ordinate their efforts

Why because children do not have a voice - their wishes are not considered - it is the convenience of the adult that is paramount

If you are one of the children who has been abused and terrorised or a member of the childs family academic discussions about his musical abilities are not relevant

To sum he is no longer a colleague but a creep in prison for despicable crimes

If the tag "middle class" is no more than a description of the type of jobs teachers, social workers, hospital staff and police do, then to berate them for being middle class is to berate them for doing those jobs.

I don't think social workers share the public popularity enjoyed by teachers, nurses and police officers but round here they do some pretty special work without which there would be a lot more children like Victoria Climbie. I applaud anyone who is prepared to put themselves in the front line in the way social workers do.

To make a general accusation that such people collude to cover child abuse is unfair, nor were there any findings or evidence to that effect in the Climbie Enquiry.

Well put tonyteech.

But to the vast majority of people who aren't, then it is relevant. Nor is it entirely academic: people have his books and want to know what people think of continuing to use them. Should they recommend them to others if they think they are good? Personalising the issue just tries to cloud the decision, so it's made on feelings rather than facts.

I find this very interesting the AB hasn't deleted this thread....

AB being extremely clever or very stupid.

I couldn't really care less about Davey's future income...as he is being supported by HM at present.

People never change.

Edit...I wouldn't use his tutor books.It just sickens me...

Tony Teech...spot on

CET...are you a troll? Only skim reading...I'm good at sight reading...same as reading a book,but i will have to study your postings....I don't believe this.

It's a minefield!!! I don't condone the guy, but I can't imagine he'll find it easy to find ANY kind of job after he's left prison, and unless the taxpayer has to pick up the tab for him for the rest of his life, why not just let him live off the royalties from his books. I don't know the recorder music world, so I can't say how good his books are, but if they are clearly the best on the market, why deprive kids of the best.

I would say more, but clearly some feelings are running high on here so I'm not going to say what I was going to say.....................

What no-one has mentioned so far is that Brian Davey is 67, and is therefore a pensioner. The question of employment after he is released does not really come into it.

I have decided that personal preference is for the Davey books, but that I would offer an alternative if people feel too emotive over the issue. The books are well thought out and represent what was good about Mr Davey's Career. The alternative is so that those people too blinkered to see past Mr Davey's sins don't feel uncomfortable.

CET...are you a troll? Only skim reading...I'm good at sight reading...same as reading a book,but i will have to study your postings....I don't believe this.
[/quote]


I don't know Brian Davy, nor anything about the case but I do hate vigilante-ism. Mainly because I believe in justice and I want our justice system to do the job well and protect people. If people take retribution into their own hands, then we loose control. And to boycott his tutor books will do nothing to stop other child abuse, which is what we really need.
I do feel strongly about this.
We need to look at our ability to protect children, not to focus on an individual the courts have already scrutinised and come up with an appropriat punishment for.
Sorry if it offends, but it is so important to get the justice system right, that is where the energy should be spent.
I am not arguing any one else's corner this is my oppinon through and through. If I sound like a book ...well that's how it is!

Hi I have read this with much interest and feel I need to put accross the victims view on this case. I feel this mans music however good should not be used without the parents knowing his hisotry why should any parent pay for a book whoose proceed will go to an evel man once out of prison. Anyone who was in the court room the day this man was sentanced would fully understand my view why. This man used his position as a teacher and author of music books to encourage parents to let him teach their children whilst he calculated his abuse on the victims. Anyone who thinks this was a illness, should know the effects of his abuse has had on the victims, their families and their future. Should someone with aids be allowed to knowing spread the illness to others???? so why should this man be allowed to be excused on the mental state. Anyone at court would have heard how this man developed a trusting relationship with the girls parents (Hence many would have said he was a good teacher ) whilst he used and abused young girls from the age of 4 so arrogant was his abuse that he actually abused girls in their own homes, at school and in his home. I don't care how good his music was the thought that any child should be using his books sickens me. How many of the parents who praised his teaching really knew what was going on. Having meet many of his victims even now they will not speak out about him many have not even told their parents. Anyone using his books should think seriously on the effects this mans continual abuse over more than 30 yrs has had on so many. A parent should be made aware of the souce of the material they are using there much be alternatives why should this man continue to gain from the suffering he has caused. The fact that he was jailed for 13 YEARS tells you how bad the abuse. So please do not use his material

If this material is useful and the pupils enjoy it then use it. The man is in prison for what he has done. His loss of freedom is his punishment. He will have a bad time there at both the hands of his fellow prisoners and some of the staff. That is unfair. He has been sentenced to imprisonment, not physical torture.
We cannot but feel the greatest sadness for his victims of course, but the fact is that he has written some very useful and good teaching material. If by buying it we are providing him with an income I cannot see a real problem. Would everyone be happier if he were supported solely by the DSS on his release? He has the ability to earn an income from his writing. He will never be allowed to teach or come into contact with children in any personal way again. Can we not at least show some compassion to everyone concerned in this sad matter?

I wouldn't be surprised if this thread isn't locked or deleted before long, so here is my final comment on this subject. Anyone who has only heard about this case through the media can not know the full circumstances. Things like it was an illness, trying to deal with his perversions, decent with adults etc. are all things the media can obscure. It's like cases in the past where only courts can pass sentences which can not be interfered with by government, for this reason. I don't condone paedophilia in the slightest but unless you know someone personally or were in court you shouldn't make definitive conclusions.

As to using his music, well, I know nothing about Paul Harris, except he wrote the most brilliant clarinet books on the market. That's all I need to know. Then again, if you believe this stands in the way of using Davey's books, use an alternative for those who only care about his crimes.

If we stopped using the materials of anyone who'd ever been involved in anyting of this nature, we'd have to stop playing the compositions of quite a few major composers. Then there's Eric Gill whose fonts can be found on every list of fonts and nobody seems to object. And what about Oscar Wilde? Does the fact these people are dead make any difference? Probably not, because the effects of abuse can repiclicate over generations and often do.

The people here who say he shouldn't be able to benefit from the royalties of his books should probably come clean and say they'd rather see him dead - after all he will still need to live when he comes out of jail. As it happens we don't have capital punishment in this country, and 15 years is a pretty stiff sentence which he most certainly deserves; however to imply that he shouldn't be paid royalties from his books when he comes out is tantamount to a sort of vigilantism. Should anybody be punished over and over, once they've served their sentence? Lets just hope he gets some real help while he's inside, so that he isn't a risk to anybody when he comes out, and so that he truly understands the enormity of what he's done. I happen to believe everybody, even paedophiles, deserve the possibility of redemption.

Violinia

I completely agree.


...


And... I've hesitated slightly to post this... But... just something to think about - please be careful in assuming that people don't have experience of abuse. I have read that some authorities estimate that 1 in 4 girls are sexually abused to some degree growing up, so whilst extremes of abuse are (thankfully) rare, don't assume that those who haven't said as much don't know what it's like to be abused, or to have someone they care about be abused. Not everyone who has been abused will necessarily be on the side of "he must be punished ad infinitum", so please don't assume those who are against the vigilante-ism(?) "just don't know what it's like". It isn't necessarily the case. I hope I have said this how I meant and not in a way that will be hurtful to anyone - I do think that we need to be careful in the assumptions we make about an exceedingly senstive issue.

Well said. I read an article in the Observer a few weeks ago, by someone who had been abused, commenting on a recent case in which the victim's parents, aided by the usual sensationalist papers*, were making a big fuss about the "light sentence" (actually a minimum period before consideration of parole) that had been recommended. The author's point was that the publicity that resulted from legal proceedings was often much more harmful to the victim than the original assault. Her parents had made light of her incident, removed her from the perpetrator, and acted in such a way as to minimise the damage.

* also by a particularly stupid comment from a Government minister (could it have been the Home Secretary?) blaming the judge for doing exactly what recent legislation required him to do.

On the original subject of this thread, discussion with the parents of pupils using the book seems to me to be the right policy. I hope all those who advocate boycotting the material as further retribution are consistent in their punitive attitudes. For instance, if they are Roman Catholics they should immediately leave the Church because some of its bishops have covered up for paedophile priests and redeployed them into parishes where they could continue their malpractices: these bishops are collectively responsible for far more misery than any one paedophile and have greater freedom to choose than the unfortunates with perverse inclinations.

Well I knew it wouldn't be too long before this topic would hit the Cambridge Evening News (Cambridgeshire's local rag) and I was right. Last Thursday to be precise where it commanded three pages of photographs and editiorial over how bad it was that local schools were still buying Mr Davey's recorder books.

I stand by my considered position. The Recorder tutorial books are educationally excellent and are my first choice in teaching materials, however as I know that some parents would not approve of their "little johnny being taught from that nasty pervert's book" I would consider another recorder tutorial instead.

So Mr Davey is earning royalty... from recorder tutorial books. He is paying for his crimes and has lost a job he very much loved.

http://www.cambridge-news.co.uk/news/regio...7bde79add08.lpf

Jod, we've every sympathy for the situation it's put recorder teachers in. What does worry me slightly is the article makes it out that the only reason he wrote these books was to get access to children. That's not always a motive for writing tutor books. If that's what somebody wants there are far dirtier ways of doing it. We all know the press sensationalise things like this if it will sell, which this would. We can't condone anything he did once in charge of these kids, but to suggest his books as a tool for this is pretty absurd. As I say, I don't care what Harris, Weston, Rae etc. have to their personal lives, just their materials that matter. As for royalties, if his research into recorder teaching merits this, then so be it.

By extension we might as well say anyone who seeks work with children is a paedophile. That would include music teachers, school teachers, dance teachers, tennis etc. What would we come to then. I wouldn't take this article too seriously.

As other people have said, there must surely be other recorder tutors. If I was a teacher, I would find it awkward to say to parents, "I tend to use this book, but by the way the author is a convicted paedophile. What are your views on it?" Obviously, teachers want to do the best for their pupils and provide them with the best material possible. The situation could arise where some of you recorder teachers may inherit Davey's pupils. Imagine their distress when presented with one of his books. Paedophiles go to great lengths to have contact with children. Of course we will never know if Davey was having perverse feelings when writing these books. I cannot comment because I have never seen one of his books to be in a position to interpret the music. I actually do not care what happens to Davey. Whilst I agree he is being punished and will be able to continue his life if he is still alive by the time he is released, considering his age, what concerns me is the effect his behaviour will undoubtedly have on these children, possibly giving some of them their own life sentence to deal with. He has actually robbed them of a part of their childhood which they will never be able to regain.

Essentially that is exactly what I say. Most parents say use the book you think is best to teach my child the recorder That's what we're paying for you to do.

I feel that the biggest issue here is whether or not he receives royalties from the books. If he's truly penitent, he should publicly state that all future profits will go to Childline or similar. But that's up to him. And to but or not to buy is up to us. My instinct is that it's not condoning child-abuse to buy a book written by a child-abuser. If we took that argument to its logical conclusion we would buy very little. What about autobiographies by murderers/rapists/Hitler/ex-IRA terrorists? Where does the money go when we purchase a cheap T-shirt in a supermarket? What are we condoning?

The problem is, he will be unemployable......and won't be able to teach again, that's for sure. So unless we the taxpayers want to pay his unemployment benefit or income support or whatever it's called these days, I think he should be allowed to keep the royalties from his books. Afterall, it's doubtful he wrote them "to get close to children" as such. He will have used his teaching position to do that.

Does anyone think that as a result of this case the government will want private teachers to have a CRB?

Mr Davey was employed by Cambridgeshire County Council... the same mob who CRB checked Ian Huntley and Keith Lavarack. All a CRB check says is that you haven't been caught molesting children yet it says no more.

That reminds me The local primary school want me to have another CRB Check done as I help out there.

Most Private instrumental tutors have almost certainly had CRB checks done due to other organisations they were involved with.

The whole system is a Farce.

Very good points.

And the story has found it into the Bucks Advertiser too, which is my local paper (click to be able to read the whole story)



And a 'comment' section in the letters saying how terrible it is. I might write in to disagree.

The stupid thing is, he's not "cashing in" on his child molesting, he's cashing in on the books he's written as a musician first and foremost - his 'crimes' don't really have anything to do with his writing. It's just sad that his teaching has allowed him to do that to children, but it's nothing to do with his books.......and I guess if you asked the people who are so scandalized if they'd rather pay for him and support him themselves out of their own pocket (which is where taxes are taken from!!!!) than allow him some way of keeping himself, they'd be horrified at the suggestion. I hate the way papers sensationalize things like that....

People questioned his motives for writing the books, but I still don't see how that affects the quality of each book in itself. It's a view that may 'feel' instinctively right, but I think on balance it doesn't make sense.

I have to admit that I will continue to use the Davey books when I deem it necessary. They are excellent quality and quite unique. Some children who don't get on with traditional recorder tutors do fabulously with this book.

I asked myself if I was harming anyone by using it. I can't see that I am. Is it in the childs best interest if I do use it? Yep.

I really don't think that his book was written with any ulterior motives. If he wanted to write a book just to attract children for his perversion, he could have done the job with much less care and attention.

They go into his bank account. A criminal may not profit directly from his crimes, but Archer continued to accrue royalties from his ... ahem ... "novels", while imprisoned for a different offence.

Edward

As I said somewhere else I think it is up to the courts and the justice departments to deal with this man's offences. There has been a lot of talk about "double sentences" here because some offenders have served prison sentences, then been released and subsequently deported because they didn't have French nationality. Other people imprisoned for the same offences have not suffered a second sentence because they were French.

I have the impression some people are trying to inflict a double sentence on Mr Davey. That raises a very
serious question about what is calmly dispensed disinterested justice and what is a form of public lynching. People should pay their debt to society, people whose behaviour shows that they are sick in a way which could be dangerous should be restrained and treated. But I do not think that society should go further than that. There are some very wide issues at stake here.

If a teacher makes the choice not to use these books that is their decision but I don't believe we should all be told to do the same or considered to be in any way supporting the crimes if we choose to use the books.

A purely musical question: since I have never seen any of these publications, and since a number of teachers are keen to defend them on musical grounds, could someone please give me an idea of what the musical / pedagogical value of the method is?