So, my reflections in more detail:

We don't know at what stage, or by what means, they might have been cleared.

The first stage is consideration by an Investigating Committee. This Committee is effectively considering whether there is a prima facie case, and in contrast to the former GSCC, does so before a detailed investigation. One might have thought it highly surprising that such that Committee could find that there was no case to answer without doing an investigation, but on the other hand it would be consistent with there being no record. Equally, if there is a discontinuance hearing, there may be no record.

If, however, the case proceeds to a full hearing, then those hearings are public, and upcoming hearings are published on the Internet, and there would usually be some trace at least of the fact that there had been a hearing. This is despite the fact that as you have correctly identified (and again in contrast to the former GSCC, which published findings both in favour of and against social workers), a social worker who is vindicated may well not have (may choose not to have) the decision vindicating them published on the Internet.

Turning to the PSA and this series of tweets, the thought that was going through my head was, does the PSA automatically review every decision, or does it have some formula or algorithm for selecting which decisions need to be reviewed? And if the latter, it looks to me as though there is at least the possibility of an extraordinarily large gap between the nature of the allegations and the nature of the disposal in this case – since the nature of the allegations is lying on oath and doctoring evidence (possibly perjury, though that would need to be proved to criminal standard); whereas the nature of the disposal is possibly no case to answer without any hearing. And I would not be confident that an algorithm that reviews cases that are likely to need review would necessarily identify this one given the disjunction.

Hence, I wondered whether it was worth drawing it to the specific attention of the PSA?

Reply · Report Post