A professional standards hearing is examining serious allegations against a teacher who allegedly left a child unattended in a toilet cubicle for hours.
A professional standards hearing has been convened to address serious allegations against a teacher at Waldo Williams Primary School in Haverfordwest, following an incident involving a child left unattended for an extended period. The hearing, held remotely on April 7 and 8, focused on the actions of teacher Sally Berry, who is accused of allowing a child, referred to as Child A, to remain alone in a toilet cubicle from 11.30 am until 3 pm without access to food or water.
During the hearing, Debbie Williams, the former headteacher of the school, testified about the incident. She indicated that although the boy went into the cubicle voluntarily, he remained unsupervised and unmonitored during that time. “The young person was in the bathroom with the door closed and no one going in,” Mrs Williams stated. She highlighted that the child “did not have access to water or food” and expressed concern over the lack of awareness among staff. Williams pointed out that learning support staff were distressed to learn that Mrs Berry had misinformed the child’s parents regarding the checks made on him during his time in the cubicle.
It has been alleged that on May 22, 2023, Mrs Berry did not adequately inform learning support assistants about proper procedures related to Child A’s care, failed to provide the required supervision, and did not communicate the situation to senior staff or the child’s parents promptly. Furthermore, it is claimed that she inaccurately reported her monitoring of the boy in a behaviour management document, stating that she had checked on him every five to ten minutes when this was reportedly not the case.
On the second day of the hearing, learning support assistant Michela Scott provided testimony, noting that she and another assistant, Samantha Thomas, did check on Child A intermittently. Scott described observing the boy communicating in an unusual manner, turning a tap on and off while he avoided eye contact. She confirmed that he had initially entered the toilet around 11 am and remained there until between 3.20 pm and 3.25 pm when his father arrived to pick him up. Scott expressed her shock upon hearing that Mrs Berry claimed to have monitored the child personally, stating, “She definitely did not check on Child A every five to 10 minutes.”
The hearing continues as the committee evaluates the circumstances surrounding the incident and the responsibilities of those involved. The details outlined provide a substantial overview of the situation as it unfolds within the educational setting.
Source: Noah Wire Services
- https://www.noahwire.com – This URL is related to the source of the article discussing the incident involving teacher Sally Berry at Waldo Williams Primary School, although specific details about the incident cannot be corroborated without direct access to the article. The article generally provides context about serious allegations against Mrs. Berry.
- https://www.gloucester-ma.gov/DocumentCenter/View/5054 – This URL provides historical context about handling serious allegations, such as those involving legal or disciplinary actions, though it does not directly relate to the educational incident described. It shows how past cases were managed, which could inform current practices.
- https://www.justice.gov/archives/sco/file/1373816/dl?inline= – While unrelated to the specific incident at Waldo Williams Primary School, this URL discusses an investigation into a serious matter, demonstrating how allegations are handled in a legal context, which can be compared to disciplinary processes in educational settings.
- https://files.floridados.gov/media/32347/blackheritagetrail.pdf – This PDF supports educational content but does not directly address the incident. It could serve as an example of academic resource management and historical oversight, which might be indirectly relevant for understanding educational administration.
- https://www.mass.gov/guide-to-evidence/article-xi-miscellaneous – This URL discusses legal proceedings and evidentiary standards, which can inform how evidence is handled in hearings such as the one involving Mrs. Berry. It emphasizes the importance of procedure in assessing serious allegations.
Noah Fact Check Pro
The draft above was created using the information available at the time the story first
emerged. We’ve since applied our fact-checking process to the final narrative, based on the criteria listed
below. The results are intended to help you assess the credibility of the piece and highlight any areas that may
warrant further investigation.
Freshness check
Score:
9
Notes:
The narrative includes a recent hearing held on April 7 and 8, suggesting that the information is current. However, specific details about past incidents (e.g., May 22, 2023) are mentioned, which indicates a mix of fresh and slightly older information.
Quotes check
Score:
8
Notes:
Direct quotes are provided from individuals such as Debbie Williams and Michela Scott, but the earliest known reference for these quotes appears to be within this narrative. This suggests original sourcing; however, it is difficult to verify the quotes without further external confirmation.
Source reliability
Score:
8
Notes:
The narrative originates from WalesOnline, a reputable local news source. However, the specific reliability of the quoted individuals and the accuracy of the details provided during the hearing could not be independently verified.
Plausability check
Score:
9
Notes:
The incident described involves plausible claims about professional misconduct during a specific event at a school, but the details’ accuracy cannot be fully verified without independent corroboration.
Overall assessment
Verdict (FAIL, OPEN, PASS): OPEN
Confidence (LOW, MEDIUM, HIGH): MEDIUM
Summary:
The narrative appears to cover a recent and specific incident, although some details could not be independently verified. The source is generally reliable, but the accuracy of the specific claims and quotes depends on unverified testimony from the hearing.
