Darwen PE teacher admits drink driving after Chorley incident (From Chorley Citizen)
When news happens, text CIT and your photos and videos to 80360. Or contact us by email or phone.
Darwen PE teacher admits drink driving after Chorley incident
4:52pm Wednesday 24th November 2010 in Adlington
CAB DRIVER: Rob Willis, who tried to confiscate McGrath’s car keys after the crash, said he had been deeply affected by the incident
A PE teacher has admitted driving while three times the drink-drive limit — but has returned to his job following the court case.
Jonathan McGrath, 28, head of boys’ PE at Darwen Vale High School, crashed his car into a taxi, and was then involved in an altercation with the driver who tried to seize his keys.
But bosses said McGrath was a 'valued member of staff with a previously impeccable record who showed genuine remorse'.
And the other driver said he did not want to see McGrath lose his job.
The teacher was banned from driving for two years and ordered to undertake 180 hours' community service after the incident near Chorley in March.
McGrath, of Weavers Court, Buckshaw Village, initially faced assault charges after taxi driver Rob Willis claimed he had sustained two black eyes and bruising to his face during the scuffle.
At Preston Crown Court, McGrath pleaded guilty to the lesser charge of a section four public order offence and driving with excess alcohol.
His victim, Yellow Cabs driver Rob Willis, from Adlington, tried to confiscate McGrath’s keys until police arrived after the minor collision.
Speaking after the hearing, Mr Willis said although he had been deeply affected by the incident, he did not want McGrath to lose his job.
He said: “I feel vindicated that he has admitted what he did and has pleaded guilty to the offences.
“But I have never received an apology from him for what he did. I now want to put this behind me.”
McGrath was ordered by Judge Philip Butler to pay Mr Willis £500 compensation and the court £125 costs.
After the case, a spokesman for Darwen Vale High School said McGrath was suspended after the incident and had now returned to school, although governors are to meet to discuss the case.
He added: "We note that the judge commented in court that he hoped Mr McGrath would remain in his employment due to his previous impeccable record, good character and the genuine remorse.
“Mr McGrath is a valued member of staff at the school and is held in high regard both by those he teaches and those who work with him.”
Comments(60)
Sox
says...
6:21pm Wed 24 Nov 10
Hugh Jardon wrote:The guy is a drunkard and a thug. I wouldn't want him anywhere near my kid.
While no one condones his actions,he's a bloody superb PE teacher.
My lad (LN) attends Vale & has a real passion for Rugby..mainly thanks to this man!
He cannot be allowed to leave Vale!!
.
The school should have sacked him.
OwdAkela
says...
6:29pm Wed 24 Nov 10
embeee
says...
7:12pm Wed 24 Nov 10
OwdAkela wrote:You took the words right out of my mouth. The quality of journalism in the LT generally is appalling. Chris Gee's article demonstrates inaccurate spelling, bad grammar, repetition, poor punctuation ......... need I say any more?
Ye Gods Chris Gee! Where did you learn English as you can't spell or proof read.
Hugh Jardon
says...
8:14pm Wed 24 Nov 10
Sox wrote:..& replaced him with what?
Hugh Jardon wrote:The guy is a drunkard and a thug. I wouldn't want him anywhere near my kid.
While no one condones his actions,he's a bloody superb PE teacher.
My lad (LN) attends Vale & has a real passion for Rugby..mainly thanks to this man!
He cannot be allowed to leave Vale!!
.
The school should have sacked him.
The guy has expressed his regret & has been punished for it..
Why punish those who are associated with him?
As for your assessment of the chap...
..I may say that you are a bit of a ****, that doesn't actually mean that I'm correct, does it?
Sox
says...
8:55pm Wed 24 Nov 10
Hugh Jardon wrote:Yes but my assessment of the individual is based on the outcome of criminal proceedings.
Sox wrote:..& replaced him with what?
Hugh Jardon wrote:The guy is a drunkard and a thug. I wouldn't want him anywhere near my kid.
While no one condones his actions,he's a bloody superb PE teacher.
My lad (LN) attends Vale & has a real passion for Rugby..mainly thanks to this man!
He cannot be allowed to leave Vale!!
.
The school should have sacked him.
The guy has expressed his regret & has been punished for it..
Why punish those who are associated with him?
As for your assessment of the chap...
..I may say that you are a bit of a ****, that doesn't actually mean that I'm correct, does it?
.
Whereas your assessment of me is groundless.
.
You may also note from the article that he has failed to apologise to the IP, do you consider this to be an admirable quality?
.
I feel his days are already numbered.
Wrightyy
says...
9:02pm Wed 24 Nov 10
Sox wrote:Sox I take that you know this man and are well aware all the details of the case???? From your comment you must be?? Otherwise you would be a very small minded person who likes to make extremely daming without all the facts??
Hugh Jardon wrote: While no one condones his actions,he's a bloody superb PE teacher. My lad (LN) attends Vale & has a real passion for Rugby..mainly thanks to this man! He cannot be allowed to leave Vale!!The guy is a drunkard and a thug. I wouldn't want him anywhere near my kid. . The school should have sacked him.
Here are some facts:- (1) Like Hugh Jardon my son also attends the school and is taught by this man. He can't do enough for the pupils. (2) He has broken the law and has got punished by our legal system and quite rightly so.
SOX:- By your assessment of this man I take it that you have never broken any law and are the perfect human being.
Why is he a thug?? Does the article not say that he had a previous impeccable record? So 1 mistake makes him a thug?
And what makes him a drunkard?? Because he made the stupid mistake of enjoying a drink but stupidly driving? Has he not been punished by the law for this????????
He who has never sinned cast the first stone.
Sox
says...
9:26pm Wed 24 Nov 10
.
Why did Mr McGrath leave a good citizen with two black eyes and facial bruising?
.
...and why did he fail to apologise?
.
Your right, we have all made mistakes, but, by his own actions, Mr McGrath may have irreparably damaged his teaching career.
P.Rogers
says...
9:31pm Wed 24 Nov 10
friend197
says...
9:34pm Wed 24 Nov 10
Contrary to popular belief, teachers are human and can make mistakes but Mr McGrath has been punished by school and by the government already.
You will notice that Mr McGrath has chosen not to comment, not to give his side of the story, which is thoroughly indicative of the person he is. He, unlike his "victim" (and there are two sides to every story) has chosen to maintain a dignified silence in just the same way as he has, despite all odds, returned to work in such a dignified manner.
Has anyone ever considered that, once the pupils know the true story, they will repsect him for his "human" side, the fact that he can make mistakes and accept resposibility for his actions, and that this will only serve as a lesson for other pupils? And, until you know these children, and their respect for him, then you quite simply cannot comment.
mob
says...
9:38pm Wed 24 Nov 10
Big Zeke
says...
9:46pm Wed 24 Nov 10
Sox wrote:Sox:If he had killed a child he would have duly been punished. Fact is he didnt and has been punished by law. What a narrow minded view you have taken over a person you know nothing about. For him to lose his job and punished twice would be a tragedy for the hundreds of pupils that hold him in high regard.
It's very admirable that you are all leaping to Mr McGrath's defence but what would have happened if, in his drunken state, he had run over and killed a child? . Why did Mr McGrath leave a good citizen with two black eyes and facial bruising? . ...and why did he fail to apologise? . Your right, we have all made mistakes, but, by his own actions, Mr McGrath may have irreparably damaged his teaching career.
I didnt know it was common procedure for all people convicted of an offense to apologise to their victim. Maybe you can show me the legislation where it says he has to do so.
As someone remarked earlier there are two sides to a story and if this taxi driver wanted Mr McGrath to keep his job and wanted closure then maybe he should not have gone running to the press.
You are entitled to your opinion like everyone else but please dont slate a man's character when you dont know him personally.
Wrightyy
says...
9:46pm Wed 24 Nov 10
Sox wrote:SOX you are right, the consequences of his actions could have been much worse. However, people that chose to speed put childrens lives at risk, people that dont look after their children properly put childrens lives at risk. Would these things have been publicised as much??
It's very admirable that you are all leaping to Mr McGrath's defence but what would have happened if, in his drunken state, he had run over and killed a child? . Why did Mr McGrath leave a good citizen with two black eyes and facial bruising? . ...and why did he fail to apologise? . Your right, we have all made mistakes, but, by his own actions, Mr McGrath may have irreparably damaged his teaching career.
.....
As I have previously stated, he has accepted his punishment and accepted that he has done wrong.
......
In relation to an apology, did MrMcGrath not state in court that regreated the whole situation??
........
I notice that this man has not been found guilty of assault, therefore did the taxi driver hit him back? Has Mr McGrath any injuries?? This a side of the story that we may never no, therefore make assumptions like saying he's 'thug'. Thanks
mob
says...
9:52pm Wed 24 Nov 10
P.Rogers wrote:I indeed agree with you 100%. It is an entirely 1 sided story one of which mr mc grath has not commented on. Have we seen photos of mr mc Grath after the incident ? No. Have we seen mr mc Grath look for his 5 minutes of fame an play the victim? No. So although paper does not refuse ink i think in this day and age people need to wake up and see that this is 1 persons view and how can some one who only reads 1 story possibly know mr mc Grath better than his school or even the judge who is said to have commented on his IMPECCABLE Record
I think the story is very one sided. There are two sides to every story and this article is very clearly only telling one side which I dont think is very fair
Hugh Jardon
says...
10:06pm Wed 24 Nov 10
Sox wrote:May I congratulate you on your charming pastiche of a emply headed, fliptard?
It's very admirable that you are all leaping to Mr McGrath's defence but what would have happened if, in his drunken state, he had run over and killed a child?
.
Why did Mr McGrath leave a good citizen with two black eyes and facial bruising?
.
...and why did he fail to apologise?
.
Your right, we have all made mistakes, but, by his own actions, Mr McGrath may have irreparably damaged his teaching career.
You use the word 'IF'.
Let's give you another hypothetical situation, as you appear to be very fond of them.
IF my grandma have had a pair of **** & a nob, then she may have beem my grandad instead.
WHY may he irreparably damaged his teaching career?
Sure, he's dropped a gooley but the unsolicited support that he has received on here speaks volumes for the man.
JD22
says...
10:10pm Wed 24 Nov 10
Unfortunately, due to this badly-written piece of journalism, this incident is now being scrutinised by people who don't know him personally and might find it more profitable to mind their own business.
mcgrath1
says...
11:11pm Wed 24 Nov 10
Hugh Jardon wrote:I totally agree with this guy. Mr.McGrath is a very good teacher who made one mistake and has paid the price for it. I believe we all make mistakes at some time in our lives and, like Mr.McGrath have taken the punishment. I believe it is only but fair to let this man move on with his life and his teaching career.
While no one condones his actions,he's a bloody superb PE teacher. My lad (LN) attends Vale & has a real passion for Rugby..mainly thanks to this man! He cannot be allowed to leave Vale!!
friend197
says...
11:27pm Wed 24 Nov 10
A wonderful teacher and support to the pupils. Thanks to all who are able to realise that everyone makes mistakes and can accept the consequences without the need to hypothesis!!! Yes, it could have been worse, and thank god it wasn't, now give this man a break and let him get on with what the LAW has decided his punishment should be! who, out of all of us, is above that?????
Good luck, Mr McGrath, and those people who are "what iffing" should be glad it wasn't more serious instead of, apparently, wishing it was!!!
mob
says...
1:09am Thu 25 Nov 10
Sox wrote:Sox it is not that people are wrongly jumping to the defence of mr mc Grath, we are meerly doing what seams to be a forgotten art and standing up for someone who actually has numerous quality's but 1 person and if you look through these comments you will discover that you stand alone in your opinion of mr mc Grath, thinks he should be taking out an publically flogged if it were up to you. I hasten to add that all this knowledge you have of the man is what you have seen in a paper!!!! As you have seen people feel very strongly that it would be a huge loss to our school to loose someone of his ability and with such a vested interest in our children. Just ask how his classes for gcse etc came out. Could you do just a smidgen of research and then maybe form an actual educated opinion
It's very admirable that you are all leaping to Mr McGrath's defence but what would have happened if, in his drunken state, he had run over and killed a child? . Why did Mr McGrath leave a good citizen with two black eyes and facial bruising? . ...and why did he fail to apologise? . Your right, we have all made mistakes, but, by his own actions, Mr McGrath may have irreparably damaged his teaching career.
Sox
says...
7:07am Thu 25 Nov 10
mob wrote:My observations are based on the facts quoted as a result of the outcome of criminal proceedings. The outcome of these proceedings is that Mr McGrath, due to his drunken state, ended with a two year driving ban and having to pay compensation to a person he chose to injure.
Sox wrote:Sox it is not that people are wrongly jumping to the defence of mr mc Grath, we are meerly doing what seams to be a forgotten art and standing up for someone who actually has numerous quality's but 1 person and if you look through these comments you will discover that you stand alone in your opinion of mr mc Grath, thinks he should be taking out an publically flogged if it were up to you. I hasten to add that all this knowledge you have of the man is what you have seen in a paper!!!! As you have seen people feel very strongly that it would be a huge loss to our school to loose someone of his ability and with such a vested interest in our children. Just ask how his classes for gcse etc came out. Could you do just a smidgen of research and then maybe form an actual educated opinion
It's very admirable that you are all leaping to Mr McGrath's defence but what would have happened if, in his drunken state, he had run over and killed a child? . Why did Mr McGrath leave a good citizen with two black eyes and facial bruising? . ...and why did he fail to apologise? . Your right, we have all made mistakes, but, by his own actions, Mr McGrath may have irreparably damaged his teaching career.
.
To me, "Mr McGrath is good at teaching my kids rugby" is insufficient reason to excuse the behaviour of a person who needs to display the highest possible standards to young people under his direction.
.
I can carry on indefinitely with this but, as someone remarked above, the longer this blog drags on the the more damage it is likely to cause to Mr McGrath's career.
JD22
says...
8:10am Thu 25 Nov 10
If not, his intolerant attitude belongs to an era and society far removed from the one to which the rest of us belong.
Hugh Jardon
says...
8:48am Thu 25 Nov 10
Sox wrote:"While no one condones his actions,he's a bloody superb PE teacher..."
mob wrote:My observations are based on the facts quoted as a result of the outcome of criminal proceedings. The outcome of these proceedings is that Mr McGrath, due to his drunken state, ended with a two year driving ban and having to pay compensation to a person he chose to injure.
Sox wrote:Sox it is not that people are wrongly jumping to the defence of mr mc Grath, we are meerly doing what seams to be a forgotten art and standing up for someone who actually has numerous quality's but 1 person and if you look through these comments you will discover that you stand alone in your opinion of mr mc Grath, thinks he should be taking out an publically flogged if it were up to you. I hasten to add that all this knowledge you have of the man is what you have seen in a paper!!!! As you have seen people feel very strongly that it would be a huge loss to our school to loose someone of his ability and with such a vested interest in our children. Just ask how his classes for gcse etc came out. Could you do just a smidgen of research and then maybe form an actual educated opinion
It's very admirable that you are all leaping to Mr McGrath's defence but what would have happened if, in his drunken state, he had run over and killed a child? . Why did Mr McGrath leave a good citizen with two black eyes and facial bruising? . ...and why did he fail to apologise? . Your right, we have all made mistakes, but, by his own actions, Mr McGrath may have irreparably damaged his teaching career.
.
To me, "Mr McGrath is good at teaching my kids rugby" is insufficient reason to excuse the behaviour of a person who needs to display the highest possible standards to young people under his direction.
.
I can carry on indefinitely with this but, as someone remarked above, the longer this blog drags on the the more damage it is likely to cause to Mr McGrath's career.
What part of the above do you fail to understand?
Hugh Jardon
says...
8:57am Thu 25 Nov 10
Mmmm the only person to have suggested this is yourself, "SOX".
"SELF PRAISE AINT NO RECONMENDATION....."
Hugh Jardon
says...
8:58am Thu 25 Nov 10
JD22 wrote:Nope, she's just being ignorant.
Is Sox playing devil's advocate?
If not, his intolerant attitude belongs to an era and society far removed from the one to which the rest of us belong.
Big Zeke
says...
9:50am Thu 25 Nov 10
Grizzly
says...
12:06pm Thu 25 Nov 10
Yesterday, before they released that photograph, I thought he's had his punishment, let him continue in his work.
Now, I am not too convinced - but as someone has rightly pointed out, this article is very one sided (there's a surprise from the LT..!!)
There also appears to have been some plea bargaining going on too, on the basis of his guilty plea, the charge of assault was dropped....
No doubt the governors of the school will have far greater detail than the LT and they will come to what they consider to be the correct decision.
If they keep him on, fair enough I am sure they must be satisifed with the punishment of the court and his excuse.
Should they feel he has brought the name of the school into disrepute, and his position is therefore untenable - I'd have every confidence in their decision.
The Barons
says...
1:05pm Thu 25 Nov 10
Grizzly wrote:Hi Im a friend of MrMcGrath and Id like to state some facts before people jump to their misinformed conclusions.
The taxi driver in that photograph looks like he's had a good kicking. Yesterday, before they released that photograph, I thought he's had his punishment, let him continue in his work. Now, I am not too convinced - but as someone has rightly pointed out, this article is very one sided (there's a surprise from the LT..!!) There also appears to have been some plea bargaining going on too, on the basis of his guilty plea, the charge of assault was dropped.... No doubt the governors of the school will have far greater detail than the LT and they will come to what they consider to be the correct decision. If they keep him on, fair enough I am sure they must be satisifed with the punishment of the court and his excuse. Should they feel he has brought the name of the school into disrepute, and his position is therefore untenable - I'd have every confidence in their decision.
Mr McGrath had also injuries caused by the taxi driver but has chosen to not add to all the speculation.
The taxi driver had initially lied about not hitting McGrath and when the evidence came to light, had to admitt to this. That is why the assault charge was dropped.
No one has said the McGrath caused the accident although he was completely wrong to have got behind the wheel after having a drink.
As has been said before this was a matter for the law and he has been punished. I can imagine that if the judge thought that he was a danger to children he would have stated so, rather than hoping that he could remain in his job.
Grizzly
says...
1:39pm Thu 25 Nov 10
and I clearly finished with whatever the school governors decide, I would trust as they will undoubtedly have far more information than has been reported on here...
So i'd appreciate less of the 'misinformed'. It is patently obvious to anyone with common sense that I don't know his side of the story and it is best that others judge who know more...
tosser.
Grizzly
says...
1:47pm Thu 25 Nov 10
5 pints of lager my arse, 3 times the drink drive limit! yea right! Even the judge didn't believe that....
Judge Philip Butler admitted to a 'degree of surprise' that the prosecution had agreed to accept a guilty plea to a public order offence.
He said the defendant was lucky that Mr Willis had shown him compassion and said other victims may not have been inclined to do so.
He added: "You drove on the relevant occasion having consumed, you say five strong lagers. You had been to the pub and were sufficiently intoxicated to be involved in a minor traffic incident. Mr Willis tried to restrain you until the police arrived by taking the keys from the car.
"There may have been a scuffle and he may have received those injuries as part of the scuffle. That situation was set up by your drunken driving."
Judge Butler revealed that McGrath had been more than three times over the drink drive limit when he was arrested and said his colleagues had been supporting him since his interim driving ban.
tpreece01
says...
2:24pm Thu 25 Nov 10
OwdAkela wrote:Probably at Vale!
Ye Gods Chris Gee! Where did you learn English as you can't spell or proof read.
Big Zeke
says...
3:15pm Thu 25 Nov 10
Grizzly wrote:Grizzly: I assume you also read where mr willis said it took 6 months to get his car back on the road. Do you not find that strange considering the judge classed it as a minor traffic incident!!!! As for calling a baron a tosser do you not consider that to be rather childish!
A snippet from the Chorley Guardain which goes into a bit more detail...
5 pints of lager my arse, 3 times the drink drive limit! yea right! Even the judge didn't believe that....
Judge Philip Butler admitted to a 'degree of surprise' that the prosecution had agreed to accept a guilty plea to a public order offence.
He said the defendant was lucky that Mr Willis had shown him compassion and said other victims may not have been inclined to do so.
He added: "You drove on the relevant occasion having consumed, you say five strong lagers. You had been to the pub and were sufficiently intoxicated to be involved in a minor traffic incident. Mr Willis tried to restrain you until the police arrived by taking the keys from the car.
"There may have been a scuffle and he may have received those injuries as part of the scuffle. That situation was set up by your drunken driving."
Judge Butler revealed that McGrath had been more than three times over the drink drive limit when he was arrested and said his colleagues had been supporting him since his interim driving ban.
Grizzly
says...
3:22pm Thu 25 Nov 10
It is very likely to be a dispute with the insurers, in who is at fault (remember, civil and criminal law is completely different, so from a negligence point of view, Mr McGrath insurers could deny liability) they would also be well within their rights to refuse indemnity and willis would have to go to the MIB (not the men in black...)
But that is nothing to do with the case reported on, which is criminal.
I do consider it childish. However, I do get annoyed when people don't read posts properly and resort to calling me 'misinformed'.
the judges comments regarding his surprise at the plea bargain is worrying. Also, the fact it was listed at Crown Court, rather than magistrate which suggests McGrath either wanted to be judged by his peers, or the magistrate thought the crime was outside its sentancing powers.....
food for thought, but merely speculation.
Grizzly
says...
3:24pm Thu 25 Nov 10
Sox
says...
4:07pm Thu 25 Nov 10
.
"Judge Butler revealed that McGrath had been more than three times over the drink drive limit when he was arrested"
.
I initially thought, by the reaction of Mr McGrath's apologists, that he was just a bit tipsy (although the two year ban did ring some alarm bells).
.
Seems that he was actually pretty slaughtered and would have presented an extreme danger to himself and anyone else on the road.
.
Poor Mr Willis, nobody deserves to be battered like that.
Big Zeke
says...
4:22pm Thu 25 Nov 10
Grizzly
says...
4:44pm Thu 25 Nov 10
there is certainly more to this case than what has been reported, which is due to the guilty plea. Evidence would have been heard from both parties had McGrath entered a 'Not Guilty' plea.
Given the plea bargain, you can only assume that means both parties wanted an end to this, and the maybe some things that happened on the night in question were in the interests of both parties not be be aired in court....
As it stands, he has been found guilty, sentenced accordingly and now it is up to the school to decide if they take any further action, not us.
Big Zeke
says...
4:48pm Thu 25 Nov 10
Wrightyy
says...
5:29pm Thu 25 Nov 10
Wrightyy
says...
5:34pm Thu 25 Nov 10
Sox wrote:Sox, why is that a good spot from grizzly? It also says that he was 3 times the legal limit in the telegraph!!!! You really are a genius
Hmm, this is far worse than I originally thought. Good spot Grizzly, from the Chorley Guardian: . "Judge Butler revealed that McGrath had been more than three times over the drink drive limit when he was arrested" . I initially thought, by the reaction of Mr McGrath's apologists, that he was just a bit tipsy (although the two year ban did ring some alarm bells). . Seems that he was actually pretty slaughtered and would have presented an extreme danger to himself and anyone else on the road. . Poor Mr Willis, nobody deserves to be battered like that.
Sox
says...
7:42pm Thu 25 Nov 10
Wrightyy wrote:Read carefully, the Judge quoted in the Chorley Guardian says "MORE than three times over the drink drive limit when he was arrested."
Sox wrote:Sox, why is that a good spot from grizzly? It also says that he was 3 times the legal limit in the telegraph!!!! You really are a genius
Hmm, this is far worse than I originally thought. Good spot Grizzly, from the Chorley Guardian: . "Judge Butler revealed that McGrath had been more than three times over the drink drive limit when he was arrested" . I initially thought, by the reaction of Mr McGrath's apologists, that he was just a bit tipsy (although the two year ban did ring some alarm bells). . Seems that he was actually pretty slaughtered and would have presented an extreme danger to himself and anyone else on the road. . Poor Mr Willis, nobody deserves to be battered like that.
.
Out of interest, from a personal perspective, how many times the legal limit do you consider acceptable?
Big Zeke
says...
7:47pm Thu 25 Nov 10
Sox wrote:Oh Sox u couldn't let it lie!!! Your contradictions make you look even more ignorant and presumptuous than before!!! Leave the guy alone and stop wasting your time thinking up more ways to have a dig!!! He's been punished for his stupidity he deserved wot he got!! Wot more do you want a public flogging?? Put him in the stocks?? Stone him?? Do you not trust the british justice system?!
Hmm, this is far worse than I originally thought. Good spot Grizzly, from the Chorley Guardian:
.
"Judge Butler revealed that McGrath had been more than three times over the drink drive limit when he was arrested"
.
I initially thought, by the reaction of Mr McGrath's apologists, that he was just a bit tipsy (although the two year ban did ring some alarm bells).
.
Seems that he was actually pretty slaughtered and would have presented an extreme danger to himself and anyone else on the road.
.
Poor Mr Willis, nobody deserves to be battered like that.
JD22
says...
8:15pm Thu 25 Nov 10
tpreece01 wrote:Maybe you would like to read this year's Ofsted report on Darwen Vale before you make another ridiculous comment?
OwdAkela wrote: Ye Gods Chris Gee! Where did you learn English as you can't spell or proof read.Probably at Vale!
Sox
says...
8:18pm Thu 25 Nov 10
Big Zeke wrote:Well yes I will.
Sox wrote:Oh Sox u couldn't let it lie!!! Your contradictions make you look even more ignorant and presumptuous than before!!! Leave the guy alone and stop wasting your time thinking up more ways to have a dig!!! He's been punished for his stupidity he deserved wot he got!! Wot more do you want a public flogging?? Put him in the stocks?? Stone him?? Do you not trust the british justice system?!
Hmm, this is far worse than I originally thought. Good spot Grizzly, from the Chorley Guardian:
.
"Judge Butler revealed that McGrath had been more than three times over the drink drive limit when he was arrested"
.
I initially thought, by the reaction of Mr McGrath's apologists, that he was just a bit tipsy (although the two year ban did ring some alarm bells).
.
Seems that he was actually pretty slaughtered and would have presented an extreme danger to himself and anyone else on the road.
.
Poor Mr Willis, nobody deserves to be battered like that.
.
However, just to finish on a practical note (and this occurred to me on my way into work this morning), as Mr McGrath will possibly be faced with a difficult journey to work for the next two years (which could be much longer with his insurance situation), can the parents not rally round and arrange a rota of lifts?
Wrightyy
says...
8:27pm Thu 25 Nov 10
Sox wrote:Sox, just to quence you interest in my personal views, I believe that anything over the legal limit is unexceptable. Ok so the judge said over 3 times the legal limit. I presume that this would be close to 3 times the legal limit other he would have said close to 4 times?? So do you believe that things would have been better if the judge said "you where exactly, bang on 3 times the legal limit"??
Wrightyy wrote:Read carefully, the Judge quoted in the Chorley Guardian says "MORE than three times over the drink drive limit when he was arrested." . Out of interest, from a personal perspective, how many times the legal limit do you consider acceptable?Sox wrote: Hmm, this is far worse than I originally thought. Good spot Grizzly, from the Chorley Guardian: . "Judge Butler revealed that McGrath had been more than three times over the drink drive limit when he was arrested" . I initially thought, by the reaction of Mr McGrath's apologists, that he was just a bit tipsy (although the two year ban did ring some alarm bells). . Seems that he was actually pretty slaughtered and would have presented an extreme danger to himself and anyone else on the road. . Poor Mr Willis, nobody deserves to be battered like that.Sox, why is that a good spot from grizzly? It also says that he was 3 times the legal limit in the telegraph!!!! You really are a genius
stubaggs
says...
8:33pm Thu 25 Nov 10
Nice person, spoke to him many times including last night at parents evening
Big mistake,
Justice done,,
Still a great teacher, with a tough lesson learned
Story over, move on
Big Zeke
says...
8:34pm Thu 25 Nov 10
Sox wrote:Sox is that the best you could come up with??? Oh dear oh dear let me get my notepad out and write that one down for future reference it was that funny!! Did you enjoy school by any chance?? Or are you just nomally a bitter person??
Big Zeke wrote:Well yes I will. . However, just to finish on a practical note (and this occurred to me on my way into work this morning), as Mr McGrath will possibly be faced with a difficult journey to work for the next two years (which could be much longer with his insurance situation), can the parents not rally round and arrange a rota of lifts?Sox wrote: Hmm, this is far worse than I originally thought. Good spot Grizzly, from the Chorley Guardian: . "Judge Butler revealed that McGrath had been more than three times over the drink drive limit when he was arrested" . I initially thought, by the reaction of Mr McGrath's apologists, that he was just a bit tipsy (although the two year ban did ring some alarm bells). . Seems that he was actually pretty slaughtered and would have presented an extreme danger to himself and anyone else on the road. . Poor Mr Willis, nobody deserves to be battered like that.Oh Sox u couldn't let it lie!!! Your contradictions make you look even more ignorant and presumptuous than before!!! Leave the guy alone and stop wasting your time thinking up more ways to have a dig!!! He's been punished for his stupidity he deserved wot he got!! Wot more do you want a public flogging?? Put him in the stocks?? Stone him?? Do you not trust the british justice system?!
JD22
says...
8:41pm Thu 25 Nov 10
Sox
says...
8:44pm Thu 25 Nov 10
Big Zeke wrote:Big Zeke,
Sox wrote:Sox is that the best you could come up with??? Oh dear oh dear let me get my notepad out and write that one down for future reference it was that funny!! Did you enjoy school by any chance?? Or are you just nomally a bitter person??
Big Zeke wrote:Well yes I will. . However, just to finish on a practical note (and this occurred to me on my way into work this morning), as Mr McGrath will possibly be faced with a difficult journey to work for the next two years (which could be much longer with his insurance situation), can the parents not rally round and arrange a rota of lifts?Sox wrote: Hmm, this is far worse than I originally thought. Good spot Grizzly, from the Chorley Guardian: . "Judge Butler revealed that McGrath had been more than three times over the drink drive limit when he was arrested" . I initially thought, by the reaction of Mr McGrath's apologists, that he was just a bit tipsy (although the two year ban did ring some alarm bells). . Seems that he was actually pretty slaughtered and would have presented an extreme danger to himself and anyone else on the road. . Poor Mr Willis, nobody deserves to be battered like that.Oh Sox u couldn't let it lie!!! Your contradictions make you look even more ignorant and presumptuous than before!!! Leave the guy alone and stop wasting your time thinking up more ways to have a dig!!! He's been punished for his stupidity he deserved wot he got!! Wot more do you want a public flogging?? Put him in the stocks?? Stone him?? Do you not trust the british justice system?!
.
My post was meant in earnest, it was a shame that you did not see it that way.
.
Have you a better suggestion to Mr McGrath's potential travel-to-work issues?
Big Zeke
says...
8:49pm Thu 25 Nov 10
JD22
says...
8:54pm Thu 25 Nov 10
Let it be so!!
Sox
says...
9:02pm Thu 25 Nov 10
Big Zeke wrote:Funny as I read your words I have a picture of Ian Paisley in my head.
thats not my problem is it? he's been stupid enough to do what he did so deserved the ban! Thats his punishment! He has to live with that along with the stigma of what he's done. Like I said earlier, people should leave him alone now and not want further retribution!!
.
Are you related?
Big Zeke
says...
9:05pm Thu 25 Nov 10
easynow
says...
9:57pm Thu 25 Nov 10
I am sure he knows on another day things could have been different and the outcome could have resulted in a loss of life... but it didn't.
Some people posting on here live in a different world never mind era.
He seems a well respected teacher and hopefully he has learnt a valuable lesson.
security/issolated
says...
10:47pm Thu 25 Nov 10
mob
says...
9:53pm Fri 26 Nov 10
Sox wrote:sox it has been a long time since anyone or anything has incensed me as much as you have.You belong in the age of dinosaures. I really dont know how you can say you have based your opinion on anything to be honest because despite all the evidance of support from people who actually know this person unlike yourself you fail to be able to digest the information given. He does not just teach rugby and your ignorance or stupidity shines out clearly here or you are a very uneducated man, as a phyiscial education teacher he has numerious lessons to teach both practical and theroy. Unlike in the stone age when you were at school and times have moved on unlike you, p.e now is an examination subject.
mob wrote:My observations are based on the facts quoted as a result of the outcome of criminal proceedings. The outcome of these proceedings is that Mr McGrath, due to his drunken state, ended with a two year driving ban and having to pay compensation to a person he chose to injure.
Sox wrote:Sox it is not that people are wrongly jumping to the defence of mr mc Grath, we are meerly doing what seams to be a forgotten art and standing up for someone who actually has numerous quality's but 1 person and if you look through these comments you will discover that you stand alone in your opinion of mr mc Grath, thinks he should be taking out an publically flogged if it were up to you. I hasten to add that all this knowledge you have of the man is what you have seen in a paper!!!! As you have seen people feel very strongly that it would be a huge loss to our school to loose someone of his ability and with such a vested interest in our children. Just ask how his classes for gcse etc came out. Could you do just a smidgen of research and then maybe form an actual educated opinion
It's very admirable that you are all leaping to Mr McGrath's defence but what would have happened if, in his drunken state, he had run over and killed a child? . Why did Mr McGrath leave a good citizen with two black eyes and facial bruising? . ...and why did he fail to apologise? . Your right, we have all made mistakes, but, by his own actions, Mr McGrath may have irreparably damaged his teaching career.
.
To me, "Mr McGrath is good at teaching my kids rugby" is insufficient reason to excuse the behaviour of a person who needs to display the highest possible standards to young people under his direction.
.
I can carry on indefinitely with this but, as someone remarked above, the longer this blog drags on the the more damage it is likely to cause to Mr McGrath's career.
Sox
says...
7:07am Sat 27 Nov 10
mob wrote:Your rantings are somewhat bizarre and irrational, have you been drinking?
Sox wrote:sox it has been a long time since anyone or anything has incensed me as much as you have.You belong in the age of dinosaures. I really dont know how you can say you have based your opinion on anything to be honest because despite all the evidance of support from people who actually know this person unlike yourself you fail to be able to digest the information given. He does not just teach rugby and your ignorance or stupidity shines out clearly here or you are a very uneducated man, as a phyiscial education teacher he has numerious lessons to teach both practical and theroy. Unlike in the stone age when you were at school and times have moved on unlike you, p.e now is an examination subject.
mob wrote:My observations are based on the facts quoted as a result of the outcome of criminal proceedings. The outcome of these proceedings is that Mr McGrath, due to his drunken state, ended with a two year driving ban and having to pay compensation to a person he chose to injure.
Sox wrote:Sox it is not that people are wrongly jumping to the defence of mr mc Grath, we are meerly doing what seams to be a forgotten art and standing up for someone who actually has numerous quality's but 1 person and if you look through these comments you will discover that you stand alone in your opinion of mr mc Grath, thinks he should be taking out an publically flogged if it were up to you. I hasten to add that all this knowledge you have of the man is what you have seen in a paper!!!! As you have seen people feel very strongly that it would be a huge loss to our school to loose someone of his ability and with such a vested interest in our children. Just ask how his classes for gcse etc came out. Could you do just a smidgen of research and then maybe form an actual educated opinion
It's very admirable that you are all leaping to Mr McGrath's defence but what would have happened if, in his drunken state, he had run over and killed a child? . Why did Mr McGrath leave a good citizen with two black eyes and facial bruising? . ...and why did he fail to apologise? . Your right, we have all made mistakes, but, by his own actions, Mr McGrath may have irreparably damaged his teaching career.
.
To me, "Mr McGrath is good at teaching my kids rugby" is insufficient reason to excuse the behaviour of a person who needs to display the highest possible standards to young people under his direction.
.
I can carry on indefinitely with this but, as someone remarked above, the longer this blog drags on the the more damage it is likely to cause to Mr McGrath's career.
.
It may be appropriate to continue the debate when you have sobered up.
Hugh Jardon
says...
1:59pm Sat 27 Nov 10
Sox wrote:he does have a point.
mob wrote:Your rantings are somewhat bizarre and irrational, have you been drinking?
Sox wrote:sox it has been a long time since anyone or anything has incensed me as much as you have.You belong in the age of dinosaures. I really dont know how you can say you have based your opinion on anything to be honest because despite all the evidance of support from people who actually know this person unlike yourself you fail to be able to digest the information given. He does not just teach rugby and your ignorance or stupidity shines out clearly here or you are a very uneducated man, as a phyiscial education teacher he has numerious lessons to teach both practical and theroy. Unlike in the stone age when you were at school and times have moved on unlike you, p.e now is an examination subject.
mob wrote:My observations are based on the facts quoted as a result of the outcome of criminal proceedings. The outcome of these proceedings is that Mr McGrath, due to his drunken state, ended with a two year driving ban and having to pay compensation to a person he chose to injure.
Sox wrote:Sox it is not that people are wrongly jumping to the defence of mr mc Grath, we are meerly doing what seams to be a forgotten art and standing up for someone who actually has numerous quality's but 1 person and if you look through these comments you will discover that you stand alone in your opinion of mr mc Grath, thinks he should be taking out an publically flogged if it were up to you. I hasten to add that all this knowledge you have of the man is what you have seen in a paper!!!! As you have seen people feel very strongly that it would be a huge loss to our school to loose someone of his ability and with such a vested interest in our children. Just ask how his classes for gcse etc came out. Could you do just a smidgen of research and then maybe form an actual educated opinion
It's very admirable that you are all leaping to Mr McGrath's defence but what would have happened if, in his drunken state, he had run over and killed a child? . Why did Mr McGrath leave a good citizen with two black eyes and facial bruising? . ...and why did he fail to apologise? . Your right, we have all made mistakes, but, by his own actions, Mr McGrath may have irreparably damaged his teaching career.
.
To me, "Mr McGrath is good at teaching my kids rugby" is insufficient reason to excuse the behaviour of a person who needs to display the highest possible standards to young people under his direction.
.
I can carry on indefinitely with this but, as someone remarked above, the longer this blog drags on the the more damage it is likely to cause to Mr McGrath's career.
.
It may be appropriate to continue the debate when you have sobered up.
I will put it simply(so that you will understand) you are a t!t.
mob
says...
12:08am Tue 30 Nov 10
Sox wrote:all i have to add to you sox is that what i have said is neither ranting, irrational nor bizarre and if trying to bring me down to your level by insinuating that because i actually have a valid point that i have been somehow drinking, well this just reiterates that you are an ignoramus with nothing left to say, as i would consider my self to be above this i will leave this debate knowing that without the backing of other people you dont even have a real voice.
mob wrote:Your rantings are somewhat bizarre and irrational, have you been drinking?
Sox wrote:sox it has been a long time since anyone or anything has incensed me as much as you have.You belong in the age of dinosaures. I really dont know how you can say you have based your opinion on anything to be honest because despite all the evidance of support from people who actually know this person unlike yourself you fail to be able to digest the information given. He does not just teach rugby and your ignorance or stupidity shines out clearly here or you are a very uneducated man, as a phyiscial education teacher he has numerious lessons to teach both practical and theroy. Unlike in the stone age when you were at school and times have moved on unlike you, p.e now is an examination subject.
mob wrote:My observations are based on the facts quoted as a result of the outcome of criminal proceedings. The outcome of these proceedings is that Mr McGrath, due to his drunken state, ended with a two year driving ban and having to pay compensation to a person he chose to injure.
Sox wrote:Sox it is not that people are wrongly jumping to the defence of mr mc Grath, we are meerly doing what seams to be a forgotten art and standing up for someone who actually has numerous quality's but 1 person and if you look through these comments you will discover that you stand alone in your opinion of mr mc Grath, thinks he should be taking out an publically flogged if it were up to you. I hasten to add that all this knowledge you have of the man is what you have seen in a paper!!!! As you have seen people feel very strongly that it would be a huge loss to our school to loose someone of his ability and with such a vested interest in our children. Just ask how his classes for gcse etc came out. Could you do just a smidgen of research and then maybe form an actual educated opinion
It's very admirable that you are all leaping to Mr McGrath's defence but what would have happened if, in his drunken state, he had run over and killed a child? . Why did Mr McGrath leave a good citizen with two black eyes and facial bruising? . ...and why did he fail to apologise? . Your right, we have all made mistakes, but, by his own actions, Mr McGrath may have irreparably damaged his teaching career.
.
To me, "Mr McGrath is good at teaching my kids rugby" is insufficient reason to excuse the behaviour of a person who needs to display the highest possible standards to young people under his direction.
.
I can carry on indefinitely with this but, as someone remarked above, the longer this blog drags on the the more damage it is likely to cause to Mr McGrath's career.
.
It may be appropriate to continue the debate when you have sobered up.
daytoday
says...
11:22pm Tue 30 Nov 10
“Yellow Cabs driver Rob Willis, tried to confiscate McGrath’s keys until police arrived after the minor collision”.
Mr McGrath is 5ft 7inc tall. I believe that the yellow taxi driver Rob Willis should not have even tried to confiscate the keys of somebody else’s car. If some stranger tried to take my car keys I would be a little upset too. I have no sympathy for Rob Willis trying to pick a fight with a small guy who had made a big mistake. The police deal with these incidents and Rob Willis had no right to go near Mr McGrath’s car and try to take the law in his own hands. In my opinion he was looking for a sob story and a claim. Maybe he should go in the X-factor.
Hugh Jardon
says...
5:33pm Wed 1 Dec 10
daytoday wrote:true...
I have worked with Mr McGrath in a previous school and he is a real genuine, sincere guy. It is unacceptable to drink drive and Mr McGrath has pleaded guilty and faced the consequences of his actions. What I would like to discuss is the fact the
“Yellow Cabs driver Rob Willis, tried to confiscate McGrath’s keys until police arrived after the minor collision”.
Mr McGrath is 5ft 7inc tall. I believe that the yellow taxi driver Rob Willis should not have even tried to confiscate the keys of somebody else’s car. If some stranger tried to take my car keys I would be a little upset too. I have no sympathy for Rob Willis trying to pick a fight with a small guy who had made a big mistake. The police deal with these incidents and Rob Willis had no right to go near Mr McGrath’s car and try to take the law in his own hands. In my opinion he was looking for a sob story and a claim. Maybe he should go in the X-factor.
& it must be heartwarming for Mr G to know just how much he's liked & respected by colleagues (ex & present), school pupils & their parents!
Could the telegraph confirm that the photo is of the taxi driver after the so called assault or before?
Either way he's an ugly f'pig!
Hugh Jardon says...
5:45pm Wed 24 Nov 10
My lad (LN) attends Vale & has a real passion for Rugby..mainly thanks to this man!
He cannot be allowed to leave Vale!!