John Smyth, Church Scandal, Channel 4 9pm

Doodledog

According to a Channel 4 interview with PJ Smyth (available on YouTube) AS kept a book of her son's 'misdemeanours' when his father was away, so that they could be 'addressed' by beatings when he got home. On one occasion he had had a school report that criticised him in six subjects, and he was given 36 strokes of the cane - six for each subject. He was a child, and his mother allowed it. Apparently (according to PJ) his mother was 'specially kind' to him after he was beaten, administering first aid and giving him cushions to sit on.

Is that normal behaviour? Not in my world.

I can't get my head round how she colluded and was just as much to blame as him. Some people seem keen to excuse her, she was young, it was her religion, she was brain washed.

She was guilty and unless you are prepared to excuse me who knew what was going on why would you excuse her. Her own child was a victim, she saw the injuries with her own eyes, she encouraged the victims to hide the evidence and make sure they hid the blood stains. She should be locked up.

Men who knew not me. I didn't know.

So, to actually record what her child did, so that he would be punished when the abuser returned, is an 'unforced' action which for me demonstrates 'complicity'.

Maremia

So, to actually record what her child did, so that he would be punished when the abuser returned, is an 'unforced' action which for me demonstrates 'complicity'.

Exactly, it isn't as if she was expecting him to get a telling off or have his pocket money stopped. She was setting up her child to get a beating. Vile.

As I’ve repeatedly said, by seeking to understand mars Smythe’s beviour, I’m in no way excusing or condoning it.
I haven’t watched the documentary and might be wise to do so.
It is not uncommon to find abused wives who placate in order to avoid the wrath of their husbands.
Like others posting, there’s no way on earth I would allow anyone to beat, to terrify and emotionally abuse my children.

I didn’t know about her keeping a record of her son’s ‘misdemeanours’ to report back to the abuser. It’s a great pity he wasn’t the subject of a thorough police investigation rather than being shipped off to Africa where he co tinted to abuse. A thorough investigation would have included interviewing his wife and children. Her involvement could have been evaluated

I think you should watch it, Iam, particularly the second episode. Much of the discussion on here has been speculation, but if you see her behaviour (particularly the strange smile) and listen to her children you might feel differently, as might those who keep referring to corporal punishment.

The Ch4 interview with SJ (the son) is on YouTube, and features Cathy Newman speaking to him about his experiences as a child. That is worth a watch too, to get a fuller picture of AS's involvement.

she encouraged the victims to hide the evidence

I struggle to understand how the shocking evidence could be hidden?

My husband says you would know which boys at boarding school (1970s) had occasionally been given the cane because you would see red marks on their upper legs when they went swimming or in the shower. This was corporal punishment, not violent child abuse, and never, ever bad enough to break the skin.

The teachers were undoubtedly present too when those bleeding Winchester boys got undressed and showered at school, so they would have seen. Yet they reported nothing at the time, and the school just carried on sending them to the house.

In the documentary, one of the victims said it was usually three of them sent continually together. No doubt three of the most vulnerable boys, one was an orphan, because those are the type that wicked predators in those situations choose to abuse.

Not necessarily. Don’t forget that ‘ muscular Christianity’ was encouraged in those elite circles, and attracted some of the most privileged young men. JS was admired and popular in those circles.

Yes, I guess the type of abuse was physical, sexual and emotional. Difficult to see where one sort ends and another type starts.

And how boys were selected, because out of 750 pupils, the number is small. (Though even one victim makes it completely wrong.)

Remember that ghastly old saying, 'Spare the rod, spoil the child'?

Maremia

Remember that ghastly old saying, 'Spare the rod, spoil the child'?

Exactly Meremia. Thrashing boys was seen as ensuring good behaviour. No wonder Smythe ‘s abuse was not dealt with effectively via criminal investigations

MartavTaurus

^she encouraged the victims to hide the evidence^

I struggle to understand how the shocking evidence could be hidden?

My husband says you would know which boys at boarding school (1970s) had occasionally been given the cane because you would see red marks on their upper legs when they went swimming or in the shower. This was corporal punishment, not violent child abuse, and never, ever bad enough to break the skin.

The teachers were undoubtedly present too when those bleeding Winchester boys got undressed and showered at school, so they would have seen. Yet they reported nothing at the time, and the school just carried on sending them to the house.

In the documentary, one of the victims said it was usually three of them sent continually together. No doubt three of the most vulnerable boys, one was an orphan, because those are the type that wicked predators in those situations choose to abuse.

What I heard was she gave them adult nappies do no one would see them bleeding or blood on their clothes.