A teacher who allegedly held a gun to the head of a child has been suspended while facing assault charges in Queensland.
The teacher, who could not be identified, allegedly pushed a boy and held a handgun to his head in front of the teacher’s daughter, a Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal decision has revealed.
In his decision, senior tribunal member Ned Aughterson said there were criminal charges against the teacher, and police advised him they had CCTV of the incident, which allegedly occurred on December 1.
The teacher, known as KUF in the ruling, is facing charges of common assault and going armed to cause fear.
He cannot be identified as it may reveal the child involved. Similarly, the school where he works is also subject to a non-publication order, as is any information that may identify a witness.
The Queensland College of Teachers suspended the teacher on December 4 last year.
In their application for an extension of that suspension, the college argued the teacher posed an unacceptable risk of harm to children.
In his submission, the teacher argued the proceedings should be dismissed, and said it was “unreasonable for punitive measures to be sought” until a decision had been made in the criminal case, adding the police report said neither child had been physically injured.
The teacher also argued that the claims he possessed a firearm were unsubstantiated, he had a clean criminal record, and that his release on bail proved he was not a risk.
In response, the college submitted that suspension under section 49 of the Education (Queensland College of Teachers) Act placed the interests of children ahead of those of a teacher, and the tribunal could rely on untested evidence due to the urgent nature of such suspensions.
It argued bail relied on separate considerations and did not necessarily mean the teacher posed no risk to children.
Aughterson agreed. He said the purpose of a suspension was not to punish a teacher, but to protect children.
In his decision he said while the children may not have suffered any physical harm, the teacher made no reference to the potential psychological damage caused by the event.
“That reflects a lack of insight on the part of the teacher into the nature of potential harm that might be inflicted on children,” he said.
Aughterson said the onus was on the teacher to provide evidence that he posed no threat to children, and the bail decision was not conclusive proof of this.
The teacher was given 28 days to apply for a review of the decision.
Start the day with a summary of the day’s most important and interesting stories, analysis and insights. Sign up for our Morning Edition newsletter.
From our partners
Read the full article here
