Justice Singh refutes Queen’s College’s Deputy Principal’s accusations of aggression

Last Updated on Friday, 18 November 2022, 17:13 by Denis Chabrol

Justice Narendra Singh

Justice Navindra Singh has rejected claims by Queen’s College Deputy Headmistress  Lenise Morgan that he was aggressive towards her while he was at the school for a meeting concerning the alleged assault of his daughter by the son of the Ministry of Education’s Chief Education Officer.

“While it is difficult to properly answer your last query since you did not describe what my body language physically entailed, I can say without any doubt that I did not exhibit any behaviour that can be characterised as aggressive and further I had absolutely no inclination to assault anyone,” he said in a letter dated In a letter dated November 17, 2022 to Chairman of Queen’s College Board of Governors, Marcel Gaskin.

Mr Singh said he had gone to the school for a meeting with the Principal after he had made a police report of the alleged assault of his daughter on October 27, 2022. He said Divisional Commander Simon Mc Bean advised him to go to the school on November 11 for a meeting with the Principal. He said the Principal sent a message with the Deputy Headmistress that she did not have an appointment for a meeting with him.

Mr Singh admitted that he raised his voice but denied that he “advanced to her”.  “I never advanced to her. I remained standing in the same position that I was in when she came to us for the entire time that she was there,” Mr Singh told Mr Gaskin. He added that also present were Superintendent Mitchell Caesar and Corporal Bailey from the Juvenile section. “I did not become irate at any time. I did not act or speak in a manner that can be characterised as demonstrating great anger. I did speak louder when the Deputy Principal ignored me when I queried whether she was referring to me as the parent with whom the matter was resolved,” he added.

He said the two police officers never restrained  or had any reason to do so . He said he d not move from the position I was in from the time the Deputy Principal approached us to when she walked away.

Mr Singh said his daughter informed him of the incident and further that they were made to apologise to each other. “She informed me that the boy started pushing her, pushing her so aggressively that she almost fell and when she reached the door he pushed her through the door, violently thumped her on the back of her shoulder causing her to feel pain, and then closed the door. She then went to the front door and he started pushing her again, as a result of which, she put her hands on his arms to try to stop him from pushing her. He then pushed her out of the door and slammed the door almost hitting her with the door,” the judge told the School’s Board of Governors. According to the Judge, his daughter informed him that the Principal told her that she had no right to touch the boy although it was human to defend oneself.

Mr Singh said he called the Principal about the incident and she related the same story to him except that she said his daughter hit the boy. The Judge said he told the Principal that he disagreed with his daughter having apologised to the boy. “I told her that I didn’t think it was proper to have a victim apologise and she said there were no victims, that in her opinion the two children were involved in a scuffle, despite the fact that she acknowledged to my daughter, that she knew my daughter was simply defending herself,” he said.

He said the Principal informed him that she did not interview any witnesses and that as far as she was aware the matter was closed. But Mr Singh said he told her that the incident amounted to an assault, he was dissatisfied with how it was dealt with and that he would be lodging a complaint with the police for an investigation. “I also told her that I felt that her handling of the matter was incompetent and that she should be removed as Principal. That was the end of the telephone call,” he said.

At the school, he said the Deputy Principal also informed him that the Principal had no appointment to meet with him, that the matter was logged, sent to the Ministry of Education and resolved. The Judge said the matter could not have been resolved without his input as he is the parent.

The Judge asked the Chairman of the Governing Board to investigate the unfounded claims that he shouted at the Deputy Principal, called her a liar and attempted to hit her when  the policewoman stepped in and pushed him away. He challenged the Board of Governors to conduct a thorough investigation into the incident and to ascertain whether the account was logged and properly done. He also  promised to stand by the account of surveillance camera video recording. “As the Board of Governors you certainly must have the authority to access the CCTV footage for that date and time and I will stand by that footage. Please give yourself and the public the opportunity to examine for yourselves and themselves my body language since you are apparently no longer looking for an attempted physical assault,” he said.