View Full Version : Bullied Teen Paid $1 Million
Link. (http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/bullied-at-school--now-hell-walk-away-with-1-million/2007/05/14/1178995079788.html)
He was bullied at school - now he'll walk away with $1 million
Leonie Lamont
May 15, 2007
Latest related coverage
BEN COX has no friends. He is unlikely to make any in the future, or form any romantic relationships. At 18, his teenage life has "all but been destroyed", and his adult life will be no better.
He will never know the satisfaction of a job, and anxiety and depression will be his likely companions for the rest of his life.
With this bleak forecast, the Supreme Court's Justice Carolyn Simpson yesterday found schoolboy bullying was to blame and Mr Cox was entitled to compensation.
In what is believed to be the biggest school bullying damages award in NSW, Mr Cox's legal team estimates the reclusive Hunter Valley teenager will receive about $1 million, giving him an income for life and superannuation.
About $213,000 of the award is for his pain and suffering.
Justice Simpson found authorities "grossly failed" him when he was in kindergarten and year 1 at Woodberry Public School by failing to protect him from repeated assaults, bullying and harassment by an older, disturbed student.
During one attack he was "throttled" and lost consciousness, and in another had a tooth knocked out when the bully tried to make him eat his jumper.
When his mother, Angela Cox, contacted the Department of Education and complained that the school had done nothing to stop the attacks, she said she was told that "bullying builds character and [the officer, Ian Wilson] thought it was a good thing Ben got bullied".
In his class photograph, above, one of many signs on the wall behind the children read: "If I hit a bully it makes me a bully.'
Another read: "To have a friend I must be a friend."
Since the bullying in 1994 and 1995, Mr Cox has seen pediatricians, psychiatrists and counsellors and was diagnosed with depression, anxiety, a separation anxiety disorder and post traumatic stress disorder.
He transferred to Black Hill Primary School where he settled well but continued to spend days at home with his mother, who herself had significant anxiety and depression. His schooling effectively ended in year 7. He is on a disability pension and, according to his mother, spends most of his time in his bedroom playing PlayStation.
The state of NSW had argued that it was his mother's emotional and psychiatric condition which had fostered Mr Cox's avoidance of school. A spokesman for the Education Department said it was examining avenues for appeal.
Justice Simpson accepted the opinion of a psychiatrist who said: "Had, at the time of the bullying, Ben been a completely normal child with no genetic history … it is my opinion more probable than not that he would have recovered from the trauma of bullying. [But] he was not a normal child. There was a genetic vulnerability."
Outside court, Mr Cox's barrister, Dennis Wheelahan, QC, said: "The implications are that pupils in our school systems who are the subject of this type of conduct [if liability is established] can expect to recover substantial damages as is the case for Benjamin Cox. This is a matter I know school authorities view differently now to the way they did 12 years ago when these series of events occurred."
Personally I think its rubbish, if we were to make payouts to every marginalised person and minority we would have been bankrupt a long time ago. There's no doubt that the authorities failed to protect him and serve in his interests; but his mother should have stepped in earlier to move him to a different school. Not to mention the fact of her own depression that perpetuated his problem disallowing him the opportunity to regain his confidence and lead a normal social life.
doc_bean
05-15-2007, 08:39
Personally I think its rubbish, if we were to make payouts to every marginalised person and minority we would have been bankrupt a long time ago. There's no doubt that the authorities failed to protect him and serve in his interests; but his mother should have stepped in earlier to move him to a different school. Not to mention the fact of her own depression that perpetuated his problem disallowing him the opportunity to regain his confidence and lead a normal social life.
This isn't really about bullying, it's about child abuse through neglect, both from the authorities and his parents. It's not his mother that is getting the money it's him. And when you get beaten up regularly even to tthe point where you're unconscious and the teachers/school doesn't step in, it's partly their fault.
Samurai Waki
05-15-2007, 08:56
hmmm...
How's about, when a child attends school for the very first time, they send in some salty, mean ol' bastard, who's missing all his teeth, missing an arm and a leg, and an eye. And having him tell the kids that this is the result of him being a bully as a child. :idea2:
HoreTore
05-15-2007, 11:01
When parents send their children to school, they can no longer protect them personally. They have to have complete confidence that the authorities at the school are capable of protecting their child. If they are not, the schools should pay.
I can also see a big problem with that school if such things can happen there repeatedly. And the sign/poster that says hitting bullies makes you a bully should be removed.
English assassin
05-15-2007, 12:45
Seems a reasonable case. $1 million sounds a lot but you have to assume the court had the evidence of harm justifying it.
In his class photograph, above, one of many signs on the wall behind the children read: "If I hit a bully it makes me a bully.'
What hope did the children at that school have? :no:
Sir Moody
05-15-2007, 12:55
he isnt getting the money because he was bullied - that is a symptom - he is getting the money because he was bullied quite vicously and the school and the state did nothing to stop it and in didnt offer him any help (to quote the article)
When his mother, Angela Cox, contacted the Department of Education and complained that the school had done nothing to stop the attacks, she said she was told that "bullying builds character and [the officer, Ian Wilson] thought it was a good thing Ben got bullied".
the reason the payout it so high is he comes from a family with a genetic predisposition to depression and he now is effectivly disabled as a direct result of his bullying.
how the school didnt do anything when his bully throttled him i dont know hell the bully could have killed him...
Cronos Impera
05-15-2007, 14:01
If bullied kids ware paid compensations in Romania I would have been billionaire by now.(That's what happens when a metalhead meets a bunch of R&B fans)
Sir Moody
05-15-2007, 14:21
are you clinically depressed as a direct result of your bullying Cronos? that is the difference
are you clinically depressed as a direct result of your bullying Cronos? that is the difference
Well he just said he's a metalhead ~;)
Sir Moody
05-15-2007, 14:54
Well he just said he's a metalhead ~;)
touche - this round go's to you master Fragony :laugh4:
Understandable.
Mmmm, 1 mil: imagine what I could do with that. Authorities have failed, and the boy's life is ruined by other people. Of course compensation is necessary.
Whenever things like these happen and appropriate action isn't taken and good results don't appear, give compensation. And make sure those who are guilty of these horrible acts pay as well. Put them into a snake pit or something for a week without food (or dry water, and wet bread, in little poor amounts). Or put them in jail for a couple years. That should teach them.
As far as I'm concerned, what they've done to the boy is criminal. It shows man's typical weakness to attack, damage, destroy, fuel the ego, and instill fear, and especially in a case like this it must be punished.
Get medieval on thei' asses, as Ving Rhames in Pulp Fiction would say :)
And besides that, a case like this should -- again(?) -- show that authorities should take better care to prevent stuff like this from happening. They don't give a ****? **** you, pay me. No money? **** you, pay me. (Goodfellas is a good movie :) )
Having a tooth knocked out is bad enough without nearly being throttled to death. Too many schools turn a blind eye to this kind of thing. Something like this will be a wake up call to them to get their acts together and start tackling bullying. The safety and well being of the child is the responsibility of the school when they're there, and the school failed in that respect.
touche - this round go's to you master Fragony :laugh4:
:bow:
And Bijo, the guy failed himselve. Guys that get picked on bring it on theirselves, go on nursing them but it doesn't stop when they get older you know, each and every one of us has an eye for weaker specimen and boy are we cruel when we spot them. Teasing hurts, well so does tasing. Guess what he should do, but a stick would be just fine as well.
:bow:
And Bijo, the guy failed himselve. Guys that get picked on bring it on theirselves, go on nursing them but it doesn't stop when they get older you know, each and every one of us has an eye for weaker specimen and boy are we cruel when we spot them. Teasing hurts, well so does tasing. Guess what he should do, but a stick would be just fine as well.
Did she bring it on herself? http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/1680522.stm
:bow:
And Bijo, the guy failed himselve. Guys that get picked on bring it on theirselves, go on nursing them but it doesn't stop when they get older you know, each and every one of us has an eye for weaker specimen and boy are we cruel when we spot them. Teasing hurts, well so does tasing. Guess what he should do, but a stick would be just fine as well.
I just advocate justice and proper conduct, goodness, etc. Who is stronger: he who attacks (or they who attack together), or he (or they) who stands (/ stand) up for the "weak" who is/are attacked? The answer is very simple. Heads must roll.
I just advocate justice and proper conduct, goodness, etc. Who is stronger: he who attacks (or they who attack together), or he (or they) who stands (/ stand) up for the "weak" who is/are attacked?
Neither, the first gets an aggresion course and the victim a tissue, the one that actually helps will get trouble. Guess who is the strongest, yup, the one giving the course, who incidently also kindly provides the tissue. Someone nags you, deal with it, mamma can get you only that far, be it the state or your real one
Neither, the first gets an aggresion course and the victim a tissue, the one that actually helps will get trouble. Guess who is the strongest, yup, the one giving the course, who incidently also kindly provides the tissue. Someone nags you, deal with it, mamma can get you only that far, be it the state or your real one
That's irrelevant. The question was who was stronger and the fourth party -- the authorities -- was excluded. The point is made that he who attacks shows his weakness, his fear, his feeling of inferiority and insecurity. Outer strength that comes from inner weakness. Many have inner weakness, and you can spot 'em easily.
The only thing here I agree with you on, is that people should stand up for themselves when necessary. But the point is that it shouldn't be necessary.
Then the so-called "strongest" that you mention, the one(s) providing the course and the tissue, the authority, should've prevented these things from happening in the first place. They failed horribly and look what happened -- so **** 'em, pay up! :)
And lock them SOBs not IN, but UNDER the damn jail. And the school should receive another extra-high fine for laziness / neglect.
ohhh for the love of god....
grow some balls, stop whining and stand up for yourself!!!
$1 Million....pff.....if that´s the going rate for being bullied now I want some money too dammit!
That's irrelevant. The question was who was stronger and the fourth party -- the authorities -- was excluded.
No it wasn't, those are the heads you call for.
@Ronin, chapeau.
HoreTore
05-15-2007, 16:17
So....what you're basically saying, is that if someone hurts you, you should hurt them back. I guess that means that if someone kills someone close to you, you kill someone close to them...
A return of the blood feud?
So....what you're basically saying, is that if someone hurts you, you should hurt them back. I guess that means that if someone kills someone close to you, you kill someone close to them...
A return of the blood feud?
Suits me just fine really. Why are we always asking the authorities to act, they just report and file. 'That's outragious, goverment should act', when did nanny-state become a mommy all of a sudden. You go crying to your mommy, you go to the nurse when you are sick and need treatment.
ps, minus killing that is of course.
Let me give you an example. Girls who was been tenderly loved by her stephfather for years, went to all the blabla of the authorites, now guess who ultimatily arranged her a place to live, not the authorities who live from trouble but from me, payed by me and my friends. Girl is save, stephfather might just make a full recovery.
doc_bean
05-15-2007, 16:46
Honestly, people, this is about *kindergarten*, it's not like some teenager is whining he gets laughed at by the girls. This was a kid physically abused regularly by a bigger, stronger and older person. There was not a damn thing he could have done about it.
Next you're all going to be claiming pedophile victims just bring it on themselves...
Honestly, people, this is about *kindergarten*, it's not like some teenager is whining he gets laughed at by the girls. This was a kid physically abused regularly by a bigger, stronger and older person. There was not a damn thing he could have done about it.
Well a million of what ultimatily the tax-payer has to be pay won't help him much either now doesn't it. If I can get the remaining of the cash I would be more then willing to get him a shrink to rub up his balls a bit. Or just get the bully.
English assassin
05-15-2007, 17:17
Well a million of what ultimatily the tax-payer has to be pay won't help him much either now doesn't it. If I can get the remaining of the cash I would be more then willing to get him a shrink to rub up his balls a bit. Or just get the bully.
Seriously, get a life.
If he had been physically injured, in a situation where the school was under a duty to protect him, would we be having this debate?
No.
Here's a heads up: psychological injury is injury too. As we have absolutely no reason to suppose he is not genuinely psychologically injured, all this macho bull excrement about how he should have got a taser (not readily available in many nursery schools) is beside the point.
And no, I didn't get bullied at school and the few kids who tried it never tried it again, and yes, that IS a valuable life lesson, (although the best lesson of all is to have the bullies as your mates) but it is NOT a reason not to compensate this kid. I bet he would swap his £1 million dollars to be the sort of person who thinks :daisy: you when a would be bully comes into view but he isn't. He probably doesn't need you to tell him that's not good.
Here's a heads up: psychological injury is injury too. .
Ouch you suggested I have a head, been afraid of these things ever since one of them said something nasty to me. My toes are flattened; 1.000.000 please, + the 100 for my shoes. For that amount of money you may break mine with a sledgehammer, promise.
He is having this debate because people can get a piece of this 1.000.000 for having it. Oh they are helping him, how nice of them.
Seriously, grab your life.
Banquo's Ghost
05-15-2007, 18:24
Gentlemen,
We are veering towards the personal now. Bullying is an emotive subject, but there's no need to be nasty to each other.
Otherwise I may have to come and collect your lunch money. :wink:
:bow:
No it wasn't, those are the heads you call for.
Your answer included more than the particular question asked for. And what was answered was irrelevant -- the fourth authoritian party you mentioned. It is fact: you have only to let go of the belief you are correct and accept it :)
Samurai Waki
05-15-2007, 20:02
Ya know... I actually seem to recall, that I was more of the bully rather than the victim... so I guess I can't relate.
PanzerJaeger
05-15-2007, 20:53
Yay - He was picked on in kindergarten and now he gets to play his Playstation for the rest of his life.
Ridiculous. We all go through traumatic experiences in life, but we(most of us) are capable of moving past them and even learning and growing from them.
The school should definitely have been punished, but this person is now the responsibility of the state for the remainder of his life due to bullying in Kindergarten! Not even high school or the Ausi equivalent, but kindergarten! :no:
Kralizec
05-15-2007, 22:10
I used to be a pretty whimpy kid that got picked on really hard, in the end I just toughened up, like most picked-on kids do. I imagine that for a people who have psychological problems like him just can't.
The kid was strangled into unconsciousness and got a teeth beaten out by the same kid - and the school thinks that "bullying builds character and [the officer, Ian Wilson] thought it was a good thing Ben got bullied." wtf?
I'd say he darn well deserves some hefty compensation from the state. I wish him the best and hope he moves and makes something out of his life.
Goofball
05-15-2007, 22:15
Yay - He was picked on in kindergarten and now he gets to play his Playstation for the rest of his life.
Ridiculous. We all go through traumatic experiences in life, but we(most of us) are capable of moving past them and even learning and growing from them.
The school should definitely have been punished, but this person is now the responsibility of the state for the remainder of his life due to bullying in Kindergarten! Not even high school or the Ausi equivalent, but kindergarten! :no:
I like the verdict in terms of its value pour encourager les autres. No, I don't think every kid who gets bullied is entitled to a payout. But I also think schools everywhere take bullying and its impact on students far too lightly. I hope this shakes things up a bit. Maybe the fear of lawsuits will encourage school administrators to take preventative action, which may just result in fewer children killing themselves.
What I would really have liked to have seen is an additional judgement against the parent of the kid who did the bullying for $100,000 or so, as I am willing to bet that their inaction was also part of the problem.
I used to be a pretty whimpy kid that got picked on really hard, in the end I just toughened up, like most picked-on kids do. I imagine that for a people who have psychological problems like him just can't.
The kid was strangled into unconsciousness and got a teeth beaten out by the same kid - and the school thinks that "bullying builds character and [the officer, Ian Wilson] thought it was a good thing Ben got bullied." wtf?
I'd say he darn well deserves some hefty compensation from the state. I wish him the best and hope he moves and makes something out of his life.
:2thumbsup:
Can only agree.
repeated assaults, bullying and harassment by an older, disturbed student.
During one attack he was "throttled" and lost consciousness, and in another had a tooth knocked out when the bully tried to make him eat his jumper.
For those who didn't read the article: this is not a "regular" case of bullying.
Like almost everybody on a certain stage, I was picked on as well, when I was a child. It lasted until I stood up and beat up one of those little bastards pretty hard (and I got punished for that by the director of the school, but it was well worth it). He was of my age, in the same class as me and he was a little bit smaller than me at the time.
But not everybody has the physical or mental constitution to stand up against it.
Considering the fact that the bully in case was an older (= bigger and much stronger, so you don't stand a chance if you want to hit back) guy, most children wouldn't have a chance to stand up for themselves against him, let alone a child with psychological problems.
The attitude of the school and the reaction of the school board when the mothter complained is inacceptable. 1.000.000 $ might be exaggerated, but it is a good signal and warning for the future.
I agree the parents of the bully should have been convicted as well. And the parent of the victim also had a responsability. There's more than 1 school and you don't leave your kid in such circumstances.
ALways have been the smallest of the class, the wierdest too,... Never get picked on tough. Always had a good atmosphere in primary and secondary. Tough I remember a kid in primary who got picked on, but that was really the parents fault. The boy had some kind of autism (he was diagnosed) and should have gone to a special school. (You can't make freinds if you throw rocks towards classmates heads when you lose a game.) Except for him noone get picked on, except a few wanna be bullies. I bullied the bullies. How? Making them feel embarresed. Getting hit,... ain't that bad but getting embaressed before the entire school does, and I always have been good at getting people embarressed. (I also never get embarressed myself, and was always ready for a fight if anyone dared.)
ajaxfetish
05-16-2007, 22:41
I agree the parents of the bully should have been convicted as well. And the parent of the victim also had a responsability. There's more than 1 school and you don't leave your kid in such circumstances.
I'd just like to point out one sidenote. This attitude has come up in a few posts so far, and it may well be legitimate in this case. However, I think it's dangerous to automatically blame parents for the actions of their children. In some cases they may be responsible. In some they are not. It should be decided on a case-by-case basis in the context of that case, and we don't have enough information--especially about the bully's parents--to make any kind of accurate judgment on that score.
Ajax
Crazed Rabbit
05-17-2007, 06:41
In his class photograph, above, one of many signs on the wall behind the children read: "If I hit a bully it makes me a bully.'
That's the stupidest thing about this story. How does standing up in defense of yourself (and your mental and physical well being) make you a bad person?
CR
That's the stupidest thing about this story. How does standing up in defense of yourself (and your mental and physical well being) make you a bad person?
CR
That depends on whether you see a bully as a bad person or not. ~;)
But like I said before, they need to take that poster down, it's a very bad poster. Someone should bully the one who created the poster.:sweatdrop:
'The attitude of the school and the reaction of the school board when the mothter complained is inacceptable. 1.000.000 $ might be exaggerated, but it is a good signal and warning for the future.'
It's only an alleged reaction. Personally I doubt anyone would openly claim bullying is character building (though they may think it) as the mother claims they did.
1M USD is ridiculous. It won't help the kid recover from his social damage. It'll probably stop him having to seriously work, he won't have any reason to try to recover.
'I agree the parents of the bully should have been convicted as well. And the parent of the victim also had a responsability. There's more than 1 school and you don't leave your kid in such circumstances.'
So someone's parents should be punishable for their actions? The parent of the victim did have a responsibility, I agree with you there.
---
A parallel. If an autistic pupil went to a school and was given the option of simply staying in a 'curriculum support' section and playing on the computer most of the time and not having to interact with anyone outside of lessons, resulting in his social skills being totally underdeveloped by reaching leaving age, would he deserve compensation from the school?
Particularly if, for example, he achieved highly academically, but was turned down for a prestigious university place because he couldn't get more than a few words out at the interview.
Boyar Son
05-20-2007, 04:21
Ya know... I actually seem to recall, that I was more of the bully rather than the victim... so I guess I can't relate.
What makes you do what you do?...
HoreTore
05-22-2007, 18:33
Suits me just fine really. Why are we always asking the authorities to act, they just report and file. 'That's outragious, goverment should act', when did nanny-state become a mommy all of a sudden. You go crying to your mommy, you go to the nurse when you are sick and need treatment.
ps, minus killing that is of course.
Let me give you an example. Girls who was been tenderly loved by her stephfather for years, went to all the blabla of the authorites, now guess who ultimatily arranged her a place to live, not the authorities who live from trouble but from me, payed by me and my friends. Girl is save, stephfather might just make a full recovery.
What you are basically describing, is a cross of some sorts between fascism and anarchy. A society without any laws except "might is right". This was basically how things worked in the early stone age...
It's not about a "nannystate", it's about having a functional society. Society can never progress without it. With the system you propose, everything would be set back by some thousand years. Inventions would be near extinct, the ones capable of inventing new things would be bullied into submission by the strong. Same goes for corporations, etc, etc. The ones capable of doing such things would be the small "strong percentage" of society, other people wouldn't contribute at all, except by slavery, I suppose.
vBulletin® v3.7.1, Copyright ©2000-2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.