Imagine if a 14 year old school boy repeatedly hit his teacher over the head with a dumbbell shouting 'die, die die.' He would be expelled, probably imprisoned for at least a year. Neither the jury nor the judge would have any sympathy for him. So why, when the situation is reversed, does the teacher get acquitted? He might have been driven to the brink. But the fact remains that he attempted to murder one of the pupils - has that just been ignored? As a teacher he has the responsibility to be an example to the students. Anything the boy may have done is not at the same level as attempted murder. The teacher showed a complete lack of control that is childish and frankly vile.
I had a look on the Daily Mail website (an endlessly bountiful resource for balanced and intelligent critical opinion) to look at some of the comments on the article. The highest rated comments were in complete favour of the teacher - saying how he was a good and innocent man driven to madness by evil disruptive pupils. But he was 50. The boy was practically a child. In my (100% right) opinion, it's ridiculous and backwards.
Oh and then there's the election. Ho hum. How to choose between three identical parties with different names? Well I'll certainly be voting BNP, only joking. I tried to watch the election debates but got distracted by the ugly people in the audience, and David Cameron's creepy hypnotic, piercing eyes.