PARENTS

10-Year-Old Boy Headbutted Teacher And Shattered Second Teacher's Leg With A Kick : 'He's Not A Bad Kid' Claims Mum

22/06/2012 14:12 | Updated 22 May 2015
10-year-old boy headbutted teacher and shattered teaching assistant's leg with a kick : 'He's not a bad kid' claims mumRex Stock image

A 53-year-old teaching assistant has been left on crutches and could be permanently disabled after a 10-YEAR-OLD pupil shattered her leg with a flying kick, while a design and technology teacher needed surgery after she was headbutted by the same child.

i

The boy's mum claims her child is 'not a bad kid' - and BLAMED the teachers!

i

The out-of-control youngster lost it when he was told to stop scraping a coin on his desk. He threw over three desks, including his teacher's, and stormed down a corridor punching the walls and doors.

Bromley Youth Court heard he then headbutted his teacher and kicked the assistant who suffered the 'most serious type' of fracture possible and might need a knee replacement operation - witnesses told the court how they heard the bone in her leg crack.

In a victim impact statement she said: "I have gone from being an independent and active woman to almost immobile, being totally dependent on others and scarred for life."

The boy's other victim, a design and technology teacher, needed reconstructive surgery after she was headbutted and lost consciousness. She has since been forced to leave her job after suffering ringing in her ears and blurry vision.

Defence solicitor Daniel Cummins argued that the boy had a personality disorder and behavioural difficulties and was of below average intelligence.

The youngster pleaded guilty to assault and unlawful wounding and was given a 12-month referral order. He will also be regularly by probation staff.

His mother said: "I don't agree with this. The only reason he pleaded guilty is because he did hurt them, but they caused the ­situation. He is not a bad kid."

Christine Blower of the NUT said: "Teachers have a right to be able to go to work and not be assaulted."

HOW shocking is this?

Suggest a correction