"The little lad though, WAS charged with sexual harrassment, in 1998, I found it in several American papers. The mouthwash incident also happened, again in 1998 in America, according to The New York Times. The last one is somewhat more ambiguous, but I'd not be surprised if that too happened, round about the same time, perhaps,"


Re the mouthwash incident: 'In a letter to the youth's parents, the principal, James E. Person, said their son had admitted to drinking the mouthwash and had bragged to classmates about its content of nearly 22 percent alcohol.

Mr. Person said teachers had seen the youth using the mouthwash at least once before "in a way that made others think he was drinking it." '

Now, do I believe the kid or the school? Is it really "PC gone mad" once you hear the other side of the story?

So that's one story where you admit you can find no evidence, one where there is a perfectly reasonable explanation for why the school responded as it did, and one which probably was, indeed, an OTT response.

See? No trend. Just unrelated, anecdotal (and in one case possibly completely untrue) incidents.