On that occasion I stood in the corridor for two hours rather than share the one waiting room with the person who had tried to smash a classroom door into my face.

Later that morning I had been allowed to sit in the back of the courtroom and watch another case - the first time I had ever been in any court. The defending solicitor seemed prepared to try any trick in the book to undermine the witnesses for the benefit of his client. Unfortunately I discovered he was also defending my attacker. I watched as he destroyed the evidence of a young policewoman and made her look incompetent. Would he try to do that to me?

Two months later I found myself in a different courtroom with a different prosecutor. I was offered the chance to look over my statement, which I gratefully took. Unnervingly, some of the things in my signed statement were not as I now remembered them. I am sure, for instance, that my attacker said he would blow my knees away with a sawn-off shotgun in the classroom in front of 32 seven-year-olds, not in the corridor outside. Perhaps people who are in shock after having been attacked are not in a fit state to sign a statement.

This prosecutor seemed prepared and confident. He had a list of queries which he discussed with me. The defendant’s solicitor, who had been watching our discussions as we waited for the case to begin, left the courtroom for a few minutes and then returned saying that his client was now willing to plead guilty to common assault. I felt deflated. I had geared up for this experience twice, gone through two lots of sleepless nights and two lots of gut-churning anxiety.

The parent was brought in and pleaded guilty. In my naivety I expected sentencing immediately, not realising that the three magistrates knew nothing about the case at this point. I now know that they have no notes about any of the cases and rely totally on the evidence they hear, with legal advice from the clerk of the court, to arrive at a judgment.

The prosecutor told my story. The magistrates looked shocked as he quoted the abuse and threats used as the parent confronted me in the corridor and then pinned me against the wall of the classroom. Then he told them how the parent had tried to slam the door into my face, spraining my wrist as I put my hand up to protect myself.

The defending solicitor rose. He admitted his client had “done great wrong” but claimed that he was full of remorse.

As the clerk of the court handed the magistrates a long list of previous convictions he pointed out that all the convictions were now “spent” and so his client should be regarded as being of previous good character. I started to smile. This was getting farcical.

In mitigation he pleaded that his client was now a responsible family man with four children who should be given credit for holding down a job when many others in this deprived part of the city were living on the dole. He pointed out what a difficult time Christmas was for familiesIthe magistrates retired to consider sentence, returning after about 10 minutes.

They gave my attacker a two-year conditional discharge. This conviction for common assault would be taken into consideration if he offended again in that time. He was ordered to pay Pounds 30 compensation to me and Pounds 30 costs.

His lawyer persuaded the magistrates to allow him to pay at Pounds 2 per week.

Do I feel I had justice? I am not sure. I wanted him convicted so that it would send out a strong message to other potential parent aggressors. But what have they to fear? A smack on the wrist and a Pounds 2 a week fine?

I am also saddened that at no point did anyone show concern for the 32 seven-year-olds who were forced to watch this violence in the one place in their community that they felt safe.

At the time of the assault Kevin James was head of an inner city primary school in Newcastle. He is now head of Hadrian Park First School in North Tyneside.