Panel Meeting – Teacher C

Definitions

Any reference in this outcome to:

• ‘GTC Scotland’ means the General Teaching Council for Scotland;
• the ‘Panel’ means the Fitness to Teach Panel considering the case;
• the ‘Rules’ (and any related expression) means the GTC Scotland Fitness to Teach Rules 2017 or refers to a provision (or provisions) within them;
• the ‘Register’ means the GTC Scotland Register of teachers; and
• ‘COPAC’ means the GTC Scotland Code of Professionalism and Conduct.

Notification of Meeting

The Panel had before it a copy of the Notice of Panel Consideration, dated 18 May 2022. The Panel was satisfied that the Teacher had been provided with notice of the meeting in accordance with Rules 1.6 and 2.3.1. Accordingly, the Panel proceeded to consider the case.

Preliminary Matters

No preliminary matters were raised.

Allegations

1. On or around 26 May 2016 enter into a sexualised conversation about children with another male via the application WhatsApp’, including expressing a desire to engage in sexual acts with children under the age of 10.
2. Between 24 June and 5 July 2017 engage in sexualised conversations involving reference to children and young people with other individuals via the application ‘WhatsApp’ including, but not limited to:
   1. stating on two separate occasions that his 8-year-old nephew had witnessed him masturbating;
   2. asking an unknown individual the age of the youngest person he had had sex with;
   3. asking an unknown individual if any really young boys had seen his penis in a public urinal; and
   4. asking an unknown individual if he had ‘had a few young lads.’

and in light of the above it is alleged that the Teacher’s fitness to teach is impaired and he is unfit to teach, as a result of breaching Parts 1.3, 1.4, and 1.6 of the General Teaching Council for Scotland’s Code of Professionalism and Conduct 2012 (COPAC).

Information Available to the Panel

Fitness to Teach

The Panel carefully considered the available information and had regard to Part A of the GTC Scotland Fitness to Teach Conduct Cases – Indicative Outcomes Guidance Practice Statement in considering whether the Teacher’s fitness to teach is currently impaired. The Panel considered the following sections of COPAC:

1.3 You should avoid situations both within and outwith the professional context which could be in breach of the criminal law, or may call into question your fitness to teach;

The Panel considered that this was a serious breach of this section because the conduct involved children. The Teacher had sent texts in his personal life but failed to recall that, as a Teacher, he was still required to act as a professional outwith school, His conduct was potentially criminal which called into question his FtT.

1.4 you must uphold standards of personal and professional conduct, honesty and integrity so that the public have confidence in you as a teacher and teaching as a profession;

The Panel considered that the Teacher’s behaviour would undermine public confidence in teaching as a profession and in GTC Scotland as a professional regulator. There had been failures to act with honesty and integrity in that initially the Teacher did not co-operate with the school investigation, failed to co-operate with Police Scotland, sent a potentially criminal message on social media, showed a lack of integrity as a professional teacher and a disregard for children and their safety. The Panel was concerned about a lack of integrity regarding the threats expressed relating to publication of the decision. In all the circumstances the Panel considered that there was a serious breach of section 1.4.

1.6 you should maintain an awareness that as a teacher you are a role model to pupils.

The Panel considered that the Teacher had not been acting in a suitable way to be a role model to children and that this was fundamentally incompatible with being a registered teacher. In all the circumstances the Panel considered that there was a serious breach of section 1.6.

The Panel considered the level of seriousness of the allegations and characterised these as extremely serious. There were no aggravating factors in terms of the Teacher’s engagement with GTC Scotland. The Panel considered that there was a pattern of behaviour as there was more than one incident with the Teacher communicating with three different individuals. The Panel recognised that the Teacher has admitted the allegation in full albeit at a late stage on 6 June 2022, that he had attempted to demonstrate a level of insight in his statement, but it considered that this was not enough to be evidence of remediation of conduct or to mitigate the risk of reoccurrence. The Panel considered that there was evidence of steps taken to remediate as the Teacher had attended counselling but there was no evidence of sessions with the counsellor or any report from a medical professional. The Panel did not consider that it had been provided with information about the Teacher’s current circumstances or other surrounding factors which would make the risk of reoccurrence unlikely. In the absence of an expert opinion, the Panel considered that there might be a reoccurrence. The Panel found that there was an overriding public interest in this case and that, for the reasons given above, the conduct falls significantly short of the standards expected.

Having found the allegations proved and the Teacher to have fallen significantly short of the standards expected, the Teacher was therefore determined to be unfit to teach.

Disposal

As the Panel determined that the Teacher is unfit to teach, in accordance with the terms of Article 18(2)(b) of the Public Services Reform (General Teaching Council for Scotland) Order 2011, it could only direct that the Teacher be removed from the Register.

The Panel had regard to the Teacher’s position and decided to issue a Removal with Consent order in accordance with Rule 2.7 offering the Teacher the opportunity to consent to removal from the Register. Should such consent be provided, the Panel considered 2 years, the maximum period before which the Teacher should be able to apply for re-registration.

The terms of the consent order are set out in the separate ‘Consent Order’ document. Should the Teacher fail to provide his consent to the order, the case is to be referred for hearing proceedings.

1. Final Investigation Report, dated 10 May 2022, with appendices including:
2. Local Authority documentation as follows:
   • Investigation Report dated 28 March 2019 with appendices:
     • Appendix 1 – Statement of Teacher
     • Appendix 2 – Teacher amendments to minutes of interview
     • Appendix 3 – Job profile
     • Appendix 4 – Standards for Registration
     • Appendix 5 – COPAC
     • Appendix 6 – Letter from Police Scotland dated 19 June 2018
     • Appendix 7 – Letter from Beltrami & Co dated 25 September 2018
     • Appendix 8 – Email from Person A
     • Appendix 9 – Email from Person B
   • Record of Investigatory Interview
   • Police Scotland CrimeFile {redacted)
   • Excel spreadsheet Chat log {redacted)
   • Emails between Investigating Officer and Person C, dated between 15 October 2019 and 15 February 2021 (redacted)
   • GTC Scotland Statements:
     • Person C, Police Scotland
     • Person D, Police Scotland
     • Person E, Police Scotland
     • Person F, Forensic  Analyst
3. Email response to NOPC from teacher’s representative, dated 15 June 2022
4. Teacher’s Statement, dated 6 June 2022
5. Notice of Investigation, dated 30 October 2018
6. Notice of Panel Consideration, dated 18 May 2022

In response to the notice, the Teacher provided the following additional information for consideration by the Panel:

1. Email response from Teacher’s Representative to the Notice of Panel Consideration, dated 15 June 2022, with an appendix including: The Teacher’s statement, dated 6 June 2022.

Teacher’s Response

1. The Teacher admits the allegations in full.
2. The Teacher has not indicated a current position in relation to his current fitness to teach.
3. The Teacher would consent to removal from the GTC Scotland Register of Teachers.

Summary of Evidence and Submissions

The allegations were admitted in full by the Teacher and he indicated that he would consent to removal from the GTC Scotland Register of teachers. In the final investigation report the investigating officer narrated that the Teacher admitted in his response to the notification of investigation that his employer was investigating an allegation that he has a sexual interest in children, that he had cooperated with his employer and attended an investigation meeting on 26 September 2018. He further stated that it is accurate that Police Scotland have not taken any action against him and that he was interviewed by the Police in July 2017 and released without charge. He stated that he was later informed in June 2018 that no action would be taken against him but that the police wrote to him on 19 June 2018 stating that they were going to disclose to his employer that they have information to indicate that he has a sexual interest in children. He firmly denied having any sexual interest in children. The Teacher confirmed that he has been on precautionary suspension since 21 August 2017. He stated he was initially suspended in relation to an allegation that he was involved in an offence of a sexual nature (which was denied) and his suspension was amended on 25 June 2018 to relate to the current allegation that he has a sexual interest in children

The Teacher’s Representative submitted that it should be noted that, whilst the Teacher admits the allegations in full, anything that was said in the text conversations was not real and the Teacher has no desire to engage in sexual acts with children, that the Teacher has not committed any criminal offence and did not, and would not, act on any of the content of the messages. He further submitted that the Teacher has never engaged in any sexual activity with anyone who is underage, that he is adopted from birth and does not have a nephew or any siblings and that he shows insight and remorse at his behaviour.

Decision

The Panel considered all the information available to it as described above. The Panel had a range of options open to it, as set out at Rule 2.3.2 (a) to (f). The Panel had regard to the factors set out in the GTC Scotland Panel Consideration Practice Statement.

The Panel did not consider it appropriate to dispose of the case in accordance with Rule 2.3.2 (a). The Panel reached this conclusion for the following reasons:

• The matter amounts to Relevant Conduct and there is on the face of it, a real prospect of a finding that the Teacher’s fitness to teach is impaired. The Panel considered the following factors relevant in that the conduct alleged relates to:
  • Abuse of a teacher’s position of trust
  • Sexual misconduct or indecency (including child pornography)
  • Misuse of social media where it raises any other serious concern
  • Fraud or dishonesty
  • Other serious activities which cause harm and affect public confidence

The Panel considered that it did not have full information available to it. There was nothing to prove that forming inappropriate relationships with pupils/young people was a relevant factor. There was a discrepancy between what the police investigated and what the Teacher was saying in his final statement. Police Scotland questioned him twice in relation to sexual activity with an older child and inappropriate conversations on WhatsApp showing that he had a sexual interest in children.

The Panel considered the relevant Parts of COPAC to be:

• Part 1 – Professionalism and maintaining trust in the profession

The Panel considered the following additional factors to be relevant in their decision:

The Panel did not consider it appropriate to dismiss the case on the basis of an insufficiency of evidence as provided for by Rule 2.3.2 (b). The allegations have been admitted by the Teacher. Furthermore, the Panel did not consider the referral to be malicious.

Fitness to Teach

The Panel carefully considered the available information and had regard to Part A of the GTC Scotland Fitness to Teach Conduct Cases – Indicative Outcomes Guidance Practice Statement in considering whether the Teacher’s fitness to teach is currently impaired. The Panel considered the following sections of COPAC:

1.3 You should avoid situations both within and outwith the professional context which could be in breach of the criminal law, or may call into question your fitness to teach;

The Panel considered that this was a serious breach of this section because the conduct involved children. The Teacher had sent texts in his personal life but failed to recall that, as a Teacher, he was still required to act as a professional outwith school, His conduct was potentially criminal which called into question his FtT.

1.4 you must uphold standards of personal and professional conduct, honesty and integrity so that the public have confidence in you as a teacher and teaching as a profession;

The Panel considered that the Teacher’s behaviour would undermine public confidence in teaching as a profession and in GTC Scotland as a professional regulator. There had been failures to act with honesty and integrity in that initially the Teacher did not co-operate with the school investigation, failed to co-operate with Police Scotland, sent a potentially criminal message on social media, showed a lack of integrity as a professional teacher and a disregard for children and their safety. The Panel was concerned about a lack of integrity regarding the threats expressed relating to publication of the decision. In all the circumstances the Panel considered that there was a serious breach of section 1.4.

1.6 you should maintain an awareness that as a teacher you are a role model to pupils.

The Panel considered that the Teacher had not been acting in a suitable way to be a role model to children and that this was fundamentally incompatible with being a registered teacher. In all the circumstances the Panel considered that there was a serious breach of section 1.6.

The Panel considered the level of seriousness of the allegations and characterised these as extremely serious. There were no aggravating factors in terms of the Teacher’s engagement with GTC Scotland. The Panel considered that there was a pattern of behaviour as there was more than one incident with the Teacher communicating with three different individuals. The Panel recognised that the Teacher has admitted the allegation in full albeit at a late stage on 6 June 2022, that he had attempted to demonstrate a level of insight in his statement, but it considered that this was not enough to be evidence of remediation of conduct or to mitigate the risk of reoccurrence. The Panel considered that there was evidence of steps taken to remediate as the Teacher had attended counselling but there was no evidence of sessions with the counsellor or any report from a medical professional. The Panel did not consider that it had been provided with information about the Teacher’s current circumstances or other surrounding factors which would make the risk of reoccurrence unlikely. In the absence of an expert opinion, the Panel considered that there might be a reoccurrence. The Panel found that there was an overriding public interest in this case and that, for the reasons given above, the conduct falls significantly short of the standards expected.

Having found the allegations proved and the Teacher to have fallen significantly short of the standards expected, the Teacher was therefore determined to be unfit to teach.

Disposal

As the Panel determined that the Teacher is unfit to teach, in accordance with the terms of Article 18(2)(b) of the Public Services Reform (General Teaching Council for Scotland) Order 2011, it could only direct that the Teacher be removed from the Register.

The Panel had regard to the Teacher’s position and decided to issue a Removal with Consent order in accordance with Rule 2.7 offering the Teacher the opportunity to consent to removal from the Register. Should such consent be provided, the Panel considered 2 years, the maximum period before which the Teacher should be able to apply for re-registration.

The terms of the consent order are set out in the separate ‘Consent Order’ document. Should the Teacher fail to provide his consent to the order, the case is to be referred for hearing proceedings.