Full hearing (conduct)

1. On 23 September 2018, whilst employed as Head of School at [Redacted] the Teacher failed to:
   
   • (a) take appropriate action in relation to a complaint from Witness A and did not follow [Redacted] whistleblowing policy, in that:
     
     • (i) he received a written letter from Witness A dated 23 September 2018 alleging: (i) that a member of staff had hit two students with a book; and (ii) another member of staff had placed their hands heavily on the shoulder and around the neck of a child;
     • (ii) he failed to acknowledge that this was an incident of whistleblowing, as defined in whistleblowing policy (in the section titled “What is Whistleblowing”);
     • (iii) he did not convene a meeting with Witness A to discuss these allegations, as mandated by the whistleblowing policy (in the section titled “Raising a Whistleblowing Concern” at para. 3);
     • (iv) he did not take down a written summary of the concern or provide it to Witness A, as mandated by the whistleblowing policy (in the section titled “Raising a Whistleblowing Concern” at para. 4);
     • (v) he did not organise an investigation into the concern, as mandated by the whistleblowing policy (in the section titled “Investigation and Outcome”);
     • (vi) in failing to take the actions set out at (ii) to (v) above, failed to take appropriate action.
   • (b) take appropriate actions or identify child protection concerns raised in a complaint by Witness A and did not follow [Redacted] child and adult protection policy, in that:
     
     • (i) he received a written letter from Witness A dated 23 September 2018 alleging: (i) that a member of staff had hit two students with a book; and (ii) another member of staff had placed their hands heavily on the shoulder and around the neck of a child;
     • (ii) he failed to acknowledge that these allegations each amounted to a potential child protection concern;
     • (iii) he did not take any record of the potential child protection concern, as mandated by the child and adult protection policy (in the section titled “Recording Events”);
     • (iv) he did not convene a meeting with Witness A to discuss these allegations, as mandated by the child and adult protection policy (in the section titled “Child Protection of Children at [Redacted]: Procedure for Staff”);
     • (v) he did not carry out an investigation into the concern or seek further information from Witness A in respect of the concern;
     • (vi) he did not consult with any external child protection agencies in relation to the complaint, nor ensure that such consultation took place;
     • (vii) in failing to take the actions set out at (ii) to (vi) above, failed to take appropriate action.
2. On 11 December 2018, whilst employed as Head of School at [Redacted], the Teacher did distribute a report he had written entitled ‘Report on the circumstances of the closure of [Redacted] dated 21 November 2018 to elected members of [Redacted] Council which:
   
   • (a) contained personal information about a number of pupils and staff at the school, including Witness A;
   • (b) contained details of correspondence and discussions between various individuals acting in an official capacity without their knowledge or consent, including Witness B, Witness C and Witness D; and
   • (c) made reference to an internal disciplinary matter relating to a specific employee who, although not named, is easily identifiable as Witness A.
     
     And it is alleged that he did so to seek to bring various professionals and organisations into disrepute.
3. On 22 December 2018 the Teacher posted a public statement on his Facebook profile account in which he stated he was no longer employed by the school and listed forty questions criticising his former employers and partner organisations and portraying them in an unfavourable light.
4. On 23 December 2018, after his employment at [Redacted] was terminated on 21 December 2018, the Teacher did distribute a document to parents and other professionals entitled ‘Staff account of the week beginning 19th November 2018’ describing the final days at [Redacted] which:
   
   • (a) identified names and details of professionals;
   • (b) detailed events relating to pupils and professionals which can be easily attributed to specific individuals who had not given their agreement to that information being distributed; and
   • (c) contained confidential information that could only have been accessed by virtue of the Teacher’s employment.
     
     And it is alleged that he did so to seek to bring various professionals and organisations into disrepute.
5. On various dates during 2019 and 2020, the Teacher did upload, or consent to be uploaded to a website (found at address [Redacted]) and other media:
   
   • (a) a number of videos of himself repeatedly:
     
     • (i) disclosing information about the school;
     • (ii) making reference to Witness A who is easily identifiable;
     • (iii) criticising his former employers and partner organisations;
     • (iv) portraying professionals in partner organisations in an unfavourable light;
     • (v) discussing the suicide of a pupil, including outlining the method of suicide; and
     • (vi) accusing professionals of having a strategy to cause reputational damage and close the school.
6. On a date unknown in 2019, the Teacher did write an article, which he permitted to be published on the website [Redacted] on or around 13 October 2019, and in which he:
   
   • (a) criticised his former employers and professionals in partner agencies; and
   • (b) stated he imagined killing Witness B and Witness C, employees of the Care Inspectorate, placing both witnesses into a state of fear and alarm and causing them distress.
7. On 1 October 2020, the Teacher did upload or did consent to be uploaded to a website (found at address [Redacted]) a video of himself discussing the content of an interim investigation report received by him from GTCS, having previously been advised specifically on 24 September 2020 that the GTCS investigation process is a confidential process and should not be discussed on social media or similar public forums.
8. Between 23 April and 31 May 2021, having been given notice on 12 March 2021 that a Fitness to Teach full hearing would take place with regards to allegations made previously against the Teacher, and in the knowledge that Witness A was to be a witness in those proceedings, the Teacher did upload, or consent to be uploaded to a website (found at address [Redacted]):
   
   • (a) on 23 April 2021 a video of himself which had previously been uploaded to this website on 27 May 2020:
     
     • (i) making reference to Witness A who is easily identifiable; and
     • (ii) disclosing personal information regarding Witness A’s professional performance.
   • (b) On 31 May 2021, an email written by himself to a former colleague making reference to Witness A who is easily identifiable.

In light of the behaviour described in allegations 1 to 9 above, it is alleged that the Teacher lacks integrity.

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, 1.5, 1.6, 2.1, 2.3, 2.4 4.2, 4.3 and 4.5 of the General Teaching Council for Scotland’s Code of Professionalism and Conduct 2012.

Should any members of the public or press wish to attend the hearing, they must contact GTC Scotland (by emailing regulation@gtcs.org.uk) no less than 48 working hours prior to the start time of the hearing (i.e. by 10.00 am on Thursday 11 June 2026) in order to request access to the public hearing. Any requests to attend the hearing beyond this time cannot be facilitated and will not be responded to.

When requesting access to the public hearing, the following information will require to be provided:

• The full name of the person who will attend the hearing
• Contact email address
• Dates attending
• Contact number we can reach you on if there are any technical issues during the hearing
• Reason for wishing to observe (for example: press)

Please note that only the person named who has requested access to the hearing, will be permitted to enter the hearing, unless a substitute attendee has been intimated in advance.

Members of the public and press in attendance are reminded not to interrupt proceedings and it is strictly prohibited for an observer to audio or video record, screen shot, photograph, copy or share our hearing proceedings. Under Rule 1.7.10, a Panel may decide to exclude any person where the Panel is of the opinion that his/her presence is disruptive or otherwise detrimental to proceedings being conducted in line with the general objectives. Furthermore, members of the public and press will not be permitted access to the private discussions of the Panel.