Mr Adam Barton

The Secretary of State does not make these decisions themselves. They are made by a senior official on the recommendation of an independent panel.

Teacher's name: Mr Adam Barton

Teacher reference number: 1835337

Teacher's date of birth: 16 July 1972

Location teacher worked: Stockport, north west England

Date of professional conduct panel: 14 November 2022

Outcome type: prohibition order

Notice is hereby given that, in accordance with The Teacher's’ Disciplinary (England) Regulations 2012, a professional conduct panel was convened to consider the case of Mr Adam Barton, formerly employed in Stockport, north west England.

Teacher misconduct

Ground Floor, South

Cheylesmore House

5 Quinton RoadCoventryCV1 2WT

Email TRA.Casework@education.gov.uk

Telephone 020 7593 5393

Information about regulating the teaching profession and the process for dealing with serious teacher misconduct.

Mr Adam Barton: Professional conduct panel meeting outcome Panel decision and reasons on behalf of the Secretary of State for Education November 2022 2 Contents Introduction 3 Allegations 4 Preliminary applications 4 Summary of evidence 5 Documents 5 Statement of agreed facts 5 Decision and reasons 5 Findings of fact 5 Panel’s recommendation to the Secretary of State 7 Decision and reasons on behalf of the Secretary of State 11 3 Professional conduct panel decision and recommendations, and decision on behalf of the Secretary of State Teacher: Mr Adam Barton Teacher ref number: 1835337 Teacher date of birth: 16 July 1972 TRA reference: 19641 Date of determination: 14 November 2022 Former employer: Brookside Primary School, Stockport Introduction A professional conduct panel (“the panel”) of the Teaching Regulation Agency (“the TRA”) convened on 14 November 2022 by virtual means, to consider the case of Mr Adam Barton. The panel members were Mr Steve Woodhouse (teacher panellist – in the chair), Mr Maurice McBride panellist (lay panellist) and Mrs Caroline Tilley (lay panellist). The legal adviser to the panel was Mrs Luisa Gibbons of Eversheds Sutherland (International) LLP solicitors. In advance of the meeting, after taking into consideration the public interest and the interests of justice, the TRA agreed to a request from Mr Barton that the allegations be considered without a hearing. Mr Barton provided a signed statement of agreed facts and admitted that he had been convicted of a relevant offence. The panel considered the case at a meeting without the attendance of the presenting officer Ms Louise Murphy- King of Kingsley Napley or Mr Barton. The meeting took place in private. 4 Allegations The panel considered the allegations set out in the Notice of Meeting dated 2 November 2022. It was alleged that Mr Barton had been convicted of a relevant offence, namely: 1. On 18 November 2021, he was convicted at Crown Court at Minshull Street of the following offences: i. attempt/cause child under 16 to watch a sexual act on 17/10/20 Sexual Offences Act 2003 Sexual harm prevention order 5 yrs Sex offender’s notice 10 yrs ii. attempt/ engage in sexual communication with a child on 17/10/20 Sexual Offence Act 2003. The panel proposed to amend the allegations to those agreed by Mr Barton in the statement of agreed facts as that would better reflect the matters set out in the Certificate of Conviction. Before taking this decision, the panel sought representations from both the presenting officer and Mr Barton regarding this amendment. The response confirmed that Mr Barton was comfortable with the allegation set out in the statement of agreed facts. It was considered that Mr Barton’s response to the allegation would not have changed, had this amendment been made at an earlier stage, given that the wording the panel proposed to consider was as agreed to by Mr Barton in the statement of agreed facts. The panel decided therefore to amend the allegations to state as follows: 1. On 18 November 2021, he was convicted at Greater Manchester Magistrates’ Court of the following offences: i. Attempting / Causing a child between 13 and 15 years of age to watch/look at an image of sexual activity on 17/10/20, contrary to the Sexual Offences Act 2003 s 12(1)(a); ii. Attempting/ Engaging in sexual communication with a child on 17/10/20 contrary to the Sexual Offences Act 2003 s 15A(1). The teacher’s admitted both the facts of the conviction and that it amounted to a conviction of a relevant offence. Preliminary applications There were no preliminary applications. 5 Summary of evidence Documents In advance of the meeting, the panel received a bundle of documents which included: Section 1: Chronology and list of key people – pages 1 to 2 Section 2: Notice of referral, response and notice of meeting – pages 3 to 9 Section 3: Statement of agreed facts – pages 10 to 13 Section 4: Teaching Regulation Agency documents – pages 14 to 100 Section 5: Teacher documents – pages 101 to 103 The panel members confirmed that they had read all of the documents within the bundle, in advance of the meeting. Statement of agreed facts The panel considered a statement of agreed facts which was signed by Mr Barton on 22 September 2022. Decision and reasons The panel announced its decision and reasons as follows: The panel carefully considered the case and reached a decision. In advance of the meeting, the TRA agreed to a request from Mr Barton for the allegations to be considered without a hearing. The panel had the ability to direct that the case be considered at a hearing if required in the interests of justice or in the public interest. The panel did not determine that such a direction was necessary or appropriate in this case. On 28 October 2019, Mr Barton commenced his employment as a primary school class teacher at Brookside Primary School (“the School”). On 22 October 2020, Mr Barton was arrested by the police at the School. On 5 November 2020, Mr Barton was suspended from his role at the School and he resigned from the School on the same day. Findings of fact The findings of fact are as follows: The panel found the following particulars of the allegations against you proved, for these reasons: 6 1. On 18 November 2021, he was convicted at Greater Manchester Magistrates’ Court of the following offences: i. Attempting / Causing a child between 13 and 15 years of age to watch/look at an image of sexual activity on 17/10/20, contrary to the Sexual Offences Act 2003 s 12(1)(a); ii. Attempting/ Engaging in sexual communication with a child on 17/10/20 contrary to the Sexual Offences Act 2003 s 15A(1). Mr Barton has admitted to the allegations in the statement of agreed facts. The panel has seen the certificate of conviction and print of PNC details which together confirm that Mr Barton was convicted as alleged. The panel accepted the certificate of conviction as conclusive proof of both the convictions and the facts necessarily implied by the convictions. In the statement of agreed facts, Mr Barton admitted that on 17 October he sent messages to a female in an online chat room. The female messaged him to say that she was [REDACTED]. Mr Barton sent the female a picture of an erect penis and asked her if she liked it before sending another picture of an erect penis. Mr Barton then messaged the female to say that his fantasy was to strip and masturbate for a stranger and he asked her if she wanted to watch. He then video called the female with his hand down his trousers playing with his penis. During a video call with the female he pulled his erect penis from his trousers and began masturbating. He pleaded guilty to both of the offences with which he was charged and was subsequently convicted. Findings as to conviction of a relevant offence The panel was satisfied that the conduct of Mr Barton, in relation to the facts it found proved, involved breaches of the Teachers’ Standards. The panel considered that by reference to Part 2, Mr Barton was in breach of the following standards: • Teachers uphold public trust in the profession and maintain high standards of ethics and behaviour, within and outside school, by o treating pupils with dignity, building relationships rooted in mutual respect, and at all times observing proper boundaries appropriate to a teacher’s professional position o having regard for the need to safeguard pupils’ well-being, in accordance with statutory provisions • Teachers must have proper and professional regard for the ethos, policies and practices of the school in which they teach… • Teachers must have an understanding of, and always act within, the statutory frameworks which set out their professional duties and responsibilities. 7 The panel noted that the individual’s actions were relevant to teaching, working with children and working in an education setting as they demonstrated a sexual interest in children. The panel noted that the behaviour involved in committing the offence would have been likely to have had an impact on the safety and/or security of pupils and members of the public. This is evidenced by the 5 year sexual harm prevention order imposed upon Mr Barton and his placement of the sex offenders’ register for a period of 10 years. The panel also took account of the way the teaching profession is viewed by others. The panel considered that Mr Barton’s behaviour in committing the offence would be likely to affect public confidence in the teaching profession, if Mr Barton was allowed to continue teaching. The panel noted that Mr Barton’s behaviour ultimately led to a sentence of 24 months imprisonment, (albeit that it was suspended for 24 months), which was indicative of the seriousness of the offences committed, and which the Advice states is likely to be considered “a relevant offence”. Mr Barton also received 100 hours of unpaid work requirement and a 30 day rehabilitation activity requirement. This was a case concerning an offence involving sexual activity and sexual communication with a child. The Advice indicates that a conviction for any offence that relates to or involves such offences is likely to be considered “a relevant offence”. The panel took into account the steps Mr Barton has taken since his arrest to understand and address his behaviour. Nevertheless, the panel found that the seriousness of the offending behaviour that led to the conviction was relevant to Mr Barton’s fitness to be a teacher. The panel considered that a finding that these convictions were for relevant offences was necessary to reaffirm clear standards of conduct so as to maintain public confidence in the teaching profession. Panel’s recommendation to the Secretary of State Given the panel’s findings in respect of a conviction of a relevant offence, it was