Mr Alun Pickford

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 Alun Pickford

Teacher reference number: 9040716

Teacher's date of birth: 30 January 1969

Location teacher worked: West Lavington, South West England

Date of professional conduct panel: 28 November 2024

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 Alun Pickford formerly employed in West Lavington, South 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 Alun Pickford: Professional conduct panel meeting outcome Panel decision and reasons on behalf of the Secretary of State for Education November 2024 2 Contents Introduction 3 Allegations 4 Preliminary applications 4 Summary of evidence 4 Documents 4 Statement of agreed facts 4 Decision and reasons 4 Findings of fact 6 Panel’s recommendation to the Secretary of State 8 Decision and reasons on behalf of the Secretary of State 12 3 Professional conduct panel decision and recommendations, and decision on behalf of the Secretary of State Teacher: Mr Alun Pickford Teacher ref number: 9040716 Teacher date of birth: 30 January 1969 TRA reference: 19886 Date of determination: 28 November 2024 Former employer: Dauntsey’s School, Wiltshire Introduction A professional conduct panel (“the panel”) of the Teaching Regulation Agency (“the TRA”) convened on 28 November 2024 via virtual means, to consider the case of Mr Alun Pickford. The panel members were Mr Peter Ward (lay panellist – in the chair), Ms Jackie Hutchings (teacher panellist) and Ms Katie Dent (lay panellist). The legal adviser to the panel was Miss Shanie Probert 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 Pickford that the allegation be considered without a hearing. The panel had sight of a signed statement of agreed facts and noted that Mr Pickford had admitted to the conviction of a relevant offence. The panel considered the case at a meeting without the attendance of the presenting officer, or Mr Pickford. The meeting took place in private. 4 Allegations The panel considered the allegation set out in the notice of meeting dated 13 September 2024. It was alleged that Mr Pickford was guilty of having been convicted of a relevant offence, in that: 1. On 17 May 2023, he was convicted of rape of a woman 16 years of age or over, contrary to Section 1 of the Sexual Offences Act 2003. The teacher admitted the allegation and also admitted that he was convicted of a relevant offence. 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 4 to 5 Section 2: Notice of referral and response to notice of referral – pages 6 to 13 Section 3: Statement of agreed facts – pages 14 to 16 Section 4: Teaching Regulation Agency documents – pages 17 to 159 Section 5: Teacher documents – pages 160 to 181 Section 6: Notice of meeting – pages 182 to 183 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 Person Y [REDACTED] on his behalf on 18 July 2024. The panel noted that Mr Pickford had not signed the statement of agreed facts himself, due to him currently serving a custodial sentence. The panel also noted that it did not have sight of any ‘form of authority’ or similar form to confirm that Mr Pickford had agreed for Person Y to sign the statement of agreed facts on his behalf. However, the panel did have sight of a handwritten note from Mr Pickford in the bundle dated 30 April 2024, which had been sent to [REDACTED] (Person Y) by email from prison. Within this note, 5 Mr Pickford confirmed that he had “no intention of fighting against any decisions barring [him] from the teaching profession by the T.R.A” and that he had hoped that his letter “brings the matter with the T.R.A to an end”. The panel considered that Mr Pickford’s note was consistent with the contents of the statement of agreed facts and therefore, accepted that Person Y was authorised to sign the statement of agreed facts on behalf of Mr Pickford. 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 Pickford for the allegation 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. Mr Pickford obtained his PGCE in August 1991. Between April 1991 and August 1998, Mr Pickford was employed at Aldenham School (“the School”) as a Teacher of Technology. In June 1993, Mr Pickford had a one-bedroom flat allocated to him, situated [REDACTED] at the School. Person A attended the School. [REDACTED]. In June 1993, Person A left the School. At this time, Mr Pickford was 23 years old [REDACTED]. On 1 September 1998, Mr Pickford commenced employment as Head of Design Technology at Dauntsey’s School. On 23 September 2020, Mr Pickford attended a voluntary interview with the police following a historic allegation of rape made by Person A that took place in 1993. On 10 October 2020, Mr Pickford was suspended from Dauntsey’s School, pending the outcome of the police investigation. On 17 May 2023, Mr Pickford was convicted. Mr Pickford was referred to the TRA. 6 Findings of fact The findings of fact are as follows: The panel found the following particulars of the allegation against you proved, for these reasons: 1. On 17 May 2023, you were convicted of rape of a woman 16 years of age or over, contrary to Section 1 of the Sexual Offences Act 2003. The allegation was admitted by Mr Pickford in the statement of agreed facts, signed by [REDACTED] (Person Y) on his behalf on 18 July 2024. The panel also had sight of the transcript of the Judge’s sentencing remarks, which set out the following background: In the summer of 1993, Mr Pickford was employed as a teacher at the School and had responsibility as a house tutor within House A. Person A was an [REDACTED] pupil at the School [REDACTED]. Mr Pickford issued an open invitation to Person A, for her to stay at his flat, if she was staying late at the School. On one occasion, Mr Pickford offered Person A his bed. Person A was undressed preparing to go to sleep on the understanding that Mr Pickford would be staying on the sofa in the living room. However, about 15 or 20 minutes after Person A got into bed, Mr Pickford went into the bedroom, undressed, put on a condom, positioned himself on top of Person A and proceeded to have sex with her, continuing until he ejaculated. On 27 February 2020, Person A made a historic report to the police. Mr Pickford was subsequently charged. He entered a ‘not guilty’ plea, and on 17 May 2023, he was convicted at St Albans Crown Court of rape of a woman 16 years of age or over. On 21 July 2023, Mr Pickford was sentenced at St Albans Crown Court to 7 years imprisonment and was placed on the sex register indefinitely. The panel has seen the certificate of conviction dated 31 January 2024 and accepted it as conclusive proof of the conviction and the facts necessarily implied by the conviction. The panel has also seen an extract of the police national computer record confirming the conviction. Findings as to conviction of a relevant offence Having found the allegation proved, the panel went on to consider whether the facts of the proved allegation amounted to the conviction of a relevant offence. 7 The offence was committed by Mr Pickford’s conduct prior to the coming into force of Teachers’ Standards. Therefore, the panel had regard to its knowledge and experience of teaching standards at that time and considered that the duties to maintain professional boundaries and safeguard pupils’ wellbeing, treat pupils with dignity and respect, show respect for the rights of others, and not undermine the rule of law would have been important then, and that Mr Pickford had breached these duties at the time in his conduct. The panel considered that Mr Pickford’s behaviour fell well short of what would have been expected of the personal and professional standards of a teacher at the time of his conduct and that his actions were completely incompatible with being a teacher. The panel noted that the individual’s actions were relevant to teaching, working with children and working in an education setting. The panel noted that the offence was committed at Mr Pickford’s flat which was on the School grounds, and also involved a pupil for whom Mr Pickford was responsible [REDACTED]. The panel also considered the Judge’s sentencing remarks, in which the Judge stated that Mr Pickford had “enjoyed considerable responsibility and trust, both as a teacher and a house tutor”, and that his “conviction is a breach of that trust”. 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/or members of the public. The panel also took account of the way the teaching profession is viewed by others. The panel considered that Mr Pickford’s behaviour in committing the offence would be likely to affect public confidence in the teaching profession, if Mr Pickford was allowed to continue teaching. The panel noted that Mr Pickford’s behaviour ultimately led to a sentence of imprisonment, which was indicative of the seriousness of the offences committed, and which the Advice states is likely to be considered “a relevant offence”. This was a case concerning an offence involving violence and sexual activity. 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 considered the offence of rape to be a violent offence. The panel considered the offence to be extremely serious. In particular, the panel noted from the Judge’s sentencing