Mr Andrew Lear

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 Andrew Lear

Teacher reference number: 0563981

Teacher's date of birth: 19/01/1968

Location teacher worked: Northampton, East Midlands

Date of professional conduct panel: 17 July 2023

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 Andrew Lear , formerly employed in Northampton, East Midlands.

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 Andrew Lear Professional conduct panel meeting outcome Panel decision and reasons on behalf of the Secretary of State for Education July 2023 2 Contents Introduction 3 Allegations 4 Preliminary applications 4 Summary of evidence 4 Documents 4 Statement of agreed facts 5 Decision and reasons 5 Findings of fact 6 Panel’s recommendation to the Secretary of State 8 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 Andrew Lear Teacher ref number: 0563981 Teacher date of birth: 19/01/1968 TRA reference: 19019 Date of determination: 17 July 2023 Former employer: Northamptonshire Music and Performing Arts Trust, Northampton Introduction A professional conduct panel (“the panel”) of the Teaching Regulation Agency (“the TRA”) convened on 17 July 2023 on Microsoft Teams, to consider the case of Mr Andrew Lear. The panel members were Mr Paul Millett (lay panellist – in the chair), Ms. Jackie Hutchings (teacher panellist) and Miss Louisa Munton (teacher panellist). The legal adviser to the panel was Mr Jermel Anderson of Blake Morgan 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 Andrew Lear that the allegation be considered without a hearing. Mr Andrew Lear provided a signed statement of agreed facts and admitted conviction of a relevant offence. The panel considered the case at a meeting without the attendance of the presenting officer Ms Louise Murphy-King or Mr Andrew Lear. 4 Allegations The panel considered the allegations set out in the notice of meeting dated 04 May 2023. It was alleged that Mr Andrew Lear was guilty of having been convicted of a relevant offence, in that: The allegations against you, which will be considered by the panel, are: You have been convicted of a relevant offence at any time in that: 1.On 31 March 2021, you were convicted of: a) Possessing indecent photographs of children on 8 January 2020, namely 10 Category A images, contrary to Section 160(1), (2A) and (3) of the Criminal Justice Act 1988. b) Possessing indecent photographs of children on 8 January 2020, namely 9 Category B images, contrary to Section 160(1), (2A) and (3) of the Criminal Justice Act 1988. c) Possessing indecent photographs of children on 8 January 2020, namely 3 Category C images, contrary to Section 160(1), (2A) and (3) of the Criminal Justice Act 1988. The teacher’s admission of facts. The teacher’s admission of conviction of a relevant offence. Preliminary applications There were no preliminary applications. 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 3 to 4 Section 2: Notice of Referral and Notice of Meeting – pages 5 to 13 Section 3: Statement of Agreed Facts and Presenting Officer Representations – pages 14 to 16 Section 4: Teaching Regulation Agency documents – pages 17 to 82 5 Section 5: Teacher documents – pages 83 to 85 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 Andrew Lear on 17 November 2022. No summary of the evidence given is required, as evidence that was material to the panel’s decision should be captured in the reasons given for it (below) 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 Andrew Lear 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. Mr Andrew Lear was employed by Northamptonshire Music and Performing Arts Trust in Northampton as an Instrumental Music Teacher. In this capacity, he worked across several primary schools. The role that he undertook began in September 2006. On 08 January 2020, he was found by police to be in possession of indecent images of children and was therefore suspended from work the following day. A police interview took place on 13 January 2020, after which Mr Andrew Lear resigned from his position and a referral was made to the Teaching Regulation Agency. The panel considered the role that he was performing and confirmed that he fell within the jurisdiction of the TRA. Mr Andrew Lear was convicted at Northampton Magistrates' Court of three separate offences of possessing indecent photographs of children on 31 March 2021 and was subsequently sentenced for this at Northampton Crown Court. The sentence that he received was for a period of four months' imprisonment with each offence to run concurrently, suspended for a period of 18 months. A 20-day rehabilitation activity requirement was also ordered. Additionally, the Court imposed a Sexual Harm Prevention Order which was put in place for a period of 7 years. 6 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: 1. On 31 March 2021, you were convicted of: a) Possessing indecent photographs of children on 8 January 2020, namely 10 Category A images, contrary to Section 160 (1), (2A) and (3) of the Criminal Justice Act 1988. b) Possessing indecent photographs of children on 8 January 2020, namely 9 Category B images, contrary to Section 160 (1), (2A) and (3) of the Criminal Justice Act 1988. c) Possessing indecent photographs of children on 8 January 2020, namely 3 Category C images, contrary to Section 160 (1), (2A) and (3) of the Criminal Justice Act 1988. The allegation was admitted and was supported by evidence presented to the panel within the bundle, the allegation was therefore, found proved. The panel have seen the agreed statement of facts where you made full admissions to the above offences. The panel have also seen the PNC record, Memorandum of Conviction, the Court Transcript and the relevant police disclosure document. The panel were therefore satisfied that the allegation is proved. 7 Findings as to conviction of a relevant offence Having found the allegation proved, the panel went on to consider whether the facts of those proved allegations amounted to a relevant offence. In doing so, the panel had regard to the document Teacher Misconduct: The Prohibition of Teachers, which is referred to as “the Advice”. The panel found that this was a relevant offence. The panel found that the offence of making, possessing, distributing or publishing any indecent photograph or image or pseudo photograph or image of a child was relevant. The panel was satisfied that the conduct of Mr Andrew Lear in relation to the facts it found proved involved breaches of the Teachers’ Standards. The panel considered that by reference to Part 2, Mr Andrew Lear 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, observing proper boundaries appropriate to a teacher’s professional position The Panel considered that the specific act of possession of indecent images itself, amounted to a boundary issue due to the nature of the images and the safeguarding principles as established within the teaching profession. o having regard for the need to safeguard pupils’ well-being, in accordance with statutory provisions o not undermining the rule of law  Teachers must have proper and professional regard for the ethos, policies and practices of the school in which they teach and maintain high standards in their own attendance and punctuality.  Teachers must have an understanding of, and always act within, the statutory frameworks which set out their professional duties and responsibilities. The panel also noted that they would expect Mr Andrew Lear to have working knowledge of relevant documentation for education professionals such as KCSIE (Keeping Children Safe in Education), Working Together to Safeguard Children and Guidance for Safer Working Practices. It was felt that Mr Andrew Lear's behaviour was a clear breach of the principles established within this guidance. 8 The panel also took account of the way the teaching profession is viewed by others. The panel considered that Mr Andrew Lear's behaviour in committing the offence could affect public confidence in the teaching profession, given the influence that teachers may have on pupils, parents and others in the community. The panel noted that Mr Andrew Lear's behaviour ultimately led to a sentence of imprisonment, (albeit that it was suspended), which was indicative of the seriousness of the offences committed. Ultimately, this was a case of an offence involving viewing, taking, making, possessing, distributing or publishing any indecent photograph or image or pseudo photograph or image of a child, which the Advice states is likely to be considered a relevant offence. Panel’s recommendation to the Secretary of State Given the panel’s findings in respect of a conviction of a relevant offence, it was necessary for the panel to go on to consider whether it would be appropriate to recommend the imposition of a prohibition order by the Secretary of State. In considering whether to recommend to the Secretary of State that a prohibition order should be made, the panel had to consider whether