Mr Benjamin Hacker

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 Benjamin Hacker

Teacher reference number: 3962858

Teacher's date of birth: 25 January 1997

Location teacher worked: Surrey, south east England

Date of professional conduct panel: 7 February 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 Benjamin Hacker, formerly employed in Surrey, south east 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 Benjamin Hacker: Professional conduct panel meeting outcome Panel decision and reasons on behalf of the Secretary of State for Education February 2023 2 Contents Introduction 3 Allegations 4 Preliminary applications 5 Summary of evidence 5 Documents 5 Statement of agreed facts 5 Decision and reasons 5 Findings of fact 6 Panel’s recommendation to the Secretary of State 12 Decision and reasons on behalf of the Secretary of State 15 3 Professional conduct panel decision and recommendations, and decision on behalf of the Secretary of State Teacher: Mr Benjamin Hacker Teacher ref number: 3962858 Teacher date of birth: 25 January 1997 TRA reference: 20377 Date of determination: 7 February 2023 Former employer: The Abbey School, Surrey Introduction A professional conduct panel (‘the panel’) of the Teaching Regulation Agency (‘the TRA’) convened on 7 February 2023 by way of a virtual meeting, to consider the case of Mr Benjamin Hacker. The panel members were Mr Stephen Chappell (lay panellist – in the chair), Ms Susan Humble (lay panellist) and Ms Jane Gotschel (teacher panellist). The legal adviser to the panel was Ms Abigail Hubert of Birketts 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 Hacker that the allegations be considered without a hearing. Mr Hacker provided a signed statement of agreed facts and admitted unacceptable professional conduct and/or conduct that may bring the profession into disrepute. The panel considered the case at a meeting without the attendance of the presenting officer, Ms Louise Ravenscroft of Capsticks Solicitors LLP, Mr Hacker or any representative for Mr Hacker. The meeting took place in private by way of a virtual meeting. 4 Allegations The panel considered the allegations set out in the notice of meeting dated 23 January 2023. It was alleged that Mr Hacker was guilty of unacceptable professional conduct and/or conduct that may bring the profession into disrepute in that, whilst employed as a teacher by The Abbey School (‘the School’): 1. While employed at Kings Foundation he exchanged telephone numbers and or social media details with Person A (who at the time [redacted] and/or under his supervision); 2. He exchanged messages via mobile phone and/or social media with Person A in which he: a) commented upon Person A’s appearance; b) suggested that he wanted to engage in sexual activity with Person A; c) arranged to meet Person A outside of working at Kings Foundation and/or drive [redacted] to or from work at Kings Foundation; and d) sent a photo of a nude male to Person A; 3. On or around 26 June 2021, while employed as a lead coach at Kings Foundation, he: a) kissed Person A; b) placed his hand down Person A’s shorts; and c) digitally penetrated Person A; 4. He engaged in any or all of the conduct at paragraph 3 above when Person A did not consent to any or all of the conduct alleged; and 5. His conduct as set out in paragraph 1 and/or 2 and/or 3 was sexually motivated. Mr Hacker admitted the facts of allegations 1 to 5 and that his behaviour amounted to unacceptable professional conduct and/or conduct that may bring the profession into disrepute falling short of the standards of behaviour expected of a teacher, as set out in the statement of agreed facts signed by Mr Hacker on 5 December 2022. 5 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, anonymised pupil list and list of key people – pages 4 to 7 • Section 2: Notice of referral, response and notice of meeting – pages 8 to 30 • Section 3: Statement of agreed facts and presenting officer representations – pages 31 to 40 • Section 4: Teaching Regulation Agency documents – pages 41 to 319 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 Hacker on 5 December 2022, and subsequently signed by the presenting officer on 21 December 2022. Decision and reasons The panel carefully considered the case and reached the following decision and reasons: In advance of the meeting, the TRA agreed to a request from Mr Hacker 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 Hacker commenced employment at the School as a form tutor, class teacher and PE coordinator on 1 September 2019. Mr Hacker had also worked for the Kings Foundation as a Multi Sports Coach and Assistant Football Coach since July 2018. Kings Foundation is a not-for-profit children’s charity, which provides holiday camps for pupils during the summer holidays. In May 6 2019, the Kings Foundation interviewed Mr Hacker for consideration of a ‘step-up’ position within the foundation. In Easter 2021, following the cancellation of the programme as a result of COVID-19, Mr Hacker was invited to apply for an advancement of promotion to Lead Coach at the Gosport and Fareham Multi Academy Trust, held at Brune Park Community School. The Kings Foundation weekend programme at Brune Park Community School aimed to raise activity engagement levels for up to 30 young people, aged between 11 and 14 years old. Mr Hacker, along with other staff, were responsible for mentoring sixth form students undertaking the ‘Rookie Sports Leadership award’. Person A was [redacted] attending the ‘Rookie Sports Leadership award’ and therefore under the supervision of Mr Hacker. The School were informed by the LADO on 19 July 2021, of an allegation that Mr Hacker had engaged in sexual activity [redacted] (Person A). The sexual activity had occurred whilst Mr Hacker was working at the Kings Foundation. On 20 July 2021, Mr Hacker was formally suspended from the School. A LADO strategy meeting took place on 22 July 2021, and a second meeting took place on 13 August 2021. A letter was sent to Mr Hacker on 18 August 2021 confirming that his suspension was to remain in place. Mr Hacker was interviewed by the police on 6 September 2021. On the same day, a third LADO strategy meeting took place. On 10 September 2021, the LADO confirmed that no further action would be taken by the police. The School commenced their investigation on 10 September 2021. A letter was sent to Mr Hacker confirming his continued suspension. Mr Hacker was invited to an investigation meeting on 20 September 2021 and the meeting took place on 29 September 2021. A disciplinary investigation interview took place on 13 October 2021, and a letter was sent to Mr Hacker the following day inviting him to a disciplinary hearing. The hearing took place on 18 October 2021 and Mr Hacker was dismissed the following day, 19 October 2021. A referral was made to the DBS and the TRA on 5 November 2021. Findings of fact The findings of fact are as follows: 7 The panel found the following particulars of the allegations against you proved, for these reasons: The panel noted that within the statement of agreed facts signed by Mr Hacker on 5 December 2022, Mr Hacker admitted to the facts of allegations 1, 2(a), 2(b), 2(c), 2(d), 3(a), 3(b), 3(c), 4 and 5. Further, Mr Hacker admitted that those admitted facts amounted to unacceptable professional conduct and/or conduct that may bring the profession into disrepute. Notwithstanding the statement of agreed facts, the panel considered the evidence provided in the bundle and made a determination on the evidence available to it. 1. While employed at Kings Foundation you exchanged telephone numbers and or social media details with Person A ([redacted] and/or under your supervision); The panel considered the evidence in the bundle and noted the School’s investigation and the record of the police interview with Mr Hacker. Mr Hacker admitted that he invited Person A to provide him with [redacted] personal Snapchat details on his personal mobile phone. Mr Hacker also accepted that he obtained/requested the telephone number of Person A. Mr Hacker was aware that Person A [redacted] and was a young person in attendance at the camp, under his supervision. Mr Hacker also accepted that the Kings Foundation guidance on ‘how to protect yourself from allegations’ prohibits members of staff from becoming ‘friends’ with any young person attending the camp, on any form of social media. The guidance further prohibits members of staff from communication with any young people attending the camp over personal mobile phones. Mr Hacker therefore accepted that he had breached this guidance in pursuit of a personal relationship with Person A. Mr Hacker admitted that he obtained the social media details and telephone number of Person A as he was attracted to [redacted] and wished to pursue a personal and sexual relationship with Person A. The panel also noted the statements from Person A and Person B, Person A’s friend, within the bundle which also stated that Mr Hacker had requested Person A’s personal snapchat details. The panel found allegation 1 proven. 2. You exchanged messages via mobile phone and/or social media with Person A in which you: a) commented upon Person A’s appearance; 8 b) suggested that you wanted to engage in sexual activity with Person A; c) arranged to meet Person A outside of working at Kings Foundation and/or drive [redacted] to or from work at Kings Foundation; d) sent a photo of a nude male to Person A. Mr Hacker admitted that he communicated with Perso