Mr Christopher John Taylor

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 Christopher John Taylor

Teacher reference number: 2248772

Teacher's date of birth: 30 October 1978

Location teacher worked: Oxfordshire, South East England

Date of professional conduct panel: 6 October 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 Christopher John Taylor  formerly employed in Oxfordshire, 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 Christopher John Taylor: Professional conduct panel outcome Panel decision and reasons on behalf of the Secretary of State for Education October 2023 2 Contents Introduction 3 Allegations 4 Preliminary applications 4 Summary of evidence 5 Documents 5 Witnesses 6 Decision and reasons 6 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 Christopher John Taylor Teacher ref number: 2248772 Teacher date of birth: 30 October 1978 TRA reference: 20712 Date of determination: 6 October 2023 Former employer: Lord Williams’s School, Oxfordshire Introduction A professional conduct panel (“the panel”) of the Teaching Regulation Agency (“the TRA”) convened virtually on 14 and 15 August 2023 and 6 October 2023 to consider the case of Mr Taylor. The panel members were Mrs Shabana Robertson (lay panellist – in the chair), Ms Penny Griffith (lay panellist) and Mr Francis Murphy (teacher panellist). The legal adviser to the panel was Mr Ben Schofield of Blake Morgan LLP. The presenting officer for the TRA was Miss Leila Chaker instructed by Kingsley Napley LLP. Mr Taylor was present and was represented by Ms Wendy Hewitt, instructed by Richard Nelson LLP. The hearing took place in public and was recorded. 4 Allegations The panel considered the allegations set out in the notice of hearing dated 1 June 2023. It was alleged that Mr Taylor was guilty of unacceptable professional conduct and/or conduct that may bring the profession into disrepute, in that whilst working as a teacher at Lord Williams’s School: 1. On 25 March 2022, at the Birdcage pub you acted inappropriately towards Pupil 1 in that: a. You put your arms around Pupil 1’s waist on one or more occasions; and/or b. You acted aggressively towards Pupil 1 during conversations. 2. On 25 March 2022, at the Birdcage pub you acted inappropriately towards Pupil 3 in that you put your arm around her shoulder. 3. Between January and March 2022, you made inappropriate comments to Pupil 2 which included: a. “I would give you the world, you’re my favourite student” or words to that effect; and/or b. “I would invite you to the pub with me” or words to that effect; and/or c. “I’d invite you to a party if I ever had one” or words to that effect; and/or d. “What pubs do you guys go to in Thame?” or words to that effect; and/or e. “Don’t worry about being late, I don’t mind waiting for you, you’re my favourite” or words to that effect. 4. On or around 30 March 2022 you sent threatening and/or offensive messages to Colleague A, which included: a. “Cocksucker”; and/or b. “Lying fucker”; and/or c. “Good luck you lying sack of shit”; and/or d. “Ill see you tomorrow buddy [thumbs up emoji] trust me if you fuck me over ill ruin your life…I have many friends” Preliminary applications 5 Application for Special Measures The TRA made an application for Pupil 2 to be virtually screened from Mr Taylor in the course of giving her evidence and to be accompanied by her father. The application was not opposed by Ms Hewitt. The panel granted the application. Application to admit late evidence Ms Hewitt made an application to admit a 29-page bundle at the start of the hearing. This bundle included Mr Taylor’s witness statement and supporting documents. Ms Hewitt explained that Mr Taylor had not until very recently been legally represented in these proceedings and the documents had been prepared as soon as possible once instructions were received. Ms Chaker did not oppose the application. The panel considered the documents would be relevant and in the absence of any objection from the TRA, could not identify any unfairness in admitting the documents and therefore granted the application. Application to amend the allegation Ms Chaker made an application to amend allegation 1a. The application was to amend the word ‘arms’ to ‘arm(s)’. This would leave the allegation open to the panel to either make a finding that one or both of Mr Taylor’s arms being around the pupil’s waist, which was an issue in the case. The application was not opposed by Ms Hewitt. The panel granted the application. Summary of evidence Documents In advance of the hearing, the panel received a bundle of documents which included: Section 1: Index, chronology and anonymised pupil list – pages 1 to 7 Section 2: Notice of hearing and response – pages 8 to 11 Section 3: Teaching Regulation Agency witness statements – pages 12 to 13 Section 4: Teaching Regulation Agency documents – pages 14 to 220 In addition, the panel agreed to accept the following: Teacher’s bundle of documents consisting of 23 pages. 6 The panel members confirmed that they had read all of the documents within the bundle, in advance of the hearing and the additional documents that the panel decided to admit. Witnesses The panel heard oral evidence from the following witnesses called by the TRA:  Pupil 2 ([redacted]) The pane l heard oral evidence from the following witnesses called by Mr Taylor:  Mr Christopher Taylor (the Teacher) Decision and reasons The panel announced its decision and reasons as follows: The panel carefully considered the case before it and reached a decision. Mr Taylor took up a maternity cover position at Lord Williams School (the “School”) at the beginning of January 2022. He was a teacher in business studies. On the evening of 25 March 2022, Mr Taylor attended the Birdcage pub in Thane. A video clip purporting to show Mr Taylor with his arms around Pupil 1 began to be circulated around the school community. On 27 March 2022, the School’s Designated Safeguarding Lead (DSL) was informed of the video by a parent and also by another member of staff from the School. An investigation was started by the agency that employed Mr Taylor. As part of that process, Colleague A interviewed a number of witnesses including Mr Taylor. On 31 March 2022, Mr Taylor informed the agency that he was leaving. The following day the agency made a referral to the TRA, which has resulted in this hearing. Findings of fact The findings of fact are as follows: The panel found the following particulars of the allegation(s) against you proved, for these reasons: 1. On 25 March 2022, at the Birdcage pub you acted inappropriately towards Pupil 1 in that: a. You put your arm(s) around Pupil 1’s waist on one or more occasions; 7 In a signed statement taken by the School on 28 March 2022, Pupil 1 stated that she went to the Birdcage pub over the weekend with Pupil 3 and Pupil 4 and saw that Mr Taylor was also in the pub. Pupil 1 further stated that Mr Taylor came over to speak to Pupil 3, during this interaction she made a joke about ‘BTEC not being proper A Levels’ and that Mr Taylor got very upset about it. Pupil 1 further stated that during the evening, Mr Taylor repeatedly said to her and Pupil 3 that “I’m not your teacher, you’re not my student”. Pupil 1 stated that Mr Taylor came over to her and that was when the Snapchat video was recorded by another pupil. Mr Taylor admitted this allegation, in so far as it applied to having his right arm around Pupil 1. Mr Taylor explained in his evidence that he moved to England in January 2022 and this was his first teaching post in the UK. In February 2022, Mr Taylor suffered a serious sporting injury [redacted]. On 25 March 2022, Mr Taylor went to the Birdcage pub. Mr Taylor stated this was the first time he had been out since the injury. He saw Pupil 1 and was speaking with her. As the environment was loud, he moved in closer. As he still needed the support of crutches, he accepted putting his arm around Pupil 1’s waist. He accepted it was inappropriate for teacher to be in such physical contact with a pupil. Before the panel was video footage taken by another pupil who was present at the pub on 25 March 2022. It was a short clip approximately 2 seconds in length and was focused on 2 people. One was a male with the right-hand side of his back to the camera. The male was close to a young female who was facing the camera. The male could be seen to be using a crutch and clearly had his right arm around the waist of the young female. What was not immediately clear on the footage was whether the male’s left arm was also around the female’s waist. The clip contained an overlaid caption which read “Taylor WTF”. There was no dispute between the parties that the male in the footage was Mr Taylor and the young female was Pupil 1. The panel was satisfied Mr Taylor’s admission was unequivocal and consistent with the surrounding evidence and therefore found this allegation proved. Following the earlier application to amend this allegation, the panel was required to resolve whether Mr Taylor had one or both arms around Pupil 1’s waist. The panel was not able to resolve from the video evidence whether Mr Taylor also had his left arm around Pupil 1. Mr Taylor accepted in his evidence he could be seen with his right arm around Pupil 1’s waist. He denied that his left arm was around her waist. Pupil 2 was not present at the pub that evening, so could not assist the panel on this point. On this evidence the panel could not be satisfied that it was more likely than not that Mr Taylor’s left arm was around Pupil 1’s waist. The panel’s finding in relation to this sub-allegation is only in so far as Mr Taylor placing his right arm around Pupil 1’s waist. 8 and/or b. You acted aggressively towards Pupil 1 during conversations. The TRA offered no evidence in regard to allegation 1b. Therefore, the panel found this sub-allegation not proved. 2. On 25 March 2022, at the Birdcage pub you acted inappropriately towards Pupil 3 in that you put your arm around her s