Mr Christopher North

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 North

Teacher reference number: 0667563

Teacher's date of birth: 19 October 1983

Location teacher worked: London, England

Date of professional conduct panel: 10 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 North formerly employed in London, 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 North: Professional conduct panel meeting 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 4 Documents 4 Statement of agreed facts 4 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 10 3 Professional conduct panel decision and recommendations, and decision on behalf of the Secretary of State Te acher: Mr Christopher North Teacher ref number: 0667563 Teacher date of birth: 19 October 1983 TRA reference: 0020687 Date of determination: 10 October 2023 Former employer: The Hall School, London Introduction A professional conduct panel (“the panel”) of the Teaching Regulation Agency (“the TRA”) convened virtually on 10 October 2023, to consider the case of Mr Christopher North. The panel members were Mr Duncan Tilley (lay panellist – in the chair), Ms Julia Hyde (teacher panellist) and Ms Sue Davies (lay panellist). The legal adviser to the panel was Ms Claire Watson 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 North that the allegations be considered without a hearing. Mr North 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 North. The meeting took place in private. 4 Allegations The panel considered the allegations set out in the notice of meeting dated 14 September 2023. It was alleged that Mr Christopher North was guilty of having been convicted of a relevant offence, in that: 1. On or around 31 May 2022, he was convicted of: a. three counts of making an indecent photograph or pseudo-photograph of a child b. Possessing a controlled drug (Class A – Cocaine) Mr North admitted the facts of the allegations and 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, anonymised pupil list and list of key people – pages 3 to 4 Section 2: Notice of referral, response and notice of meeting – pages 5 to 12 Section 3: Statement of agreed facts – pages 13 to 17 Section 4: Teaching Regulation Agency documents – pages 18 to 96 Section 5: Teacher documents – page 97 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 Christopher North on 4 August 2023. 5 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 Christopher North 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 Christopher North had been employed as the head of computing and digital learning at The Hall School (‘the School’) between 1 September 2015 and 16 March 2022. On 16 March 2022, Mr North was arrested by police. Mr North pleaded guilty to 3 counts of making an indecent photograph or pseudo-photograph of a child and one count of possession of a Class A drug. 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 or around 31 May 2022, you were convicted of: a. three counts of making an indecent photograph or pseudo- photograph of a child b. Possessing a controlled drug (Class A – Cocaine) The allegations were admitted and were supported by evidence presented to the panel within the bundle. In the signed statement of agreed facts presented to the panel, Mr North admitted to making 2 still Category A indecent images of a child, 7 still Category B indecent images of a child and 4 still Category C indecent images of a child. It was noted in the transcript of the sentencing hearing included within the bundle that none of the images for which Mr North appeared before the court were images of pupils at the School but were stills which had been downloaded from the internet. The panel was presented with a certificate of conviction from Snaresbrook Crown Court dated 31 May 2022. The panel accepted the certificate of conviction contained within the bundle as conclusive proof of the conviction and the facts necessarily implied by the conviction. 6 Mr North had pleaded guilty to the offences. In relation to allegation 1a, the panel had sight of the transcript of the sentencing hearing at which Mr North was sentenced on 31 May 2022 to: • three sentences of imprisonment running concurrently, the longest being 12 months imprisonment. All 3 sentences were suspended for 24 months; • Sexual Harm Prevention Order for a period of 10 years; • Sex Offenders Register for 10 years; • Rehabilitation activity requirements; • Curfew requirements. In relation to allegation 1b, the panel had sight of the transcript of the sentencing hearing at which Mr North was sentenced on 31 May 2022 to pay a fine of £200 or in default to serve 14 days imprisonment. The allegations were therefore, found proved. Findings as to conviction of a relevant offence Having found the allegations proved, the panel went on to consider whether the facts of those proved allegations amounted to a conviction of a relevant offence. The panel was satisfied that the conduct of Mr North, in relation to the facts it found proved, involved breaches of the Teachers’ Standards. The panel considered that by reference to Part 2, Mr North 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 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. Although there was no evidence that Mr North had failed to safeguard pupils at the School, the panel noted that the indecent photographs were of children who would likely have been pupils somewhere. The panel noted that the individual’s actions were relevant to teaching, working with children and working in an education setting. Although the indecent photographs were not of pupils at the School, the panel noted that the conviction related to making indecent 7 photographs or pseudo-photographs of a child considered to be of secondary school age. Mr North was in a position of trust and responsibility as head of computing and digital learning at the School. He had a duty to act as a role model and the panel considered that his actions fell far short of the standard of behaviour expected of a teacher. The panel noted that the behaviour involved in committing the offence would have been likely to have had an impact on the safety or security of pupils or members of the public. Although there was no suggestion that harm had been caused to pupils at the School, the panel noted that the photographs were of children considered to be of secondary school age. As mentioned in the transcript of the sentencing hearing, each child in the photographs was a real child to whom harm was caused. The panel also took account of the way the teaching profession is viewed by others. The panel considered that Mr North’s behaviour in committing the offence would be likely to affect public confidence in the teaching profession, if Mr North was allowed to continue teaching. The panel noted that Mr North’s behaviour ultimately led to sentences of imprisonment, (albeit that they were suspended), 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 viewing, making, or possessing any indecent photograph or image or indecent pseudo photograph or image of a child, or permitting any such activity, including one-off incidents and possession (including for personal use) of any class A drugs. The Advice indicates that a conviction for any offence that relates to or involves such offences is likely to be considered “a relevant offence”. In relation to the gravity of the offences, the panel considered these to be very serious offences. The panel was not aware of any mitigating circumstances in relation to the commission of the offences. Although the panel found that the evidence of Mr North’s teaching proficiency was of note, the panel also found that the seriousness of the offending behaviour that led to the conviction was relevant to Mr North’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 necessary for the panel to go on to consider whether it would be appropriate to recommend