Mr Craig Slater

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 Craig Slater

Teacher reference number: 19913

Teacher's date of birth: 06 February 1981

Location teacher worked: Lancashire, northern England.

Date of professional conduct panel: 12 September 2022

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 Craig Slater, formerly employed in Lancashire, northern England.

Mr Craig Slater: Professional conduct panel outcome Panel decision and reasons on behalf of the Secretary of State for Education September 2022 2 Contents Introduction 3 Allegations 4 Preliminary applications 4 Summary of evidence 5 Documents 5 Witnesses 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 12 3 Professional conduct panel decision and recommendations, and decision on behalf of the Secretary of State Teacher: Mr Craig Slater Teacher ref number: 0237226 Teacher date of birth: 6 February 1981 TRA reference: 19913 Date of determination: 12 September 2022 Former employer: Byrchall High School, Wigan Introduction A professional conduct panel (‘the panel’) of the Teaching Regulation Agency (‘the TRA’) convened on 12 September 2022 by way of a virtual hearing, to consider the case of Mr Craig Slater. The panel members were Ms Fiona McLaren (lay panellist – in the chair), Ms Joanna Hurren (teacher panellist) and Mr Duncan Tilley (lay panellist). The legal adviser to the panel was Ms Josie Beal of Birketts LLP solicitors. The presenting officer for the TRA was Ms Kiera Riddy of Browne Jacobson LLP solicitors. Mr Slater was not present and was not represented. The hearing took place by way of a virtual hearing in public and was recorded. 4 Allegations The panel considered the allegations set out in the notice of hearing dated 3 May 2022. It was alleged that Mr Slater was guilty of having been convicted, at any time, of a relevant offence, in that: 1. He was convicted on his guilty pleas and sentenced to a term of five years and three months imprisonment in respect of the following offences: a) five counts of sexual activity with a child; b) three counts of making indecent images of a child; c) engaging in sexual communication with a child; d) inciting a child to watch sexual activity; and e) inciting a child to engage in sexual activity. Mr Slater admitted to the facts of allegation 1(a)-(e) in his response to the notice of hearing dated 20 August 2022 and in a letter to the TRA dated 20 August 2022. Further, Mr Slater admitted that those facts amounted to a conviction of a relevant offence. Preliminary applications Application to proceed in the absence of the teacher Mr Slater was not present at the hearing nor was he represented. The presenting officer made an application to proceed in the absence of Mr Slater. The panel accepted the legal advice provided in relation to this application and took account of the various factors referred to it, as derived from the guidance set down in the case of R v Jones [2003] 1 AC 1 (as considered and applied in subsequent cases, particularly GMC v Adeogba). The panel was satisfied that the notice of hearing had been sent to Mr Slater in accordance with the Teacher misconduct: Disciplinary procedures for the teaching profession May 2020 (the ‘Procedures’). The panel concluded that Mr Slater’s absence was voluntary and that he was aware that the matter would proceed in his absence. This was apparent from Mr Slater’s letter to the TRA dated 20 August 2022 in which he confirmed that he voluntarily waived his right to attend the hearing; was content for the panel to make a decision in his absence; and that he understood that the findings may lead to a prohibition order. 5 The panel noted that Mr Slater had not sought an adjournment to the hearing and the panel did not consider that an adjournment would procure his attendance at a hearing. There was no medical evidence before the panel that Mr Slater was unfit to attend the hearing. The panel considered that it was in the public interest for the hearing to take place. Having decided that it was appropriate to proceed, the panel agreed to seek to ensure that the proceedings wer e as fair as possible in the circumstances, bearing in mind that Mr Slater was neither present nor represented. Summary of evidence Documents In advance of the hearing, the panel received a bundle of documents which included: • Section 1: Notice of hearing and response to notice of hearing – pages 4 to 16 • Section 2: Teaching Regulation Agency documents – pages 18 to 55 • Section 3: Teacher documents – pages 57 to 73 The panel members confirmed that they had read all of the documents within the bundle, in advance of the hearing. Witnesses No witnesses were called to give oral evidence at the hearing. 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 Slater commenced employment as an ICT teacher at Byrchall High School (‘the School’) on 1 September 2003. On 31 October 2019, the Sexual Crime Unit executed a warrant at an address in Wigan. A mobile phone was seized from a 15 year old boy. The phone was later examined and WhatsApp messages were recovered that were sexual in nature, contained sexual images and suggested that Mr Slater and the boy had engaged in sexual contact. 6 On 28 May 2020, the boy disclosed that he had sexual intercourse with Mr Slater. The boy stated that Mr Slater was aware of his age. He explained that he met Mr Slater on an adult dating application, Grinder, and had initially told Mr Slater that he was 16 years old, however he later admitted to Mr Slater that he was, in fact, 15 years old. Notwithstanding this, the boy and Mr Slater met on at least 6 occasions. Mr Slater was arrested on 28 May 2020 and was later charged. He was sentenced at Bolton Crown Court on 23 April 2021, in respect of multiple offences involving: sexual activity with a child, sexual communication with a child, making/possessing indecent images of a child, inciting a child to watch sexual activity and inciting a child to engage in sexual activity. Findings of fact The findings of fact are as follows: The panel found the following particulars of the allegations against you proved: 1. You were convicted on your guilty pleas and sentenced to a term of five years and three months imprisonment in respect of the following offences: a) five counts of sexual activity with a child; b) three counts of making indecent images of a child; c) engaging in sexual communication with a child; d) inciting a child to watch sexual activity; and e) inciting a child to engage in sexual activity. The reasons for these findings are set out below. The panel noted that, within the response to the notice of hearing signed by Mr Slater on 20 August 2022 and in a letter to the TRA dated 20 August 2022, Mr Slater admitted to the facts of allegations 1(a)-(e). Further, Mr Slater admitted that those admitted facts amounted to a conviction of a relevant offence. Notwithstanding this, the panel made a determination based on the evidence available to it. The panel noted page 8 of the Advice which states that where there has been a conviction at any time of a criminal offence, the panel will accept the certificate of conviction as conclusive proof of both the conviction and the facts necessarily implied by the conviction, unless exceptional circumstances apply. The panel did not find that any exceptional circumstances applied in this case. 7 The panel had been provided with a copy of the certificate of conviction from Bolton Crown Court, which detailed that Mr Slater had been convicted of five counts of sexual activity with a child, three counts of making indecent images of a child, engaging in sexual communication with a child, inciting a child to watch sexual activity and inciting a child to engage in sexual activity. The panel specifically noted the certificate of conviction stated that Mr Slater had been convicted upon his own confession. In respect of the allegations, Mr Slater was sentenced at Bolton Crown Court on 23 April 2021 to 63 months imprisonment to run concurrent ly. In addition, he was placed on the Sex Offenders Register and made subject to a forfeiture order. The panel found all of the allegations proven. 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. 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 was satisfied that the conduct of Mr Slater, in relation to the facts it found proved, involved breaches of the Teachers’ Standards. The panel considered that by reference to Part 2, Mr Slater 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, building relationships rooted in mutual respect, and at all times observing proper boundaries appropriate to a teacher’s professional position o having regard for the need to safeguard pupils’ well-being, in accordance with statutory provisions • Teachers must have an understanding of, and always act within, the statutory frameworks which set out their professional duties and responsibilities. The panel noted that Mr Slater’s conduct took place outside of the education setting and did not involve pupils or colleagues at the School. However, a pupil at another school was involved. The panel was therefore satisfied that Mr Slater’s behaviour was relevant to teaching, working with children and working in an education setting. The panel concluded that Mr Slater’s behaviour was likely to have had an impact on the safety and/or security of pupils and/or members of the public. 8 The panel also took account of the way the teaching profession is viewed by others. The panel considered that Mr Slater’s behaviour in committing t