Mr Ian Bensley

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 Ian Bensley

Teacher reference number: 1236292

Teacher's date of birth: 24 September 1981

Location teacher worked: Derby, East Midlands

Date of professional conduct panel: 25 October 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 Ian Bensley, formerly employed in Derby, 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 Ian Bensley: Professional conduct panel meeting outcome Panel decision and reasons on behalf of the Secretary of State for Education October 2022 2 Contents Introduction 3 Allegations 4 Preliminary applications 5 Summary of evidence 5 Documents 5 Statement of agreed facts 5 Decision and reasons 6 Findings of fact 6 Panel’s recommendation to the Secretary of State 9 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 Ian Bensley Teacher ref number: 1236292 Teacher date of birth: 24 September 1981 TRA reference: 18418 Date of determination: 25 October 2022 Former employer: Spencer Academies Trust, Derby Introduction A professional conduct panel (‘the panel’) of the Teaching Regulation Agency (‘the TRA’) convened on 25 October 2022 by way of a virtual meeting, to consider the case of Mr Ian Bensley. The panel members were Mr Ronan Tyrer (lay panellist – in the chair), Ms Dawn Hawkins (teacher panellist) and Mr Paul Millet (lay panellist). The legal adviser to the panel was Mr Sam Haldane 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 Bensley that the allegations be considered without a hearing. Mr Bensley 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 Tamy Conn, Mr Bensley or any representative for Mr Bensley. 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 13 October 2022. It was alleged that Mr Bensley was guilty of having been convicted of a relevant offence, in that: 1. On 9 January 2020, he was convicted of making an indecent photograph or pseudo photograph of children on or around 20 March 2018 contrary to the Protection of Children Act 1978 s. 1(a); 2. On 9 January 2020, he was convicted of making an indecent photograph or pseudo photograph of children between 28 October 2011 and 05 July 2018, contrary to the Protection of Children Act 1978 s. 1(a); 3. On 9 January 2020, he was convicted of making an indecent photograph or pseudo photograph of children between 28 October 2011 and 05 July 2018 contrary to the Protection of Children Act 1978 s. 1(a); 4. On 9 January 2020, he was convicted of committing an Act of Outraging Public Decency by behaving in an indecent manner between 22 August 2015 and 01 July 2018 contrary to Common Law; 5. On 9 January 2020, he was convicted of committing an Act of Outraging Public Decency by behaving in an indecent manner between 22 August 2015 and 01 July 2018 contrary to Common Law; 6. On 9 January 2020, he was convicted of making of an indecent photograph or pseudo photograph of children between 03 July 2016 and 05 July 2018, contrary to the Protection of Children Act 1978 s. 1(a); 7. On 9 January 2020, he was convicted of making an indecent photograph or pseudo photograph of children between 03 July 2016 and 05 July 2018, contrary to the Protection of Children Act 1978 s. 1(a); 8. On 9 January 2020, he was convicted of making an indecent photograph or pseudo photograph of children between 03 July 2016 and 05 July 2018 contrary to the Protection of Children Act 1978 s. 1(a); 9. On 9 January 2020, he was convicted committing an Act of Outraging Public Decency by behaving in an indecent manner between 03 July 2016 and 05 July 2018 contrary to Common Law; 5 Mr Bensley admitted the facts of allegations 1 to 9 and that his behaviour amounted to a conviction of a relevant offence falling short of the standards of behaviour expected of a teacher, as set out in his email to the presenting officer dated 3 December 2020 and in the statement of agreed facts signed by Mr Bensley on 20 October 2021. Preliminary applications There were no preliminary applications. The panel noted that since the date of the referral to the TRA in this case, new ‘Teacher misconduct: Disciplinary procedures for the teaching profession’ were published in May 2020 (the ‘May 2020 Procedures’). The panel understands that the earlier provisions contained within the ‘Teacher misconduct: Disciplinary procedures for the teaching profession’ updated in April 2018 (the ‘April 2018 Procedures’) apply to this case, given that those provisions applied when the referral was made. Although the panel has the power to direct that the May 2020 Procedures should apply in the interests of justice or the public interest, the panel had received no representations that this should be the case. For the avoidance of doubt, therefore, the panel confirms that it has applied the April 2018 Procedures in this case. 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 1 to 2 • Section 2: Notice of referral, response and notice of meeting – pages 3 to 13A • Section 3: Statement of agreed facts and presenting officer representations – pages 14 to 24 • Section 4: Teaching Regulation Agency documents – pages 25 to 57 • Section 5: Teacher documents – pages 58 to 62 Statement of agreed facts The panel considered a statement of agreed facts which was signed by Mr Bensley on 20 October 2021. 6 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 Bensley 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 Bensley commenced employed at Spencer Academies Trust (‘the Trust’) based at Derby Moor Academy (‘the School’), on 1 September 2013. On 4 July 2018, Mr Bensley was arrested for holding indecent images of children and all his electronic devices were seized. Mr Bensley was suspended pending a police investigation and the School made a referral to the LADO. On 1 September 2018, Mr Bensley moved from the School to John Port Spencer Academy (‘John Port’). An investigatory meeting took place on 15 March 2019, although Mr Bensley did not attend. John Port held a disciplinary hearing on 2 April 2019. Mr Bensley did not attend but sent his apologies. Mr Bensley was later dismissed for gross misconduct. On 25 November 2019, Mr Bensley was convicted of 9 offences in the Southern Derbyshire magistrates’ Court. Mr Bensley was later sentenced in Derby Crown Court, on 9 January 2020. 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 9 January 2020, you were convicted of making an indecent photograph or pseudo photograph of children on or around 20 March 2018 contrary to the Protection of Children Act 1978 s. 1(a); 2. On 9 January 2020, you were convicted of making an indecent photograph or pseudo photograph of children between 28 October 2011 and 05 July 2018, contrary to the Protection of Children Act 1978 s. 1(a); 7 3. On 9 January 2020, you were convicted of making an indecent photograph or pseudo photograph of children between 28 October 2011 and 05 July 2018 contrary to the Protection of Children Act 1978 s. 1(a); 4. On 9 January 2020, you were convicted of committing an Act of Outraging Public Decency by behaving in an indecent manner between 22 August 2015 and 01 July 2018 contrary to Common Law; 5. On 9 January 2020, you were convicted of committing an Act of Outraging Public Decency by behaving in an indecent manner between 22 August 2015 and 01 July 2018 contrary to Common Law; 6. On 9 January 2020, you were convicted of making of an indecent photograph or pseudo photograph of children between 03 July 2016 and 05 July 2018, contrary to the Protection of Children Act 1978 s. 1(a); 7. On 9 January 2020, you were convicted of making an indecent photograph or pseudo photograph of children between 03 July 2016 and 05 July 2018, contrary to the Protection of Children Act 1978 s. 1(a); 8. On 9 January 2020, you were convicted of making an indecent photograph or pseudo photograph of children between 03 July 2016 and 05 July 2018 contrary to the Protection of Children Act 1978 s. 1(a); 9. On 9 January 2020, you were convicted committing an Act of Outraging Public Decency by behaving in an indecent manner between 03 July 2016 and 05 July 2018 contrary to Common Law; The panel considered the statement of agreed facts, signed by Mr Bensley on 20 October 2021. In that statement of agreed facts, Mr Bensley admitted the particulars of allegations 1 to 9. The panel noted page 8 of the Teacher misconduct: The prohibition of teachers (‘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. The panel had been provided with a copy of the certificate of conviction from Derby Crown Court, which detailed that Mr Bensley had been convicted of six counts of making indecent photographs/pseudo-photographs of a child and three counts of committing an act outraging public decency by behaving in an indecent manner. 8 In respect of the allegations, Mr Bensley was sentenced at Derby Crown Court on