Mr James Ndungu

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 James Ndungu

Teacher reference number: 0442985

Teacher's date of birth: 17 September 1975

Location teacher worked: Worcester, West Midlands

Date of professional conduct panel: 12 June 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 James Ndungu, formerly employed in Worcester, West 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 James Ndungu Professional conduct panel meeting outcome Panel decision and reasons on behalf of the Secretary of State for Education June 2023 2 Contents Introduction 3 Allegations 4 Preliminary applications 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 11 3 Professional conduct panel decision and recommendations, and decision on behalf of the Secretary of State Teacher: Mr James Ndungu Teacher ref number: 0442985 Teacher date of birth: 17 September 1975 TRA reference: 19836 Date of determination: 12 June 2023 Former employer: Blessed Edward Oldcorne Catholic School, Worcester. Introduction A professional conduct panel (“the panel”) of the Teaching Regulation Agency (“the TRA”) convened by virtual means, to consider the case of Mr James Ndungu. The panel members were Mr Martyn Stephens (lay panellist – in the chair), Ms Jackie Hutchings (teacher panellist) and Mr Adrian Meadows (teacher panellist). The legal adviser to the panel was Mrs Luisa Gibbons 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 Ndungu that the allegations be considered without a hearing. Mr Ndungu 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 of Kingsley Napley LLP or Mr Ndungu. The meeting took place in private. 4 Allegations The panel considered the allegations set out in the notice of meeting dated 8 March 2023 It was alleged that Mr Ndungu was guilty of having been convicted of a relevant offence, in that: 1. On 17 August 2021, he was convicted of two counts of attempting to engage in sexual communication with a child contrary to the Sexual Offences Act 2003 s 15A (1); 2. On 17 August 2021, he was convicted of arranging/facilitating the commission of a child sex offence contrary to the Sexual Offences Act 2003 s14. Mr Ndungu admitted both the facts alleged and that he was guilty of having been convicted 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 and list of key people - pages 1 to 2 Section 2: Notice of referral, response and notice of meeting pages 3 to 9 Section 3: Statement of agreed facts and presenting officer representations – pages 10 to 14 Section 4: Teaching Regulation Agency documents – pages 15 to 105 Section 5: Teacher documents – pages 106 to 107 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 Ndungu on 10 August 2022 by adding his typed name to the document. The panel has seen an email from Mr Ndungu to the presenting officer returning the “signed” statement of agreed facts on the same date. 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 Ndungu 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 Ndungu was employed as a teacher of religious education at Blessed Edward Oldcorne Catholic College (“the College”) from 1 September 2005. Mr Ndungu was arrested on 11 October 2020. He was suspended from his role on 21 October 2020 and resigned on 22 February 2021. 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 17 August 2021, you were convicted of two counts of attempting to engage in sexual communication with a child contrary to the Sexual Offences Act 2003 s 15A (1); 2. On 17 August 2021, you were convicted of arranging/facilitating the commission of a child sex offence contrary to the Sexual Offences Act 2003 s14. In response to the notice of referral form dated 23 April 2022, Mr Ndungu confirmed that he admitted the allegations against him. In the statement of agreed facts Mr Ndungu also admitted the above allegations. In the statement of agreed facts, Mr Ndungu confirmed that he had set up a profile “blackteacheruk” on a chat site, and began communicating with someone on 5 October 2020 who told him that she was 14. Mr Ndungu admitted that he responded “am okay with ur age”. He admitted that he exchanged messages with the person stating “Are u horny” and “Are u feeling sexual”. He admitted that he also communicated with the person using WhatsApp. He admitted that other messages were sent to the person asking about her sexual arousal and suggesting that he wanted to touch her nipples. In response to the person stating that nobody knew that she was chatting with him, Mr Ndungu admitted that he responded “It is our secret” and when asked why, he replied “Ur under 16 and am older”. 6 In the statement of agreed facts, Mr Ndungu admitted that he asked the person to attend his house and stay the night. The panel has seen the certificate of conviction confirming that Mr Ndungu was convicted on 17 August 2021 of the offences as alleged. The panel accepted the certificate of conviction as conclusive proof of both the convictions and the facts necessarily implied by the convictions. The panel also saw the police national computer print out which confirmed that for the offence of arranging/ facilitating the commission of a child sex offence, Mr Ndungu was sentenced to 15 months imprisonment, suspended for 24 months, ordered to be placed on the barring list, a rehabilitation activity requirement of 25 days, an unpaid work requirement of 200 hours, a sexual harm prevention order of 10 years, a sex offenders notice of 10 years, costs of £300 and a victim surcharge of £156. For each of the two offences of attempting to engage in sexual communications with a child, Mr Ndungu received a 10 month sentence of imprisonment, suspended for 24 months, to be served concurrently. 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 having been convicted 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 Ndungu in relation to the facts it found proved, involved breaches of the Teachers’ Standards. The panel considered that by reference to Part 2, Mr Ndungu 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 proper and professional regard for the ethos, policies and practices of the school in which they teach, and maintain high standards in their own attendance and punctuality. Teachers must have an understanding of, and always act within, the statutory frameworks which set out their professional duties and responsibilities. 7 The panel noted that the individual’s actions were relevant to teaching, working with children and working in an education setting, since they indicated that Mr Ndungu had a sexual interest in children. The panel noted that, had the person that Mr Ndungu communicated with been of the age that Mr Ndungu believed (the person was actually a decoy posing as a child), the behaviour involved in committing the offence would have been likely to have had an impact on the safety of that person. The panel also took account of the way the teaching profession is viewed by others. The panel considered that Mr Ndungu’s behaviour in committing the offence would be likely to affect public confidence in the teaching profession, if Mr Ndungu was allowed to continue teaching. The panel noted that Mr Ndungu’s behaviour ultimately led to a sentence of imprisonment, (albeit that it was 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 sexual communication with a child. The Advice indicates that a conviction for any offence that relates to or involves such offences is likely to be considered “a relevant offence”. The panel regarded Mr Ndungu’s offences to be serious. He not only engaged in sexual communication with a person he believed to be a child but went on to seek to meet with her. This would have placed a child at significant risk of harm. The panel took into account that Mr Ndungu had taught at the School for 15 years without any previous issues during his employment. Although the panel found that the duration of Mr Ndungu’s teaching experience was of note, the panel also found that the seriousness of the offending behaviour that led to the conviction was relevant to Mr Ndungu’s fitness to be a teacher. The panel considere