Mr John Lane

The Secretary of State does not make these decisions themself. They are made by a senior official on the recommendation of an independent panel.

Teacher's name: Mr John Lane

Teacher reference number: 0261581

Teacher's date of birth: 19 October 1974

Location teacher worked: Redcar and Cleveland, north east England

Date of professional conduct panel: 14 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 John Lane, formerly employed in Redcar and Cleveland, north 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 John Lane: Professional conduct panel meeting 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 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 Teacher: Mr John Lane Teacher ref number: 0261581 Teacher date of birth: 19 October 1974 TRA reference: 19366 Date of determination: 14 September 2022 Former employer: Education Plus North East, Redcar and Cleveland Introduction A professional conduct panel (‘the panel’) of the Teaching Regulation Agency (‘the TRA’) convened on 14 September 2022 by way of a virtual meeting, to consider the case of Mr John Lane. The panel members were Ms Penny Griffith (lay panellist – in the chair), Mr Clive Sentance (teacher panellist) and Mr Gamel Byles (teacher panellist). The legal adviser to the panel was Ms Lucy Churchill 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 Lane that the allegation be considered without a hearing. Mr Lane provided a signed statement of agreed facts and admitted to a conviction of a relevant offence. The panel considered the case at a meeting without the attendance of the presenting officer, Ms Louise Ravenscroft of Capsticks LLP, Mr Lane or any representative for Mr Lane. The meeting took place in private by way of a virtual meeting. 4 Allegations The panel considered the allegation set out in the notice of meeting dated 1 September 2022. It was alleged that Mr Lane was guilty of having been convicted of a relevant offence, in that: 1. On 13 June 2020, he was convicted at County Durham and Darlington Magistrates Court of one count of Attempt/Engage in Sexual Communication with a child on 11 June 2020, contrary to the Sexual Offences Act 2003. Mr Lane admitted the facts of allegation 1 and that his behaviour amounted to a conviction of a relevant offence, as set out in the undated statement of agreed facts signed by Mr Lane. 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 5 • Section 2: Notice of referral, response and notice of meeting – pages 6 to 23 • Section 3: Statement of agreed facts and presenting officer representations – pages 24 to 29 • Section 4: Teaching Regulation Agency documents – pages 30 to 80 • Section 5: Teacher documents – none provided 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 an undated statement of agreed facts which was signed by Mr Lane. 5 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 Lane for the allegation 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 Lane worked as a teacher at Education Plus North East (‘the School’) from 1 September 2018. Mr Lane was issued with a termination of employment letter by the School dated 12 June 2020 and his dismissal took effect on 11 July 2020. On 11 June 2020, the School was made aware of a public Facebook video that had been posted. The video was recorded and posted by an online paedophile hunting group, known as “Cost Child Safety Team” (‘the Group’). The video appeared to show the Group confronting Mr Lane at his home address and of him having engaged in sexualised communication with a child he believed to be 15 years old. On 11 June 2020, the School reported the video to Durham Constabulary, confirming the identity of Mr Lane and providing them with the details of his home address. Mr Lane was subsequently arrested. Mr Lane appeared before the County Durham and Darlington Magistrates Court on 13 June 2020 and was convicted of one count of attempt/engage in sexual communication with a child, contrary to the Sexual Offences Act 2003 (‘the offence’). Mr Lane pleaded guilty to the offence. The matter was referred to the TRA on 23 June 2020. Findings of fact The findings of fact are as follows: The panel found the following particulars of the allegation against you proved, for these reasons: 1. On 13 June 2020, you were convicted at County Durham and Darlington Magistrates Court of one count of Attempt/Engage in Sexual Communication with a child on 11 June 2020, contrary to the Sexual Offences Act 2003. The panel considered the undated statement of agreed facts signed by Mr Lane. In that statement of agreed facts, Mr Lane admitted the particulars of allegation 1. Further, Mr Lane admitted that the facts of the allegation amounted to a conviction of a relevant offence. 6 The panel noted page 8 of Teacher misconduct: The prohibition of teachers, referred to as ‘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 Durham Crown Court, which detailed that Mr Lane had been convicted of one count of adult attempt to engage in sexual communication with a child. In respect of the allegation, Mr Lane was sentenced at Durham Crown Court on 13 June 2020 to 6 months imprisonment suspended for 24 months. In addition, he was: • made subject to a Sexual Harm Prevention Order for a period of 7 years; • required to sign the sex offenders register for 7 years; • ordered to pay a victim surcharge of £128; and • ordered to take part in a rehabilitation activity requirement as directed for a maximum of 30 days. On examination of the documents contained in the bundle, the panel was satisfied that the facts of allegation 1 were proved. Findings as to conviction of a relevant offence Having found the allegation 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 Advice. The panel was satisfied that the conduct of Mr Lane, in relation to the facts it found proved, involved breaches of the Teachers’ Standards. The panel considered that by reference to Part 2, Mr Lane 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 7 o not undermining fundamental British values, including the rule of law, • 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 Lane’s actions might have taken place outside of the education setting, in that it was unclear from the evidence before it whether his communication with an individual he believed to be a child took place during the course of his teaching duties and/or whether the individual was a pupil of the School. However, the panel considered Mr Lane’s actions touched upon his profession as a teacher, as he believed he was engaging in sexual communication with a child, and therefore he posed a risk to children of school age. The panel noted that the behaviour involved in committing the offence could have had an impact on the safety or security of pupils, and was contrary to the standard of personal and professional conduct expected of teachers, which would affect his suitability to work with children in an education setting. The panel also took account of the way the teaching profession is viewed by others. The panel considered that Mr Lane’s behaviour in committing the offence was likely to affect public confidence in the teaching profession, given the influence that teachers may have on pupils, parents and others in the community. The panel noted that Mr Lane’s behaviour ultimately led to a sentence of imprisonment, (albeit that it was suspended), which was indicative of the seriousness of the offences committed. This was a case involving an offence of sexual communication with a child, which the Advice states is more likely to be considered as a relevant offence. The panel noted Mr Lane did not provide any documentation for the panel to consider as part of its deliberations and the panel was not made aware of any mitigating circumstances of the offence. The panel noted that it appeared to be an isolated incident, although serious in nature. The panel considered that the seriousness of the offending behaviour that led to the conviction was relevant to Mr Lane’s ongoing suitability to teach. In all the circumstances, the panel found that this conviction was for a relevant offence.