Mr Juan Torrecillas-Molina

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 Juan Torrecillas-Molina

Teacher reference number: 0742693

Teacher's date of birth: 20 May 1968

Location teacher worked: Merseyside, North West England

Date of professional conduct panel: 16 June 2025

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 Juan Torrecillas-Molina formerly employed in Merseyside, North West 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 Juan Torrecillas- Molina: Professional conduct panel outcome Panel decision and reasons on behalf of the Secretary of State for Education June 2025 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 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 Juan Torrecillas-Molina Teacher ref number: 0742693 Teacher date of birth: 20 May 1968 TRA reference: 23692 Date of determination: 16 June 2025 Former employer: St Anselm’s College, Wirral Introduction A professional conduct panel (“the panel”) of the Teaching Regulation Agency (“the TRA”) convened on 16 June 2025 by way of a virtual hearing, to consider the case of Mr Juan Torrecillas-Molina. The panel members were Mr Peter Whitelock (lay panellist – in the chair), Mrs Julie Wells (teacher panellist) and Ms Geraldine Baird (lay panellist). The legal adviser to the panel was Mrs Samantha Cass of Birketts LLP solicitors. The presenting officer for the TRA was Mr James Lloyd of Mountford Chambers, instructed by Brabners LLP solicitors. Mr Torrecillas-Molina was not present and was not represented. The hearing took place in public and was recorded. 4 Allegations The panel considered the allegations set out in the notice of hearing dated 12 February 2025. It was alleged that Mr Torrecillas-Molina was guilty of having been convicted of a relevant offence, in that: 1. On 27 February 2024, he was convicted at Merseyside Magistrates Court of: a) Between 30 April 2011 and 7 June 2023 making 3 Category B indecent photographs/pseudo-photographs of a child contrary to section 1(a) of the Protection of Children Act 1978; b) Between 30 April 2011 and 7 June 2023 making 3 Category C indecent photographs/pseudo-photographs of a child contrary to section 1(a) of the Protection of Children Act 1978; c) Between 30 April 2011 and 7 June 2023 making 36 Category A indecent photographs/ pseudo-photographs of a child contrary to section 1(a) of the Protection of Children Act 1978; d) Between 20 April 2011 and 7 June 2023 possessing 42 indecent photographs of a child contrary to section 160 of the Criminal Justice Act 1988. Mr Torrecillas-Molina made no admission of fact prior to the hearing. Preliminary applications Application to proceed in the absence of the teacher The panel considered an application from the presenting officer to proceed in the absence of Mr Torrecillas-Molina. The panel noted that the notice of hearing was delivered to Mr Torrecillas-Molina on 12 February 2025 and a reminder was sent on 14 March 2025. Mr Torrecillas-Molina acknowledged receipt of the notice of hearing by email on 18 March 2025. The presenting officer provided evidence to confirm that Mr Torrecillas-Molina was aware of the allegations and had voluntarily chosen not to participate in the hearing and had waived his right to legal representation. The panel noted email correspondence from Mr Torrecillas-Molina as recently as 18 March 2025 confirming his intention to not attend the hearing. 5 The panel was satisfied that Mr Torrecillas-Molina was aware of the allegations and the listed hearing, and an adjournment of the hearing would not result in his attendance. The panel also took account of the public interest considerations to deal with the hearing within a reasonable period of time and the adverse effect an adjournment could have on the regulator and on Mr Torrecillas-Molina who had indicated that he did not intend to attend the hearing. The panel was satisfied that Mr Torrecillas-Molina received the notice of hearing and associated documentation in good time and had the opportunity to engage with the process. The panel decided therefore to proceed in the absence of Mr Torrecillas-Molina. Summary of evidence Documents In advance of the hearing, the panel received a bundle of documents which included: Section 1: Pleadings – pages 3 to 36 Section 2: Teaching Regulation Agency documents – pages 37 to 86 The panel members confirmed that they had read all of the documents within the bundle, in advance of the hearing. In the consideration of this case, the panel had regard to the document Teacher misconduct: Disciplinary procedures for the teaching profession May 2020 (the “Procedures”). Witnesses The TRA did not call any witnesses to give oral evidence at the hearing. Mr Torrecillas-Molina was not present and did not give 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 Torrecillas-Molina was charged with the offences as set out above and was subsequently convicted of the offences on 27 February 2024. 6 Mr Torrecillas-Molina was sentenced in respect of the offences on the 26 March 2024 at Liverpool Crown Court. The matter was referred to the TRA on 10 May 2024. 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 27 February 2024, you were convicted at Merseyside Magistrates Court of: a) Between 30 April 2011 and 7 June 2023 making 3 Category B indecent photographs/pseudo-photographs of a child contrary to section 1(a) of the Protection of Children Act 1978; b) Between 30 April 2011 and 7 June 2023 making 3 Category C indecent photographs/pseudo-photographs of a child contrary to section 1(a) of the Protection of Children Act 1978; c) Between 30 April 2011 and 7 June 2023 making 36 Category A indecent photographs/ pseudo-photographs of a child contrary to section 1(a) of the Protection of Children Act 1978; d) Between 20 April 2011 and 7 June 2023 possessing 42 indecent photographs of a child contrary to section 160 of the Criminal Justice Act 1988. 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 Liverpool Crown Court, which detailed that Mr Torrecillas-Molina pleaded guilty and was convicted on 27 February 2024 of the following offences: • Between 30 April 2011 and 7 June 2023 making 3 Category B indecent photographs/pseudo-photographs of a child contrary to section 1(a) of the Protection of Children Act 1978; 7 • Between 30 April 2011 and 7 June 2023 making 3 Category C indecent photographs/pseudo-photographs of a child contrary to section 1(a) of the Protection of Children Act 1978; • Between 30 April 2011 and 7 June 2023 making 36 Category A indecent photographs/ pseudo-photographs of a child contrary to section 1(a) of the Protection of Children Act 1978; • Between 20 April 2011 and 7 June 2023 possessing 42 indecent photographs of a child contrary to section 160 of the Criminal Justice Act 1988. In respect of the convictions, Mr Torrecillas-Molina was sentenced on 26 March 2024. In respect of allegation 1(a), Mr Torrecillas-Molina was sentenced to: 3 months imprisonment (suspended for 2 years); a rehabilitation activity requirement; carry out unpaid work; register with the police; and a 10-year sexual harm prevention order. In respect of allegation 1(b), Mr Torrecillas-Molina was sentenced to: 1 month imprisonment (suspended for 2 years); a rehabilitation activity requirement; carry out unpaid work; register with the police; and a 10-year sexual harm prevention order. In respect of allegation 1(c), Mr Torrecillas-Molina was sentenced to: 8 months imprisonment (suspended for 2 years); a rehabilitation activity requirement; carry out unpaid work; forfeiture and destruction of 2 devices; register with the police; a 10-year sexual harm prevention order. In respect of allegation 1(d), Mr Torrecillas-Molina was sentenced to: 8 months imprisonment (suspended for 2 years); a rehabilitation activity requirement; carry out unpaid work; register with the police; and a 10-year sexual harm prevention order. The panel found allegations 1(a), 1(b), 1(c) and 1(d) proven. Findings as to conviction of a relevant offence Having found all of the allegations proved, the panel went on to consider whether the facts of those proved allegations amounted to 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 first considered whether the conduct of Mr Torrecillas-Molina, in relation to the facts found proved, involved breaches of the Teachers’ Standards. The panel considered that, by reference to Part 2, Mr Torrecillas-Molina was in breach of the following standards: 8  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 o showing tolerance of and respect for the rights of others o not undermining fundamental British values, including democracy, the rule of law, individual liberty and mutual respect, and tolerance of those with different faiths and b