Mr Liam Knight

Teacher's name: Mr Liam Knight

Teacher reference number: 4245540

Teacher's date of birth: 31 August 1994

Location teacher worked: Norfolk, East of England

Date of professional conduct panel: 17 January 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 Liam Knight, formerly employed in Norfolk, East of 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 Liam Knight: Professional conduct panel meeting outcome Panel decision and reasons on behalf of the Secretary of State for Education January 2025 Contents Introduction 3 Allegations 4 Preliminary applications 4 Summary of evidence 5 Documents 5 Statement of agreed facts 5 Decision and reasons 5 Findings of fact 6 Panel’s recommendation to the Secretary of State 11 Decision and reasons on behalf of the Secretary of State 14 2 Professional conduct panel decision and recommendations, and decision on behalf of the Secretary of State Teacher: Mr Liam Knight Teacher ref number: 4245540 Teacher date of birth: 31 August 1994 TRA reference: 22978 Date of determination: 17 January 2025 Former employer: Drayton Junior School, Norfolk Introduction A professional conduct panel (‘the panel’) of the Teaching Regulation Agency (‘the TRA’) convened on 17 January 2025 by way of a virtual meeting, to consider the case of Mr Liam Knight. The panel members were Mrs Shabana Robertson (lay panellist – in the chair), Mr Tom Snowdon (teacher panellist) and Ms Geraldine Baird (lay panellist). The legal adviser to the panel was Mrs Samantha Cass 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 Knight that the allegations be considered without a hearing. Mr Knight provided a signed statement of agreed facts and admitted unacceptable professional conduct and/or conduct that may bring the profession into disrepute. The panel considered the case at a meeting without the attendance of the presenting officer, Callum Heywood of Browne Jacobson, Mr Knight or any representative for Mr Knight. The meeting took place in private by way of a virtual meeting and was not recorded. 3 Allegations The panel considered the allegations set out in the notice of meeting dated 15 October 2024. It was alleged that Mr Knight was guilty of unacceptable professional conduct and/or conduct that may bring the profession into disrepute, in that whilst employed as a swimming instructor at Drayton Junior School between September 2023 and December 2023: 1. He brought alcohol onto school premises on or around 10 October 2023; 2. He consumed alcohol whilst on school premises and/or during school hours on or around 10 October 2023; 3. He failed to take appropriate action and/or ensure appropriate action was taken to safeguard one or more pupils in that: a) He failed to alert the school about his prescribed medication and/or ensure the prescribed medicine was securely stored on school premises; b) He failed to alert the school that the medication he had been prescribed was causing side effects such as drowsiness; c) He entered the school swimming pool with one or more pupils despite being aware that he was unfit to do so due to his consumption of alcohol and/or prescription medication on or around 10 October 2023. Mr Knight admitted the facts of allegations 1 to 3 in their entirety and that his behaviour amounted to unacceptable professional conduct and/or conduct that may bring the profession into disrepute falling short of the standards of behaviour expected of a teacher, as set out in the statement of agreed facts signed by Mr Knight on 6 August 2024. Preliminary applications There were no preliminary applications. 4 Summary of evidence Documents In advance of the meeting, the panel received a bundle of documents which included: x Section 1: Chronology – page 4 x Section 2: Notice of referral and response – pages 6 to 19 x Section 3: Statement of agreed facts and presenting officer representations – pages 21 to 46 x Section 4: TRA documents – pages 48 to 217 x Section 5: Teacher documents – pages 220 to 243 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 Knight on 6 August 2024 and subsequently signed by the presenting officer on the same day (“the Statement”). 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 Knight 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 Knight commenced employment at Drayton Junior School (‘the School’) as a swimming teacher on 1 September 2023. On 10 October 2023, Mr Knight was allegedly found to be in an unfit state to perform his duties owing to the fact that he presented as intoxicated. The School referred the matter to the LADO and began an investigation on 12 October 2023. Mr Knight was formally suspended from his duties on 17 October 2023. 5 A disciplinary hearing took place on 15 December 2023 and Mr Knight was dismissed. Although the panel noted that there were several references in the bundle to Mr Knight having left employment at the School in 2024, the panel was satisfied that the allegations and statement of agreed facts were consistent in referring to his last day of employment having been in December 2023. The panel therefore proceeded on this basis. Findings of fact The findings of fact are as follows: The panel noted that Mr Knight admitted the facts of allegations 1 to 3 in their entirety and that his behaviour amounted to unacceptable professional conduct and/or conduct that may bring the profession into disrepute falling short of the standards of behaviour expected of a teacher. Nevertheless, the panel considered all the evidence before it and reached its own conclusions. The panel considered the fact that there was evidence in the bundle in the form of statements which were hearsay, including Mr Knight’s responses to the School investigation and the statements of other members of staff relevant to Mr Knight’s actions. The panel therefore noted the need to attach the appropriate amount of weight to this hearsay evidence in reaching its decisions. 1. You brought alcohol onto school premises on or around 10 October 2023; The panel noted the signed statement of agreed facts, signed by Mr Knight on 6 August 2024, in which Mr Knight admitted allegation 1. Mr Knight admitted that he brought alcohol with him onto the School premises on or around 10 October 2023. Mr Knight further accepted that it is likely that the bottle of rosé wine found in the staff toilets on or around 10 October 2023 by a member of staff (a picture of which was enclosed in the bundle of documents before the panel) was his and that in any event he had purchased alcohol during lunchtime. The panel considered that there was insufficient evidence before it on which to conclude that the water bottle in the School office purporting to belong to Mr Knight contained alcohol. The panel also considered that Mr Knight had said that he may have consumed the alcohol in the park and that he could not remember consuming this on School premises. Whilst the panel noted that there was a discrepancy in terms of the timing between Mr Knight being in the School toilets and the timing of the bottle being found, the panel considered Mr Knight’s admission and the discovery of the empty alcohol bottle on School premises along with the fact that he admitted to having been intoxicated on School premises. The panel also considered the inconclusive nature of Mr Knight’s 6 evidence within the School’s investigation and his uncertainty as to where he had consumed the alcohol. Therefore, the panel found that, on the balance of probabilities, he was more likely than not to have brought alcohol onto the School premises and that the bottle of wine that was discovered belonged to Mr Knight and not anyone else. The panel found allegation 1 proven. 2. You consumed alcohol whilst on school premises and/or during school hours on or around 10 October 2023; The panel noted that Mr Knight also admitted allegation 2 in the Statement. Mr Knight accepted that he had consumed alcohol on School premises and/or within school hours. Mr Knight could not recall the specifics of his drinking on 10 October 2023 but accepted that it is likely that he drank alcohol at lunchtime, probably away from the School site. Also, the panel noted that there was no clear evidence of Mr Knight being seen with alcohol on the School premises or being seen consuming alcohol. However, the panel considered Mr Knight’s admission to having consumed alcohol during the School lunchtime and the discovery of the alcohol bottle on School premises along with the fact that he admitted to having been intoxicated during School hours and found that, on the balance of probabilities, he was more likely than not to have consumed alcohol on the School premises and/or during School hours on or around 10 October 2023. The panel also noted that Mr Knight had recalled that he probably would have consumed the wine directly from the wine bottle. The panel noted that a bottle of alcohol had been found on School premises and that there was evidence from other members of staff that Mr Knight had smelt of alcohol during School hours. The panel found allegation 2 proven. 3. You failed to take appropriate action and/or ensure appropriate action was taken to safeguard one or more pupils in that: a) You failed to alert the school about your prescribed medication and/or ensure the prescribed medicine was securely stored on school premises; b) You failed to alert the school that the medication you had been prescribed was causing side effects such as drowsiness; c) You ent