Unknown Teacher

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

Teacher reference number:

9645176

Teacher's date of birth:

5 March 1961

Location teacher worked:

Kent, South East England

Date of professional conduct panel:

16 January 2019

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 Patrick Sime formerly employed in Kent, South East England.

The proceedings were held at Cheylesmore House, 5 Quinton Rd, Coventry CV1 2WT at 9.30am on 16 January 2019.

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 Patrick Sime: Professional conduct panel outcome Panel decision and reasons on behalf of the Secretary of State for Education January 2019 Contents A. Introduction 3 B. Allegations 4 C. Summary of evidence 4 Documents 4 Statement of agreed facts 5 D. Decision and reasons 5 Panel’s recommendation to the Secretary of State 11 Decision and reasons on behalf of the Secretary of State 16 2 Professional conduct panel decision and recommendations, and decision on behalf of the Secretary of State Teacher: Mr Patrick Sime Teacher ref number: 9645176 Teacher date of birth: 5 March 1961 TRA reference: 15291 Date of determination: 16 January 2019 Former employer: Valentine's High School A. Introduction A professional conduct panel (“the panel”) of the Teaching Regulation Agency (“the TRA”) convened on 16 January 2019 at Cheylesmore House, 5 Quinton Road, Coventry, CV1 2WT to consider the case of Mr Patrick Sime. The panel members were Ms Alison Walsh (teacher panellist – in the chair), Mr Peter Cooper (teacher panellist) and Mr Paul Bompas (lay panellist). The legal adviser to the panel was Mr Delme Griffiths of Blake Morgan LLP, solicitors. The presenting officer for the TRA was Ms Naomh Gibson of Browne Jacobson LLP, solicitors. Mr Sime was present and was represented by Ms Sunyana Sharma of 3 Paper Buildings. The hearing took place in public and was recorded. B. Allegations The panel considered the allegation set out in the Notice of Proceedings dated 8 November 2017. It was alleged that Mr Sime was guilty of a conviction, at any time, of a relevant criminal offence in that: 1. On 22 February 2016, at Snaresbrook Crown Court, he was convicted of committing an act or series of acts with intent to pervert the course of justice on 11 June 2014, contrary to common law. He was sentenced to imprisonment of three months, wholly suspended for 12 months, required to 3 undertake an unpaid work requirement of 200 hours, ordered to pay costs of £500.00 and a victim surcharge. Mr Sime admitted the allegation and that the conviction was for a relevant offence. C. Preliminary applications There were no preliminary applications. D. Summary of evidence Documents In advance of the hearing, the panel received a bundle of documents which included: Section 1: Chronology – page 2 Section 2: Notice of Proceedings and Response – pages 4 to 12 Section 3: Teaching Regulation Agency documents – pages 14 to 39 Section 4: Teacher documents – pages 41 to 72 Witnesses No witnesses were called by the presenting officer. The panel heard oral evidence from Mr Sime in mitigation. E. Decision and reasons The panel announced its decision and reasons as follows: The panel carefully considered this case and reached a decision. The panel read all of the documents included in the hearing bundle. It accepted the legal advice provided. Throughout the relevant time for the purposes of these proceedings, Mr Sime was employed at Valentine's High School ("the School") as Head of Design & Technology. Mr Sime had commenced work at the School from 18 April 2006. On 7 July 2014, the School was notified that Mr Sime had been arrested as a consequence of events which had occurred in June 2014. The School was further 4 informed that as part of Mr Sime's bail conditions he was not to attend the School. Mr Sime subsequently commenced a period of long term sick leave. A decision was made to prosecute Mr Sime and he was charged with two offences, namely an offence under the Sexual Offences Act and perverting the course of justice. On 15 June 2015, Mr Sime was formally suspended by the School. The criminal prosecution subsequently proceeded to trial. Mr Sime pleaded guilty to perverting the course of justice at Snaresbrook Crown Court on 15 January 2016. He pleaded not guilty to the second offence of voyeurism/observing a person which was ultimately not proceeded with and was ordered to remain on file. On 2 February 2016, Mr Sime resigned from his position at the School. On 22 February 2016, Mr Sime was sentenced to three months imprisonment, suspended for 12 months, together with unpaid work of 200 hours and to pay costs. He was subsequently referred to the TRA by the School and the London Borough of Redbridge. Findings of fact Our findings of fact are as follows: 1. On 22 February 2016, at Snaresbrook Crown Court, you were convicted of committing an act or series of acts with intent to pervert the course of justice on 11 June 2014, contrary to common law. You were sentenced to imprisonment of three months, wholly suspended for 12 months, required to undertake an unpaid work requirement of 200 hours, ordered to pay costs of £500.00 and a victim surcharge. The panel was presented with a certificate of conviction from the Crown Court at Snaresbrook. This confirmed that Mr Sime was convicted on 22 February 2016 of the offence of committing an act or series of acts with intent to pervert the course of public justice. He was sentenced by the Court to 3 months imprisonment, suspended for 12 months, ordered to carry out unpaid work for 200 hours and to pay a victim surcharge of £80 and costs of £500. The panel carefully considered all of the evidence within the hearing bundle relating to the circumstances of this offence. This included the remarks of the judge at the sentencing hearing on 22 February 2016. As part of the wider background to the conviction, the panel noted that an allegation had been made that Mr Sime had taken and retained photographs and/or videos of girls under the age of 16. As noted above, whilst originally charged with an offence under the Sexual Offences Act, Mr Sime was not convicted of this alleged offence which was ordered to remain on file. 5 Rather, he was convicted for perverting the course of justice as a result of his actions following the alleged offence coming to light. In summary, Mr Sime was found to have disposed of a mobile phone which had allegedly been used in the course of the alleged voyeuristic acts, together with a laptop hard drive. The remarks of the judge sentencing Mr Sime record: "… that is the background to the matter that you have pleaded guilty to, destroying a mobile phone and the contents of a laptop and it was that mobile phone, in particular, which the prosecution were interested in interrogating and analysing because one of the complainants specifically said that she saw the phone being used in a bathroom and was being used to record what was going on and you knew that. You took the conscious decision to destroy it and you took a very carefully planned course to destroy it." Mr Sime denied that he had engaged in the alleged voyeuristic acts. In his witness statement to the TRA he stated that: "I accept that I threw away my mobile phone on the street. However, I do not accept that the reason why I destroyed the telephone was because the telephone contained any illegal or indecent images." Mr Sime similarly provided an explanation in relation to the circumstances in which action had been taken in relation to the laptop in question. However, Mr Sime pleaded guilty to the offence of perverting the course of justice and he admitted the facts of this allegation. In those circumstances, the panel accepted the certificate of conviction as conclusive proof of the commission of the offence of perverting the course of justice on 11 June 2014 by Mr Sime. The panel accordingly found allegation 1 proven. Findings as to conviction of a relevant offence Having found allegation 1 proven, the panel went on to consider whether the conviction was for a relevant criminal offence. This was admitted by Mr Sime. 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 Sime in relation to the facts found proved involved breaches of the Teachers’ Standards. It considered that by reference to Part Two, Mr Sime is 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, including by not undermining the rule of law. 6  Teachers must have an understanding of, and always act within, the statutory frameworks which set out their professional duties and responsibilities. The panel c