Mr Paul Harry Symonds

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's name: Mr Paul Harry Symonds

Teacher reference number: 0644853

Teacher's date of birth: 9 November 1963

Location teacher worked: Kent, south east England

Date of professional conduct panel: 29 June 2021

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 Paul Harry Symonds formerly employed in Kent, south east England.

Mr Paul Harry Symonds: Professional conduct panel meeting outcome Panel decision and reasons on behalf of the Secretary of State for Education June 2021 2 Contents Introduction 3 Allegations 4 Preliminary applications 4 Summary of evidence 4 Documents 4 Statement of agreed facts 5 Decision and reasons 5 Findings of fact 5 Panel’s recommendation to the Secretary of State 8 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 Paul Harry Symonds Teacher ref number: 0644853 Teacher date of birth: 9 November 1963 TRA reference: 19263 Date of determination: 29 June 2021 Former employer: Townley Grammar School, Kent Introduction A professional conduct panel (“the panel”) of the Teaching Regulation Agency (“the TRA”) convened virtually on 29 June 2021, to consider the case of Mr Paul Symonds. The panel members were Mrs Caroline Tilley (lay panellist – in the chair), Mr John Martin (teacher panellist) and Mr Christopher King (lay 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 Symonds that the allegations be considered without a hearing. Mr Symonds provided a signed statement of agreed facts and admitted his conviction of a relevant offence. The panel considered the case at a meeting without the attendance of the presenting officer Ms Ruth Miller of Fieldfisher Solicitors LLP or Mr Symonds. The meeting took place in private, save for the announcement of the panel’s decision, which was announced in public and recorded. 4 Allegations The panel considered the allegations set out in the notice of meeting dated 26 May 2021. It was alleged that Mr Symonds was guilty of having been convicted of a relevant offence, in that on or around 16 September 2020, he was convicted of: 1. Making an indecent photograph or pseudo-photograph of a child on 8 May 2019 contrary to the Protection of Children Act 1978 s 1(a); 2. Making an indecent photograph or pseudo-photograph of a child on 8 May 2019 contrary to the Protection of Children Act 1978 s 1(a); 3. Making an indecent photograph or pseudo-photograph of a child on 8 May 2019 contrary to the Protection of Children Act 1978 s 1(a); Mr Symonds has admitted both the facts of the allegations and that they amount to a conviction of a relevant offence. Preliminary applications Applicable Procedures The panel noted that since the date of the referral to the TRA in this case, new Teacher Misconduct Disciplinary procedures for the teaching profession were published in May 2020 (the “May 2020 Procedures”). The panel understands that the earlier provisions contained within the Teacher misconduct disciplinary procedures for the teaching profession updated in April 2018 (the “April 2018 Procedures”) apply to this case, given that those provisions applied when the referral was made. Although the panel has the power to direct that the May 2020 Procedures should apply in the interests of justice or the public interest, the panel had received no representations that this should be the case. For the avoidance of doubt, therefore, the panel confirms that it has applied the April 2018 Procedures in this case. Summary of evidence Documents In advance of the meeting, the panel received a bundle of documents which included: Section 1: Chronology – page 1 Section 2: Notice of referral, response and notice of meeting – pages 2 to 15 Section 3: Statement of agreed facts and presenting officer representations – pages 16 to 20 5 Section 4: Teaching Regulation Agency documents – pages 21 to 67 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 Symonds on 19 May 2021. 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 Symonds 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. On 1 September 2016, Mr Symonds commenced employment at Townley Grammar School, Kent (the “School”). On 3 May 2019, the School was informed that the police were investigating Mr Symonds in relation to accessing and distributing indecent images of children. On 7 May 2019, Mr Symonds was suspended by the School. On 9 May 2019, Mr Symonds was arrested and interviewed by the police. He was interviewed again by the police on 17 January 2020. On 31 January 2020, Mr Symonds was dismissed from the School. On 16 September 2020, Mr Symonds appeared at Woolwich Crown Court. 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: On or around 16 September 2020 you were convicted of: 1. Making an indecent photograph or pseudo-photograph of a child on 8 May 2019 contrary to the Protection of Children Act 1978 s 1(a); In a statement of agreed facts, Mr Symonds admitted this conviction. The panel has seen the certificate of conviction which confirms the fact of the conviction and shows that, in respect of this conviction, Mr Symonds was sentenced to carry out 200 hours unpaid work over a period of 2 years; that he was placed upon the Sex Offender register for 5 6 years; that he undertake all rehabilitation activity requirements as directed for a maximum period of 30 days; that he pay a victim surcharge of £90.00, and a sexual harm prevention order for 5 years was imposed. Whilst the certificate of conviction did not state the legislation that had been contravened by Mr Symonds, nor the date of the offence, these details are stated in the Police National Check (PNC) print out seen by the panel. This allegation was therefore found proven. 2. Making an indecent photograph or pseudo-photograph of a child on 8 May 2019 contrary to the Protection of Children Act 1978 s 1(a); In a statement of agreed facts, Mr Symonds admitted this conviction. The panel has seen the certificate of conviction which confirms the fact of the conviction and shows that, in respect of this conviction, Mr Symonds was sentenced to carry out 200 hours unpaid work over a period of 2 years; and that he undertake all rehabilitation activity requirements as directed for a maximum period of 30 days. Whilst the certificate of conviction did not state the legislation that had been contravened by Mr Symonds, nor the date of the offence, these details are stated in the PNC print out seen by the panel. This allegation was therefore found proven. 3. Making an indecent photograph or pseudo-photograph of a child on 8 May 2019 contrary to the Protection of Children Act 1978 s 1(a). In a statement of agreed facts, Mr Symonds admitted this conviction. The panel has seen the certificate of conviction which confirms the fact of the conviction and shows that, in respect of this conviction, Mr Symonds was sentenced to carry out 200 hours unpaid work over a period of 2 years; and that he undertake all rehabilitation activity requirements as directed for a maximum period of 30 days. Whilst the certificate of conviction did not state the legislation that had been contravened by Mr Symonds, nor the date of the offence, these details are stated in the PNC print out seen by the panel. This allegation was therefore found proven. Findings as to conviction of a relevant offence The panel was satisfied that the conduct of Mr Symonds in relation to the facts it found proved involved breaches of the Teachers’ Standards. The panel considered that Mr Symonds has breached the preamble of Teachers’ Standards in failing to achieve the highest possible standards in conduct, and that he has failed to act with integrity. By reference to Part 2, Mr Symonds 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 • Treating pupils with dignity… 7 • having regard for the need to safeguard pupils’ well-being, in accordance with statutory provisions • showing tolerance of and respect for the rights of others • not undermining fundamental British values, including … the rule of law, individual liberty and mutual respect…. • Teachers must have proper and professional regard for the ethos, policies and practices of the school in which they teach…. • 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 the individual’s actions were relevant to teaching, working with children and working in an education setting since a conviction of this nature indicates that Mr Symonds has a sexual interest in children, potentially posing a risk to such children. The panel noted that the behaviour involved in committing the offence could have had an impact on the safety and security of those children depicted in the images viewed by Mr Symonds. The panel also took account of the way the teaching profession is viewed by others. The panel considered that Mr Symonds’ behaviour in committing the offences could affect public confidence in the teaching profession, given the influence that teachers may have on pupils, parents and others in the community. The panel