Unknown Teacher

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

Teacher reference number:

8545106

Teacher's date of birth:

31 October 1963

Location teacher worked:

London

Date of professional conduct panel:

7 June 2016, 16 November 2016 and 16 January 2017

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 McNeil, formerly employed in London.

The proceedings were held at 53 to 55 Butts Road, Earlsdon Park, Coventry CV1 3BH at 9.30am on date month year.

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 Paul McNeil: Professional conduct panel outcome Panel decision and reasons on behalf of the Secretary of State for Education January 2017 2 Contents Contents 2 A. Introduction 3 B. Allegations 4 C. Preliminary applications 5 D. Summary of evidence 6 Documents 6 Witnesses 6 E. Decision and reasons 6 Findings of fact 7 Findings as to unacceptable professional conduct and/or conduct that may bring the profession into disrepute 11 Panel’s recommendation to the Secretary of State 12 Decision and reasons on behalf of the Secretary of State 14 3 Professional conduct panel decision and recommendations, and decision on behalf of the Secretary of State Teacher: Mr Paul McNeil Teacher ref number: 8545106 Teacher date of birth: 31 October 1963 NCTL case reference: 13542 Date of determination: 16 January 2017 Former employer: Hartley Primary School, London A. Introduction A professional conduct panel (“the panel”) of the National College for Teaching and Leadership (“the National College”) convened on 7 June 2016, 16 November 2016 and 16 January 2017 at 53 to 55 Butts Road, Earlsdon Park, Coventry CV1 3BH to consider the case of Mr Paul McNeil. The panel members were Ms Alison Walsh (teacher panellist – in the Chair), Dr Robert Cawley (teacher panellist) and Miss Polly O'Malley (lay panellist). The legal adviser to the panel was Mr Nick Leale on 7 June 2016 and 16 November 2016 and Mr Graham Miles on 16 January 2017, both of Blake Morgan LLP solicitors. The presenting officer for the National College was Miss Julia Faure-Walker of 2 Hare Court, instructed by Nabarro LLP solicitors. Mr Paul McNeil did not attend the hearing in person, but participated by video link. Mr McNeil was represented by Miss Clare Haddon of Counsel, instructed by the National Union of Teachers. The hearing took place in public and was recorded. 4 B. Allegations The panel considered the allegations set out in the Notice of Proceedings dated 12 February 2016. It was alleged that Mr Paul McNeil was guilty of unacceptable professional conduct and/or conduct that may bring the profession into disrepute, in that: While employed at Hartley Primary School, Hartley Road, East Ham, London, he: 1. Between 25 September 2008 and 14 December 2009, placed up to 6 orders for a total of up to 13 DVDs, which included: a. an indecent image of a child or children, involving (non-penetrative) sexual activity; b. 7 images of a child or children which were inappropriate or indecent; 2. In January 2012, arranged to transfer money, believing that in return he would have the opportunity to view sexual activity involving a child or children via the internet and/or to view indecent or inappropriate images of children; 3. During communications via Skype: a. On a date recorded as being 11 June 2013: i. pretended to be or played the role of a father, with another Skype user pretending to be or playing the role of a son; ii. communicated, "U R HOT LET'S DO THIS FOR REAL YOU HAVE CAM?"; iii. communicated, "hope you take them off when you pleasure yourself" (after the other Skype user had communicated, "Just underpants but not naked"); iv. communicated, "hey why don’t you get naked while u massage me"; v. communicated, "DO YOU WANNA MEET U SOUND SO HORNY I WANNA DO THIS FOR REAL"; b. On a date recorded as being 11 September 2013, after another Skype user had addressed him as, "Sir", referred to a private room, communicated, "I promise to do and show to you" and that he or she would look for a camera, he: i. communicated, "ok chat tomorrow then"; 5 ii. believed that the other Skype user was or may have been under 18 years old; c. On a date recorded as being 28 September 2013, after another Skype user had communicated that he was aged 15, he: i. communicated, "Call me. So horny already" ii. when communicating as set out in paragraph 3.c.i above, believed that the other Skype user was, or may have been, under 18 years' old; iii. arranged to see the other Skype user, or parts of his body, via a web camera or similar device; iv. communicated, "ass"; v. by communicating the above, were intending for the other Skype user to show you his bottom; vi. communicated, "wanna fuck u"; vii. communicated, "moan baby"; viii. communicated, "so u free to meet tomorrow"; 4. Before 20 May 2014, possessed images of school-children, in the following storage media: a. 6 camcorder tapes; b. 19 DVDs; c. 21 VHS tapes; d. over 1,000 images on an Acer computer; 5. Your actions in paragraphs 1, 2, 3 and/or 4 above were sexually motivated. The facts of the allegations were not admitted. C. Preliminary applications Amendment of the allegation The presenting officer made an application to amend the particulars of the allegations at paragraph 3.c.i. by deleting the words, "Call me. So horny already" and replacing them with, "One min, cam in other room.". 6 Miss Haddon confirmed that there was no objection to the proposed amendment and the panel agreed to the application. D. Summary of evidence Documents In advance of the hearing, the panel received a bundle of documents which included: Section 1: Notice of Proceedings and response – pages 4 to 11 Section 2: Witness statements – pages 13 to 17 Section 3: NCTL documents – pages 19 to 123 Section 4: Teacher documents – pages 125 to 144 The panel members confirmed that they had read all of the documents in advance of the hearing. Witnesses The panel heard oral evidence from the following witness called by the presenting officer: Witness A of the Metropolitan Police. Mr McNeil also gave evidence on his own behalf. E. Decision and reasons The panel announced its decision and reasons as follows: The panel has carefully considered the case and reached a decision. The panel confirms that it has read all the documents provided in the bundle in advance of the hearing. Mr McNeil was the headteacher at Hartley Primary School and, at the material times, resided at an address in East Ham. Mr McNeil came to the attention of the Metropolitan Police in January 2014 through an operation instigated through Canadian Law Enforcement, which had been investigating a Canadian company called Azov Films. Information was disseminated to UK Law Enforcement which indicated that Mr McNeil was identified as one of the people who had purchased a number of DVDs from Azov Films. Canadian Law Enforcement provided information to the National Crime Agency's ("NCA") Child Exploitation Online Protection ('CEOP") team, which included copies of orders for the DVDs. These referred to six separate orders for 13 DVDs which were, or 7 were purported to have been, dispatched to Mr McNeil's address. Of those 13 DVDs, seven were category C indecent images and one was a category B indecent image. On 19 May 2014, the Metropolitan Police executed a search warrant at Mr McNeil's home address. Upon searching his home, the police seized several DVDs but did not find any Azov DVDs or any other indecent images of children. As part of the investigation, a forensic examination of Mr McNeil's computers was undertaken. This included the internet history. When his Acer laptop was examined, a number of online Skype conversations were identified. In addition to the investigation by the Canadian authorities, there was a separate NCA investigation in relation to payments made to the Philippines. Mr McNeil was identified as making two payments to a Filipino suspect believed to orchestrate live on-line child sex abuse. Mr McNeil was interviewed by the police on 19 May 2014 and again on 9 October 2014. Throughout both interviews, Mr McNeil exercised his right of silence. No criminal charges were brought against Mr McNeil. Findings of fact Our findings of fact are as follows: While employed at Hartley Primary School, Hartley Road, East Ham, London, you: 1. Between 25 September 2008 and 14 December 2009, placed up to 6 orders for a total of up to 13 DVDs, which included: a. an indecent image of a child or children, involving (non-penetrative) sexual activity; b. 7 images of a child or children which were inappropriate or indecent; The panel has been presented with copies of six orders, which Witness A gave evidence were provided by Canadian Law Enforcement following an investigation into the Canadian company, Azov Films. The panel has also heard evidence that the DVDs referred to in those orders included one that contained a category B indecent image and seven that contained category C indecent images. The panel noted that Mr McNeil, while accepting that the orders contained his name, home address, email address and mobile phone number, denied any knowledge of these orders. However, the panel finds it implausible that Mr McNeil could have had no knowledge of these orders. All of the given personal details were consistent in a pattern of ordering over a period of six months. The panel also noted that internet searches were identified by the police during the forensic examination of Mr McNeil's computer enquiring whether any customers of Azov Films had been arrested. Mr McNeil does not dispute this; he stated that he was just looking at information following news articles about Azov. The panel does not accept Mr McNeil's assertion that this was mere coincidence. The panel is satisfied, on the balance 8 of probabilities, that Mr McNeil placed up to six orders for the DVD's as outlined in allegation 1.a. and 1.b. Accordingly, allegations 1.a and 1.b. are proved. 2. In January 2012, arranged to transfer money, believing that in return you would have the opportunity to view sexual activity involving a child or children via the internet and/or view indecent or inappropriate images of children; The panel has heard evidence that there was an NCA investigation, which was separate from the Canadian investigation, in relation to payments to the Phili