Mr Graham Coyle

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 Graham Coyle

Teacher reference number: 8711731

Teacher's date of birth: 04 June 1960

Location teacher worked: Worcester, West Midlands

Date of professional conduct panel: 10 April 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 Graham Coyle formerly employed in Worcester, West Midlands

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.

Graham Coyle: Professional conduct panel outcome Panel decision and reasons on behalf of the Secretary of State for Education March 2025 2 Contents Introduction 3 Allegations 4 Summary of evidence 6 Documents 6 Witnesses 7 Decision and reasons 7 Findings of fact 8 Panel’s recommendation to the Secretary of State 28 Decision and reasons on behalf of the Secretary of State 32 3 Professional conduct panel decision and recommendations, and decision on behalf of the Secretary of State Teacher: Mr Graham Coyle Teacher ref number: 8711731 Teacher date of birth: 4 June 1960 TRA reference: 22427 Date of determination: 26 to 28 March and 10 April 2025 Former employer: The River School, Worcester Introduction A professional conduct panel (“the panel”) of the Teaching Regulation Agency (“the TRA”) convened on 26 to 28 March 2025 at Cheylesmore House, 5 Quinton Road, Coventry, CV1 2WT and virtually on 10 April 2025, to consider the case of Mr Graham Coyle. The panel members were Dr Louise Wallace (lay panellist – in the chair), Mr Robert Dowey (teacher panellist) and Mrs Karen Graham (teacher panellist). The legal adviser to the panel was Mr Delme Griffiths of Blake Morgan LLP solicitors. The presenting officer for the TRA was Mr Alexander Barnfield of Capsticks solicitors. Mr Coyle was present and was represented by Mr Andrew Faux of The Reflective Practice. The hearing took place in public, save that portions of the hearing were heard in private, and was recorded. 4 Allegations The panel considered the allegations set out in the notice of proceedings dated 4 December 2024 (as amended – see decision below). It was alleged that Mr Coyle was guilty of unacceptable professional conduct and/or conduct that may bring the profession into disrepute, in that while employed as a teacher at the River School (“the School”), he: 1. Between September 2009 and July 2014 engaged in messages with Person A via Skype and/or Facebook: a. When Person A was a pupil at the School, b. After Person A left the School 2. Between September 2009 and May 2014 engaged in inappropriate communications with Person A in that, on one or more occasions he: a. Referred to Person A as “babe” and/or “petal” or words to that effect. b. Said “I missed you” or words to that effect. c. Said “I love you” or words to that effect. d. Signed off on his messages with one or more “x” and/or “o” symbols. e. Referred to Person A as “lovely” and/or “attractive” or words to that effect. f. Referred to Person A as “special” or words to that effect. g. Referred to his relationship with Person A as “special” or words to that effect. h. Discussed with Person A what sex would be like for them and whether it was good. i. Discussed with Person A about them finding a spouse. 3. Met with Person A on one or more occasions outside of the School premises. 4. Visited Person A’s home and/or took a photograph of him and Person A with their arms interlinked. 5. While on a School trip to Devon in or around summer 2010 he: a. Sat with Person A with his arms and/or knees touching. 5 b. Asked Person A to get up early to go for a walk together. c. Followed Person A into the sea and said “Let’s see how strong you are” and/or “let’s fight” or words to that effect. d. While in the sea with Person A he touched their arm and/or their waist. 6. On or around April 2011 while visiting [REDACTED] on a School trip he placed his hands on Person A’s back and/or said “that’s enough now” or words to that effect. 7. On or around April 2010 met with Person A alone in the art room at the School. 8. In or around July 2010 asked Person A to send him a picture of them in their prom outfit. 9. Between September 2009 and May 2014 on one or more occasions gave Person A: a. Credit for their mobile phone; b. Chocolates; c. Flowers; and/or d. Souvenirs from places you had visited. 10. Gave Person A a handwritten book which contained personal messages to them. 11. Between September 2009 and October 2010, on one or more occasion gave Person A your personal phone number. 12. On one or more occasions: a. Asked Person A to delete messages he had exchanged between him and Person A. b. Told Person A to save his phone number in their phone under the name “Bev”. c. Using the codeword “squish” to signal that he was available to communicate. 6 d. Told Person A that he would speak with their parent and “sort it” or words to that effect when Person A told him that their parent was concerned about his relationship. e. Hid in Person A’s garden when someone arrived at their home while visiting Person A at their home. f. Told Person A to tell their friends that they were going for a walk on their own while on a School trip to Devon when they were going for a walk with him. 13. His actions at allegations 1-11 were sexually motivated. 14. His actions at allegation 12 were dishonest and/or lacked integrity. 15. His conduct as may be found proven at allegations 1-11 above demonstrated a lack of insight following the warning given to him by the School on or around 27 May 2011. Mr Coyle admitted the facts of allegations 1, 2(a) to (g), 3, 4, 5(b), 6, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 14 and 15 (on a factual basis only). Allegations 2(h) and 13 were denied and allegations 2(i), 5(a), (c) and (d), 8 were not admitted on the basis that Mr Coyle had no recollection and/or insufficient awareness of the matters subject to the allegations. Mr Coyle also admitted that his conduct, as admitted, constituted unacceptable professional conduct and conduct that may bring the profession into disrepute. Summary of evidence Documents In advance of the hearing, the panel received a bundle of documents which included: Section 1: Chronology, anonymised pupil list and list of key people – pages 3 to 5 Section 2: Notice of proceedings and response – pages 6 to 42 Section 3: Teaching Regulation Agency witness statements – pages 43 to 58 Section 4: Teaching Regulation Agency documents – pages 59 to 599 Section 5: Teacher documents – pages 600 to 619 7 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 also had regard to the document Teacher misconduct: Disciplinary procedures for the teaching profession 2020, (the “Procedures”). Witnesses The panel heard oral evidence from the following witnesses called by the presenting officer: Person A - the alleged victim of inappropriate conduct as particularised in the allegations and who is anonymised for the purposes of these proceedings. Witness B – [REDACTED], who has worked [REDACTED] at the School [REDACTED]. Mr Coyle also gave oral evidence and called [REDACTED] (Witness C) to give evidence on his behalf. Decision and reasons The panel announced its decision and reasons as follows: The panel carefully considered the case before it and reached a decision. Introduction Mr Coyle was employed at The River School ("the School") from 1986 to 2017. It was indicated that Mr Coyle held various roles at the School within that period. At one stage, he was headteacher. It was suggested that after he stopped full-time teaching at the School in 2013, Mr Coyle remained a regular presence on the School site and contributed to School life until around 2017. In May 2023, a former pupil, referred to as Person A for the purposes of these proceedings, raised concerns with the School that she had engaged in communications and behaviours with Mr Coyle, which were regarded as outside of the formal teacher/pupil relationship, both whilst she was a pupil and following her departure from the School. Person A: • [REDACTED] 8 Subsequently, on 23 August 2023, Mr Coyle was referred to the TRA. Evidence considered by the panel The panel carefully considered all of the written and oral evidence presented and the submissions made. It accepted the legal advice provided. The panel heard evidence from the following witnesses who were called by the presenting officer: • Person A. • Witness B, who has worked as a teacher at the School since 1996. Mr Coyle also attended the hearing and gave evidence to the panel. Mr Coyle admitted the facts of allegations 1, 2(a) to (g), 3, 4, 5(b), 6, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 14 and 15 (on a factual basis). Allegations 2(h) and 13 were denied and allegations 2(i), 5(a), (c) and (d), 8 were not admitted on the basis that Mr Coyle had no recollection and/or a full awareness of the matters subject to the allegation. Mr Coyle also admitted that his conduct, as admitted, constituted unacceptable professional conduct and conduct that may bring the profession into disrepute. Mr Coyle presented character references from Person C and [REDACTED]. Person C also gave evidence to the panel. The panel confirms it formed its own, independent view of the allegations based on the evidence presented to it. Findings of fact The findings of fact are as follows: 1. Between September 2009 and July 2014 engaged in messages with Person A via Skype and/or Facebook: a. When Person A was a pupil at the School, b. After Person A left the School Person A gave evidence that, in the period prior to 2010, there was no prohibition on teachers at the School befriending pupils on social media and she began to exchange messages with Mr Coyle on Facebook from September 2009. 9 [REDACTED] Person A confirmed that she continued to be friends with Mr Coyle on Facebook, even after a change in policy at the School [REDACTED]. Following Person A leaving the School [REDACTED] they continued to exchange messages [REDACTED]. Person A confirmed she communicated with Mr Coyle on Skype between 2010 and 2012. Person A stated that she received messages from Mr Coyle throughout her final year at the School, both during and ou