Mr Samuel Johnston-Cree

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 Samuel Johnston-Cree

Teacher reference number: 1735433

Teacher's date of birth: 16 July 1993

Location teacher worked: Wigan, North West England

Date of professional conduct panel: 18 to 19 November 2024

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 Samuel Johnston-Cree, formerly employed in Wigan, North West 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 Samuel Johnston- Cree: Professional conduct panel outcome Panel decision and reasons on behalf of the Secretary of State for Education November 2024 2 Contents Introduction 3 Allegations 4 Preliminary applications 5 Summary of evidence 7 Documents 7 Witnesses 7 Decision and reasons 8 Findings of fact 8 Panel’s recommendation to the Secretary of State 13 Decision and reasons on behalf of the Secretary of State 13 3 Professional conduct panel decision and recommendations, and decision on behalf of the Secretary of State Teacher: Mr Samuel Johnston-Cree Teacher ref number: 1735433 T eacher date of birth: 16 July 1993 TRA reference: 0020816 Date of determination: 19 November 2024 Former employer: Standish Community High School, Wigan Introduction A professional conduct panel (“the panel”) of the Teaching Regulation Agency (“the TRA”) convened virtually on 18 and 19 November 2024, to consider the case of Mr Samuel Johnston-Cree. The panel members were Mr Alan Wells (former teacher panellist – in the chair), Mrs Christine McLintock (teacher panellist) and Mr Paul Hawkins (lay panellist). The legal adviser to the panel was Ms Lauren Slater of Eversheds Sutherland (International) LLP solicitors. The presenting officer for the TRA was Ms Louisa Atkin of Capsticks LLP solicitors. Mr Samuel Johnston-Cree was not present and was not represented. The hearing took place in public and was recorded. 4 Allegations The panel considered the allegations set out in the notice of proceedings dated 01 July 2024. It was alleged that Mr Samuel Johnston-Cree was guilty of unacceptable professional conduct and/or conduct that may bring the profession into disrepute, in that: 1. On one or more occasions on or before 7 July 2021, he: a) Had been in possession of and/or viewed one or more indecent images of children on his personal device(s); b) Had been in possession of and/or viewed one of more videos depicting children engaging in sexual activity on his personal device(s); c) W as in possession of one of more extreme pornographic images depicting bestiality; a) Carried out internet searches for one or more of the words or phrases set out in Schedule A; and b) Distributed and/or shared one or more indecent images of children. 2. On one or more occasions between March 2020 and June 2021, he communicated inappropriately with Pupil A in that you Sent Pupil A emails including the words or phrases set out at Schedule B. 3. His conduct at paragraph 1 above was sexually motivated. Schedule A I. Lolita collective; II. Labelladonna; III. Sistersofangels; IV. Forbiddenconversations; V. young preteen models Schedule B I. 26/03/2020 ‘from your favourite teacher’ II. 18/09/2020 ‘naughty [Pupil A]. Very naughty’ III. 27/11/2020 ‘that was a very naughty tune’ IV. 26/11/2020 ‘we can always arrange a little phone call if you want’ V. 02/12/2020 ‘I used to get super nervous speaking to anyone but each new time you do it, it becomes a heck of a lot easier’ VI. 31/12/2020 ‘I got a gaming chair so I’m having a wonderful time’ 5 VII. 11/01/2021 ‘I’m going to try and go into school one day to collect some work so you may be lucky!’ ‘Also, did you enjoy the song?’ VIII. 25/01/2021 ‘Amazing! Also better than [A PUPIL’S] lol’ ‘Haha maybe I should teach the water cycle as a horrific story of a snowbaby’s life? But look at you with the knowledge’ IX. 08/02/2021 ‘Let's just say, you aren't the worst - that's the best compliment you shall receive! Because Mr Johnston-Cree has gone slightly mad with his isolation and needs to talk to himself to keep his sanity I'm probably going to cry and hide under the desk, reckon they will leave me alone then. Its fake chicken with Nando's lemon and herb sauce - v v naughty! TUNA!! omg gross! Don't take it personally, I just hate seafood, it smells so bad. I shall pop on over, maybe with the wrap if you're lucky!’ X. 15/06/2021 ‘Hello [Pupil A] (My disputable favourite student)’ XI. 11/06/2021 ‘Have you been having a nice time off? Has the boredom settled in yet?’ XII. 29/05/2021 ‘Do not for one second hesitate to get In contact, you are after all, the only one who had figured out my email address I'm happy to provide any support/advice that you need’ Mr Johnston-Cree responded to the initial notice of proceedings dated 18 October 2022 admitting some of the facts. In the absence of Mr Johnston-Cree and a response to the notice of proceedings 01 July 2024 however, the panel took the allegations as not being admitted. Preliminary applications Proceedings in Absence The panel considered an application from the presenting officer to proceed in the absence of Mr Johnston-Cree. The panel was satisfied that the TRA complied with the service requirements of paragraph 19 a to c of the Teachers’ Disciplinary (England) Regulations 2012, (the “Regulations”). The panel was also satisfied that the Notice of Proceedings complied with paragraphs 5.45 to 5.47 of the Teacher Misconduct: Disciplinary Procedures for the Teaching Profession, (the “Procedures”). The panel determined to exercise its discretion under paragraph 5.47 of the Procedures to proceed with the hearing in the absence of the teacher. 6 The panel took as its starting point the principle from R v Jones that its discretion to commence a hearing in the absence of the teacher has to be exercised with the utmost care and caution, and that its discretion is a severely constrained one. The panel recognised that fairness to the teacher is of prime importance but that it also encompasses the fair, economic, expeditious and efficient disposal of allegations against the teacher, as was outlined in GMC v Adeogba & Visvardis. In making its decision, the panel noted that the teacher may waive his right to participate in the hearing. The panel firstly took account of the various factors drawn to its attention from the case of R v Jones [2003] 1 AC1. The panel was satisfied from the evidence presented to it, including emails with Mr Johnston-Cree that he had been made aware of the proceedings. The panel considered that Mr Johnston-Cree had waived his right to be present at the hearing in the knowledge of when and where the hearing is taking place. The panel did not consider that an adjournment would result in the teacher attending at a later date. The panel was also provided with a bundle of documents with several interviews with the teacher setting out his account, including in a police interview under caution. The panel was therefore able to ascertain any lines of defence. The panel noted that two witnesses were to be called to give evidence, and the panel can test that evidence in questioning those witnesses, considering such points as are favourable to the teacher, as are reasonably available on the evidence. The panel was also able to exercise vigilance in making its decision, taking into account the degree of risk of the panel reaching the wrong decision as a result of not having heard the teacher’s account in person. The panel recognised that the allegations against the teacher are serious and that there was a real risk that if proven, the panel will be required to consider whether to recommend that the teacher be prohibited from teaching. The panel recognised that the efficient disposal of allegations against teachers is required to ensure the protection of pupils and to maintain confidence in the profession. The conduct alleged is said to have taken place whilst the teacher was employed at Standish Community High School (“the School”). The School will have an interest in this hearing taken place in order to move forwards. The panel decided to proceed with the hearing in the absence of the teacher. The panel considered that in light of the teacher’s waiver of his right to attend; by taking such measures referred to above to address that unfairness insofar as is possible; and taking account of the inconvenience an adjournment would cause to the witnesses; that on balance, these are serious allegations and the public interest in this hearing proceeding within a reasonable time was in favour of this hearing continuing as listed. 7 Amendment of Allegations An application was made by the presenting officer to amend the Notice of Proceedings by amending allegation 1D to read “carried out internet searches for one or more of the words or phrases set out in Schedule A and/or visited one or more webpages with the words or phrases set out in Schedule A”. The panel has the power to, in the interests of justice, to amend an allegation or the particulars of an allegation, at any stage before making its decision about whether the facts of the case have been proved. The panel were concerned that the amendment proposed was unclear and fundamentally altered the nature and scope of the allegation. The panel was also concerned that the amendment would change the factual basis of the allegation and that the letter with notice of the amendment was only sent to the teacher on 28 October 2024, some three weeks prior to the hearing. The panel did not consider that it would be in the interests of justice to amend the allegation. The presenting officer had ample opportunity to formulate the allegations in advance of the hearing and to amend the allegations at this stage would cause unfairness to the teacher. Summary of evidence Documents In advance of the hearing, the panel received a bundle of documents which included: Section 1: Chronology and anonymised pupil list and list of key people - pages 3 to 5 Section 2: Notice of proceedings and response – pages 6 to 44 Section 3: Teaching Regulation Agency witness statements – pages 45 to 82 Section 4: Teaching Regulation Agency documents – pages 83 to 347 Service bundle – pages 1 to 51 The panel members confirmed that they had read all of the docum