Mr Terry Parsloe

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 Terry Parsloe

Teacher reference number: 9946261

Teacher's date of birth: 18 December 1975

Location teacher worked: Cornwall, South West England

Date of professional conduct panel: 10 July 2023

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 Terry Parsloe, formerly employed in Cornwall, South 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 Terry Parsloe: Professional conduct panel meeting outcome Panel decision and reasons on behalf of the Secretary of State for Education July 2023 2 Contents Introduction 3 Allegations 4 Preliminary applications 4 Summary of evidence 4 Documents 4 Statement of agreed facts 4 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 Terry Parsloe Teacher ref number: 9946261 Teacher date of birth: 18 December 1975 TRA reference: 20099 Date of determination: 10 July 2023 Former employer: Poltair School, Cornwall Introduction A professional conduct panel (“the panel”) of the Teaching Regulation Agency (“the TRA”) convened on 10 July 2023 by virtual means, to consider the case of Mr Parsloe. The panel members were Ms Penny Griffith (lay panellist – in the chair), Mr Alan Wells (former teacher panellist) and Ms Gerida Montague (teacher 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 Parsloe that the allegations be considered without a hearing. Mr Parsloe provided a signed statement of agreed facts and admitted unacceptable professional conduct and conduct that may bring the profession into disrepute. The panel considered the case at a meeting without the attendance of the presenting officer, Clare Hastie of Kingsley Napley LLP or Mr Parsloe. The meeting took place in private. 4 Allegations The panel considered the allegations set out in the notice of meeting dated 7 July 2023. It was alleged that Mr Parsloe was guilty of unacceptable professional conduct and/or conduct that may bring the profession into disrepute, in that whilst employed by Teaching Personnel as a teacher at the Poltair School he: 1. Between 27 November 2020 and 18 January 2021, engaged in inappropriate communication online with individuals who informed him that they were under the age of 16. 2. His conduct at paragraph 1 above was sexually motivated. Mr Parsloe admitted both the alleged facts and that he was guilty of unacceptable professional conduct and conduct that may bring the profession into disrepute. Preliminary applications There were no preliminary applications. Summary of evidence Documents In advance of the meeting, the panel received a bundle of documents which included: Section 1: Chronology and list of key people – pages 3 to 4 Section 2: Notice of referral, correspondence and notice of meeting – pages 5 to 15 Section 3: Statement of agreed facts and presenting officer representations – pages 16 to 18 Section 4: Teaching Regulation Agency documents – pages 19 to 66 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 Parsloe on 18 May 2023. 5 Decision and reasons The panel carefully considered the case and reached a decision. In advance of the meeting, the TRA agreed to a request from Mr Parsloe 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 9 November 2020, Mr Parsloe worked at Poltair School as a fully qualified teacher via a supply agency, Teaching Personnel. Mr Parsloe ceased working for Teaching Personnel on 18 January 2021. On 19 January 2021, the police executed a search warrant at Mr Parsloe’s home and he attended a voluntary police interview. A second voluntary police interview took place on 4 October 2021. On 15 July 2022, the police confirmed no further action would be taken against Mr Parsloe. 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: Whilst employed by Teaching Personnel as a teacher at the Poltair School you: 1. Between 27 November 2020 and 18 January 2021, engaged in inappropriate communication online with individuals who informed you that they were under the age of 16. Mr Parsloe admitted this allegation in the statement of agreed facts. Mr Parsloe admitted that his electronic devices including his mobile phone and tablet were examined by the police forensics unit. He also admitted that the police search of his electronic devices identified conversations of a sexual nature that he had undertaken with individuals who identified themselves as being under 16 years of age. Mr Parsloe admitted that he was told by individuals that he was conversing with online that they were under the age of 16 and that he had continued to message them. He also admitted that the content of his online messages was sexual in nature.Extracts of the online conversations that forensic examination found on Mr Parsloe’s devices were provided to the panel. The panel was content to admit this evidence since it was not the sole or decisive evidence in support of the allegations. The panel considered that in those conversations, Mr Parsloe understood the person to have stated they were under 16 years, yet he continued to have a sexual conversation with them. The panel therefore found allegation 1 proven. 6 2. Your conduct at paragraph 1 above was sexually motivated. Mr Parsloe admitted this allegation in the statement of agreed facts. The panel examined the nature of Mr Parsloe’s communications and the very nature of them was sexual. The panel has seen the report to the Crown Prosecutor which summarises comments made by Mr Parsloe when the police attended his house. Given Mr Parsloe’s admission and the explicit content of the messages, the panel considered that it was more likely than not that Mr Parsloe’s conduct was in pursuit of sexual gratification. The panel therefore found this allegation proven. Findings as to unacceptable professional conduct and/or conduct that may bring the profession into disrepute Having found all of the allegations proved, the panel went on to consider whether the facts of those proved allegations amounted to unacceptable professional conduct and/or conduct that may bring the profession into disrepute. 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 Parsloe, in relation to the facts found proved, involved breaches of the Teachers’ Standards. The panel considered that, by reference to Part 2, Mr Parsloe 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 o treating pupils with dignity, building relationships rooted in mutual respect, and at all times observing proper boundaries appropriate to a teacher’s professional position o having regard for the need to safeguard pupils’ well-being, in accordance with statutory provisions o showing tolerance of and respect for the rights of others • Teachers must have an understanding of, and always act within, the statutory frameworks which set out their professional duties and responsibilities. The panel was satisfied that the conduct of Mr Parsloe fell significantly short of the standard of behaviour expected of a teacher. The panel also considered that Mr Parsloe’s conduct breached the obligation to safeguard and promote the welfare of children as required by Keeping Children Safe in Education (KCSIE). 7 The panel also considered whether Mr Parsloe’s conduct displayed behaviours associated with any of the offences in the list that begins on page 12 of the Advice. The panel found that the offences of sexual activity; voyeurism; and sexual communication with a child were relevant. With regard to voyeurism, the panel noted that one of Mr Parsloe’s messages referred to looking down a female’s top. The Advice indicates that where behaviours associated with such an offence exist, a panel is likely to conclude that an individual’s conduct would amount to unacceptable professional conduct. The panel noted that the allegations took place outside of the education setting. The conduct found proven demonstrated a sexual interest in children, and therefore affects the trust that can be placed in Mr Parsloe in a teaching role. Accordingly, the panel was satisfied that Mr Parsloe was guilty of unacceptable professional conduct. The panel went on to consider whether Mr Parsloe’s conduct may bring the profession into disrepute. The panel took into account the way the teaching profession is viewed by others, the responsibilities and duties of teachers in relation to the safeguarding and welfare of pupils and considered the influence that teachers may have on pupils, parents and others in the community. The panel also took account of the uniquely influential role that teachers can hold in pupils’ lives and the fact that pupils must be able to view teachers as role models in the way that they behave. The panel also considered whether Mr Parsloe’s conduct displayed behaviours associated with any of the offences in the list that begins on page 12 of the Advice. As referred to above, the panel found that the offences of sexual activity; voyeurism and sexual communication with a child were relevant. The Advice indicates that where behaviours associated with such an offence exist, a panel is likely to conclude that an individual’