Ms Jessica Kate Patullo

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: Ms Jessica Kate Patullo

Teacher reference number: 1639962

Teacher's date of birth: 24 June 1996

Location teacher worked: Essex, East of England

Date of professional conduct panel: 5 to 8 May 2026

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 Ms Jessica Kate Patullo, formerly employed in Essex, East of 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.

OFFICIAL - FOR PUBLIC RELEASE OFFICIAL - FOR PUBLIC RELEASE Ms Jessica Kate Patullo: Professional conduct panel outcome Panel decision and reasons on behalf of the Secretary of State for Education May 2026 2 OFFICIAL - FOR PUBLIC RELEASE OFFICIAL - FOR PUBLIC RELEASE Contents Introduction 3 Allegations 4 Summary of evidence 4 Documents 4 Witnesses 5 Decision and reasons 5 Findings of fact 6 Panel’s recommendation to the Secretary of State 17 Decision and reasons on behalf of the Secretary of State 24 3 OFFICIAL - FOR PUBLIC RELEASE OFFICIAL - FOR PUBLIC RELEASE Professional conduct panel decision and recommendations, and decision on behalf of the Secretary of State Teacher: Ms Jessica Kate Patullo Teacher ref number: 1639962 Teacher date of birth: 24 June 1996 TRA reference: 25337 Date of determination: 8 May 2026 Former employer: Kelvedon Hatch Community Primary School, Brentwood, Essex (the “School”) Introduction A professional conduct panel (“the panel”) of the Teaching Regulation Agency (“the TRA”) convened on 5 to 8 May 2026 by way of a virtual hearing, to consider the case of Ms Jessica Kate Patullo. The panel members were Mr Richard Young (lay panellist – in the chair), Mrs Cathy Logan (teacher panellist), and Mrs Victoria Kelly (teacher panellist). The legal adviser to the panel was Ms Madison Taylor of Birketts LLP solicitors. The presenting officer for the TRA was Mr Felix Keating of Three Raymond Buildings. Ms Patullo was present and was represented by Mr Nicholas Kennan of Cornwall Street Barristers. The hearing took place in public save that portions of the hearing were heard in private and was recorded. 4 OFFICIAL - FOR PUBLIC RELEASE OFFICIAL - FOR PUBLIC RELEASE Allegations The panel considered the allegations set out in the notice of hearing dated 20 January 2026. It was alleged that Ms Patullo was guilty of unacceptable professional conduct and/or conduct that may bring the profession into disrepute in that whilst working as a Class Teacher at Kelvedon Hatch Community Primary School (‘the School’): 1. Between around October 2023 and November 2024, she did not disclose to the School that Person A, with whom she was in a personal relationship with, was: a. convicted of an offence in relation to indecent image(s) of children; b. on the sex offenders’ register. 2. By reason of her conduct at paragraph 1a) and/or 1b) above, she did not disclose a potentially serious safeguarding concern. 3. Her action(s) at paragraph 1 were: a. lacking in integrity; b. dishonest. Ms Patullo admitted allegations 1.a., 1.b., and 2. However, she denied allegations 3.a. and 3.b. Ms Patullo made no admission of whether her actions amounted to unacceptable professional conduct or 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, list of key people and anonymised pupil list – pages 4 to 6 Section 2: Notice of hearing and response – pages 7 to 13 Section 3: TRA witness statements – pages 14 to 18 Section 4: TRA Exhibits – pages 19 to 238 Section 5: Teacher documents – pages 239 to 250 5 OFFICIAL - FOR PUBLIC RELEASE OFFICIAL - FOR PUBLIC RELEASE 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 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: Witness A – [REDACTED] Ms Patullo was in attendance and gave oral evidence. Decision and reasons The panel announced its decision and reasons as follows: The panel carefully considered the case before it and reached a decision. In January 2019, Person A committed offences relating to possession of indecent images of primary school-aged children. In February 2021, Person A was sentenced for those offences and placed on the Sex Offenders’ Register until February 2026. On 1 September 2022, Ms Patullo commenced employment as a class teacher at the School. In October 2023, Ms Patullo began a romantic relationship with Person A. In around October or November 2023, Person A informed Ms Patullo that he had a criminal conviction relating to indecent images of children and was subject to notification requirements under the Sex Offenders’ Register. Ms Patullo continued to work at the School and did not disclose Person A’s conviction or status on the Sex Offenders’ Register to anyone at the School. On 26 November 2024, Ms Patullo disclosed to the headteacher, Witness A, Person A’s status as a sex offender and the nature of his offences. Following this disclosure, the School sought advice from the Local Authority Designated Officer (LADO) and a safeguarding risk assessment was initiated. On 7 February 2025, a disciplinary hearing was held at the School. On 30 April 2025, Ms Patullo ceased employment at the School. 6 OFFICIAL - FOR PUBLIC RELEASE OFFICIAL - FOR PUBLIC RELEASE The matter was subsequently referred to the TRA. 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: 1. Between around October 2023 and November 2024, you did not disclose to the School that Person A, with whom you were in a personal relationship with, was: a. convicted of an offence in relation to indecent image(s) of children; b. on the sex offenders’ register. The panel noted that Ms Patullo admitted allegations 1.a. and 1.b. However, the panel considered it necessary to still complete a thorough analysis of the evidence available to it and reach a conclusion with respect to the facts of allegations 1.a. and 1.b. In doing so, the panel considered information relating to the conviction and information relating to Person A’s inclusion on the Sex Offenders’ Register simultaneously as it was clear that all parties, and specifically Ms Patullo, sensibly recognised that those aspects were best dealt with collectively. When both pieces of information were eventually disclosed to the School, they were disclosed at the same time and as part of the same overall disclosure. In her witness statement, Ms Patullo stated that she had been in a relationship with Person A since October 2023 and that she became aware “early in the relationship” of Person A’s convictions relating to indecent images of children and his inclusion on the Sex Offenders’ Register. In oral evidence, Ms Patullo was asked a number of questions by the presenting officer relating to the state of her knowledge in October 2023, and as Ms Patullo did not provide an alternative suggestion for the date she became aware of Person A’s history, the panel took this as evidence suggesting that Ms Patullo had in fact known the circumstances since October 2023. In her witness statement and in oral evidence, Ms Patullo admitted that she did not disclose that information to the School before November 2024. In her witness statement, Ms Patullo recalled that police had visited her and Person A on 3 November 2024 and that in this meeting she was told that the LADO should have been informed about Person A’s history and his relationship to Ms Patullo due to her position 7 OFFICIAL - FOR PUBLIC RELEASE OFFICIAL - FOR PUBLIC RELEASE as a teacher. Ms Patullo said she was told at that point that she needed to inform the School. The panel considered the oral evidence and written statement of Witness A. Witness A explained that in around November 2024, Ms Patullo was absent from the School, [REDACTED] Witness A stated that on around 22 November 2024, Ms Patullo requested a meeting. Witness A arranged this meeting for 26 November 2024. Witness A explained that during this meeting, Ms Patullo made a disclosure regarding her partner - Person A - in which she stated that Person A had a conviction relating to indecent images of children, and that he was currently on the Sex Offenders’ Register. In her witness statement for the TRA, Witness A noted that Ms Patullo said she had been aware of Person A’s conviction and status on the Sex Offenders’ Register since approximately October 2023. Witness A therefore acknowledged that Ms Patullo had been aware of Person A’s conviction and status on the Sex Offenders’ Register for approximately a year before disclosing this to the School. Ms Patullo’s witness statement and oral evidence reflect the timings set out in Witness A’s evidence, confirming that she ultimately disclosed Person A’s history to the School on 26 November 2024. In her witness statement and oral evidence, Witness A explained that, following the meeting with Ms Patullo in which she made the disclosure, the School immediately sought advice from the LADO on how to proceed. The panel noted an email from the LADO dated 23 January 2025, which stated that the Public Protection Team had confirmed the offences which Person A was convicted of occurred in January 2019 and that Person A was sentenced in February 2021. It further stated that Person A was required to comply with the Sex Offenders’ Register until February 2026. The panel considered all the evidence and also Ms Patullo’s admission in respect of allegations 1.a. and 1.b. Having done so, it was satisfied that the TRA had discharged its burden of proof that, on the balance of probabilities, the events as alleged had occurred. The panel found allegations 1.a. and 1.b. proven. 2. By reason of your conduct at paragraph 1.a. and/or 1.b. above, you did not disclose a potentially serious safeguarding concern. The panel noted that Ms Patullo admitted allegation 2. However, it still considered the al