Mr Roberto Martellini

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 Roberto Martellini

Location teacher worked: Bromley, London

Date of professional conduct panel: 16 to 19 March 2026

Outcome type: No order made

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 Roberto Martellini formerly employed in Bromley, London.

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 Roberto Martellini: Professional conduct panel outcome Panel decision and reasons on behalf of the Secretary of State for Education March 2026 2 Contents Introduction 3 Allegations 4 Summary of evidence 4 Documents 4 Witnesses 5 Decision and reasons 5 Findings of fact 5 Panel’s recommendation to the Secretary of State 13 Decision and reasons on behalf of the Secretary of State 19 3 Professional conduct panel decision and recommendations, and decision on behalf of the Secretary of State Teacher: TRA reference: Date of determination: Former employer: Mr Roberto Martellini 24082 19 March 2026 Coopers School, Bromley (albeit the conduct allegedly occurred whilst Mr Martellini was employed at Ark Alexandra Academy, Hastings) Introduction A professional conduct panel (“the panel”) of the Teaching Regulation Agency (“the TRA”) convened on 16 March 2026 to 19 March 2026 by way of a virtual hearing, to consider the case of Mr Roberto Martellini. The panel members were Mr Paul Hawkins (lay panellist – in the chair), Miss Claire Lane (teacher panellist) and Mr Ben Wilkinson (former teacher panellist). The legal adviser to the panel was Mrs Luisa Gibbons of Eversheds Sutherland (International) LLP solicitors. The presenting officer for the TRA was Ms Ella Crine of Three Raymond Buildings, instructed by Kingsley Napley LLP solicitors. Mr Martellini was present and was not represented. The hearing took place in 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 12 December 2025. It was alleged that Mr Martellini was guilty of unacceptable professional conduct and/or conduct that may bring the profession into disrepute in that whilst working as a deputy head PE teacher at Ark Alexandra Academy: 1. On or around 31 March 2024, he was in possession of a Class A drug, namely cocaine. 2. As a result of his conduct at paragraph 1, he accepted a police caution on 31 March 2024. 3. On or around 11 February 2022, he slapped and/or hit Colleague A. Mr Martellini admitted allegations 1 and 2 but denied allegation 3. Mr Martellini denied that he was guilty of unacceptable professional conduct and/or conduct that may bring the profession into disrepute with respect to the conduct he admitted as set out in allegations 1 and 2. [REDACTED] 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 persons list – pages 5 to 7 Section 2: Notice of proceedings and response – pages 7 to 15 Section 3: Teaching Regulation Agency witness statements – pages 16 to 34 Section 4: Teaching Regulation Agency documents – pages 35 to 196 Section 5: Teacher documents – pages 197 to 212 The panel also received a recording of Mr Martellini’s police interview which formed part of the panel bundle. In addition, the panel agreed to accept a 1 page screenshot of a text message received by Mr Martellini from Colleague A on 3 June 2023 at 13:25 5 The panel members confirmed that they had read all of the documents within the bundle in advance of the hearing and the additional document that the panel decided to admit. The panel also listened to the recording of Mr Martellini’s police interview 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 B – [REDACTED] Witness C – [REDACTED] Witness D – [REDACTED] Mr Martellini also 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. On 1 August 2016, Mr Martellini commenced employment at Ark Alexandra Academy (“the School”) as a physical education teacher. On 11 February 2022, an alleged incident occurred outside of the school environment. It was subsequently reported and the School conducted an investigation. On 24 March 2022, a disciplinary hearing took place. On 31 March 2024, Mr Martellini was arrested. The School was informed by the LADO. Mr Martellini disclosed the matter to the School on 15 April 2024 on return from the Easter holidays. The School conducted an investigation. On 20 May 2024, a disciplinary hearing took place. Mr Martellini ceased to be employed at the School. Findings of fact The findings of fact are as follows: 6 The panel found the following particulars of the allegations against you proved, for these reasons: Whilst working as a deputy head PE teacher at Ark Alexandra Academy: 1. On or around 31 March 2024, you were in possession of a Class A drug, namely cocaine. 2. As a result of your conduct at paragraph 1, you accepted a police caution on 31 March 2024. Mr Martellini admitted both allegations. The panel was provided with a police caution signed by Mr Martellini on 31 March 2024. In signing the caution, Mr Martellini declared that he admitted the offence “set out above”. The offence identified above on the caution stated “possess a controlled drug of Class A – Cocaine”. The panel noted that Mr Martellini had made a clear admission of guilt in respect of the offence for which the caution was given. This carried significant weight in the panel’s consideration, and was consistent with Mr Martellini’s continued admission of the allegations. The panel was provided with the recording of Mr Martellini’s police interview following his arrest outside the stadium where he had intended to attend a football match. From the recording of the police interview, Mr Martellini’s interview with the School and Mr Martellini’s oral evidence the panel ascertained that Mr Martellini had travelled to Manchester for the football match with friends and they had some drinks in a pub before the game. On the way to the football ground, Mr Martellini’s [REDACTED] gave him a bag of cocaine and Mr Martellini put it in his pocket just before they turned the corner to the entrance to the stadium. At the entrance, there was a line of police officers and sniffer dogs. The sniffer dog identified Mr Martellini as being of interest and a police officer asked if Mr Martellini had anything on him. Mr Martellini answered “yes” and handed the small bag of cocaine over. Mr Martellini was arrested and taken to a police station where he was interviewed and subsequently cautioned. The panel found allegations 1 and 2 proven. The panel found the following particulars of the allegations against you not proved, for these reasons: 3. On or around 11 February 2022, he slapped and/or hit Colleague A. Mr Martellini denied this allegation. In considering this allegation the panel had regard to: • the interview notes that were taken during the School’s investigation from Colleague A, Witness C, [REDACTED], [REDACTED] and Mr Martellini; 7 • witness statements provided for the present TRA proceedings from Colleague A and Witness C; • written accounts provided by Mr Martellini; and • the oral evidence of Witness C and Mr Martellini. [REDACTED] and they had met up in the day or days before a “night out” on 11 February 2022. An anonymous member of staff reported to the school that Mr Martellini had slapped Colleague A during the night out. That person was not present at the time this “slap” was alleged to have occurred. Witness B was appointed as investigating officer and interviewed Colleague A, Witness C, [REDACTED], [REDACTED] and Mr Martellini. All were present during the social gathering after school on 11 February 2022, immediately before the half term break, which involved visits to multiple pubs. During those interviews, Colleague A, Witness C and [REDACTED] stated that Mr Martellini had “slapped” Colleague A. [REDACTED] did not see this and Mr Martellini denied it. The panel carefully examined the various accounts given to establish if the evidence supported that it was more likely than not that Mr Martellini had “slapped and/or hit” Colleague A. In the notes of Colleague A’s interview for the School’s investigation, she stated that a group of staff went to The Harrow and Mr Martellini had been there, which she wasn’t expecting. She stated that Mr Martellini was rude in his interactions with her. She stated that she and some of the others had moved to a different pub to “try and lose” Mr Martellini but he followed. She stated that Mr Martellini had “barged in” and accused Colleague A of [REDACTED] and slapped Colleague A across the face. Colleague A said that after they left The Harrow, they went to a bar opposite The Anchor and she hadn’t felt comfortable there with Mr Martellini present so she, Witness C, [REDACTED] and [REDACTED] left and went to The Anchor but Mr Martellini followed them. She stated that Witness C had seen what happened but [REDACTED] and [REDACTED] did not. Colleague A also stated that another member of staff, [REDACTED], had been at The Harrow but dropped them off in the Old Town and left, and that [REDACTED] knew what had happened because Witness C had told her. Colleague A stated that it had been a “slap”, that it was “not proper hard”, but it was degrading and in public. In Colleague A’s witness statement for these TRA proceedings, Colleague A stated that she had gone out with some staff members from the School and Mr Martellini had been in one of the pubs they attended and that she had not expected for him to be there. She stated that they had started the evening in the Harrow Inn and then went to the Old Town in Hastings. She stated that, during the evening, Mr Martellini was making a point of try