Martin Swarfield

Introduction

Martin Swarfield was a teacher at Wells Cathedral School in Somerset who led the school’s expedition to Nepal in October and November 2016. On that trip, and in the months that followed, he engaged in a course of sexual conduct towards a pupil, Pupil A, culminating in sexual activity with her while she was still at the school. Years later he sent her harassing messages and abusive anonymous online comments, for which he accepted a police conditional caution. A panel found every allegation proved in January 2024, and on 10 January 2024 the Secretary of State banned him from teaching for life, with no entitlement to apply for restoration.

Background Information

Born on 9 November 1977, Swarfield began teaching in September 2000 as a newly qualified teacher at a school redacted in the published decision. He joined Wells Cathedral School in September 2005 and was still there a decade later when he led the school’s Nepal expedition of 19 October to 5 November 2016. After a school safeguarding investigation in May 2017, Pupil A complained to the police in June 2017, and Swarfield was arrested at the school and suspended on 30 June 2017.

The Controversy or Incident That Led to Their Cancellation

On the Nepal expedition, which he led, the panel found the following proved. On around 22 to 23 October 2016 Swarfield entered Pupil A’s hotel bedroom and hugged her after a long conversation at her door. On 1 November he gave her a bedroom to herself, separating her from her peers, drank alcohol with pupils including her, took a cigarette from her and smoked it, told her she had looked hot in a club, and said he had chosen a necklace and bracelet for her. On 2 November he invited her to the hotel bar, drank with her, and recounted a fun night with a woman from Nepal. On 3 November he hugged and kissed her goodnight and later knocked on her door. On 4 November he met her at a hotel balcony bar, said he had been watching her at dinner, told her “you are gorgeous and you don’t even know it”, and gave her a gift.

The conduct escalated. On 5 November Swarfield kissed Pupil A, followed her into the toilets, manoeuvred her into a cubicle, pinned her against the cubicle door and kissed her; another pupil banged on the door until they got out. In the early hours of 6 November he came to her hotel room, pulled her towards him, kissed her neck, unbuttoned her top, groped her breasts and kissed her with his tongue; when two pupils intervened he claimed she had been unwell. On the journey home he told her “this can’t happen again” and that his job and family would be in jeopardy if it ever came out. Within a week of returning he told Pupil D he regretted what had happened, would vehemently deny anything had happened with Pupil A, and expected Pupil D to do the same.

Back in England, between 6 November 2016 and 30 June 2017, Swarfield met Pupil A regularly, offered to pay for yoga lessons, called her beautiful and sexy, and told her he wanted to have sex with her, mixing affectionate texts and emails framed as pastoral care with warnings that he was terrified of losing his job. On 14 November 2016 he picked her up from an off-site session, drove to an empty car park, pulled her back after she moved away, kissed her, and caused or allowed her to manually stimulate his penis until he ejaculated onto her hand; he accepted the forensic evidence verifying this encounter. On 28 November 2016 he picked her up again, took her to an empty house and had sex with her, telling her afterwards that her vagina was like his new toy. Pupil A told the panel she did not feel she had a choice.

A separate proved strand came years later, after Pupil A had left the school. On 26 February 2020 Swarfield texted her from an unknown number, urging her to say the allegations were all lies and a set-up before the matter reached the press. In late February 2020 he also posted anonymous comments attacking her, beginning “Family wrecker!”, dismissing accounts of rape against her as attention seeking, and warning she would destroy the life of anyone who cared about her. On 27 March 2020 he accepted a conditional caution, admitting conduct contrary to section 2(1) and (2) of the Protection from Harassment Act 1997.

Public Reaction and Consequences

The school’s disciplinary process ran through 2018: Swarfield skipped an investigation meeting on 29 January, attended one on 5 February, and resigned on 23 February 2018. The school referred him to the TRA on 19 September 2018. A panel met virtually on 4 and 5 January 2024, considering the case without a hearing at Swarfield’s own request, on a statement of agreed facts he signed on 4 September 2023 admitting all seven allegations. The panel nonetheless made its own determination, found every particular proved, and found the conduct amounted to both unacceptable professional conduct and conduct that may bring the profession into disrepute, cumulated as a sustained course of serious misconduct. It found his actions “calculated and sexually motivated”, noted his insufficient insight and remorse, and recommended an immediate prohibition order with no review period.

Current Status

Sarah Buxcey, deciding on behalf of the Secretary of State, issued her decision on 10 January 2024. Swarfield is prohibited from teaching indefinitely and cannot teach in any school, sixth form college, relevant youth accommodation or children’s home in England. No review period was set: the decision maker placed considerable weight on the sexual misconduct findings, the absence of full insight or remorse, and the risk of repetition. Swarfield is therefore not entitled to apply for restoration of his eligibility to teach. The order takes effect from the date it is served, with a right of appeal to the High Court within 28 days.

Impact on Their Career/Life

Swarfield’s teaching career, which ran from 2000 and included seventeen years at Wells Cathedral School, ended with his 2018 resignation, and the prohibition order closes teaching in England to him permanently. The panel found no evidence he had demonstrated exceptionally high standards or contributed significantly to the education sector, and noted he had steadfastly denied the allegations for a significant period before admitting them. With no review period allowed, he can never apply to be reinstated as a teacher.

Sources

• Department for Education, “Teacher misconduct panel outcome: Mr Martin Swarfield” — source