Richard Lees

Introduction

Richard Lees was a physical education teacher at Holy Family Roman Catholic and Church of England College in Lancashire, employed from 25 April 2022 until 31 August 2022. On 5 July 2022, while still employed at the school, he was arrested on its premises. On 13 November 2024 he was convicted at the Crown Court at Chester of four counts of voyeurism, recording images beneath the clothing of another, three counts of making indecent photographs of children, possession of indecent photographs of a child and possessing an extreme pornographic image. He was sentenced to two years’ imprisonment in February 2025. In January 2026 the Teaching Regulation Agency prohibited him from teaching indefinitely, with no entitlement ever to apply for restoration.

Background Information

Lees’ spell at the school lasted a single term and a half, ending on 31 August 2022, seven weeks after his arrest. The offending spanned contexts: the voyeurism was committed in his home against members of the public, including colleagues; the recording beneath clothing targeted girls who were pupils at the school; the indecent image offences involved a school computer. The criminal case took more than two years to move from arrest to conviction, and a further year passed before the regulator considered the matter, at a virtual panel meeting on 14 January 2026 held without a hearing at Lees’ own request.

The Controversy or Incident That Led to Their Cancellation

Conviction-based case, admitted in full. This was not a contested regulatory dispute but a criminal conviction case: Lees was convicted by a Crown Court, admitted the conviction, and signed a statement of agreed facts. The panel accepted the certificate of conviction as conclusive proof, and nothing material was left unproved.

The Teaching Regulation Agency agreed to consider the allegations without a hearing after a request from Lees himself. He provided a signed statement of agreed facts, dated 31 August 2025, and admitted conviction of a relevant offence. The panel, chaired by teacher panellist Mrs Michelle Chappell with Dr Martin Coles and Dr Sheila Cunningham, received a certificate of conviction from the Crown Court dated 27 March 2025 and accepted it as proof of the offences. The case therefore turned not on disputed facts but on what the convictions required by way of sanction.

The convictions, all returned on 13 November 2024, comprised four counts of voyeurism, one count of recording images beneath the clothing of another, three counts of making indecent photographs of children, possession of indecent photographs of a child and possessing an extreme pornographic image. On 7 February 2025 Lees was sentenced to 15 months’ imprisonment for the voyeurism offences, with a further nine months to run consecutively for the remaining offences, a total of two years. He was also placed on the Sex Offenders Register for 10 years and made subject to a Sexual Harm Prevention Order for 10 years.

The school context was explicit in sentencing. The upskirting offence involved the targeting of girls who were pupils at the college, and the sentencing judge told him: “you are at school as a teacher and you are filming up the skirts of young girls”, adding that it was “hard to imagine in your profession and your role a more serious breach of trust in relation to those young girls”. The judge remarked that people “send their children to school and have a right to believe that they will be safe with their teachers”, and that his actions had “disgraced your profession”. The indecent image offences, the panel noted, were committed on a school computer.

Lees initially claimed the images had simply appeared on his computer, a defence the judge dismantled: “It is nonsense to suggest that they just appeared on your computer”, he said, noting that Lees “certainly know[s] how to use computer equipment and you know how to use it covertly”, and that he was “not really ready to take responsibility”. Probation assessed him as “somebody who finds it difficult to display empathy”. The panel identified no mitigation, noting his guilty plea came though not at the earliest opportunity, and concluded that he lacked insight or remorse for his offending.

Public Reaction and Consequences

The immediate consequences were criminal: a two-year prison sentence, 10 years on the Sex Offenders Register and a 10-year Sexual Harm Prevention Order. His employment at the college had already ended in August 2022, weeks after his arrest on school premises. The regulatory consequences followed in January 2026. The panel found the proven facts amounted to a conviction for a relevant offence and breached the Teachers’ Standards on treating pupils with dignity, observing proper boundaries and safeguarding pupils’ wellbeing. It noted his behaviour could affect public confidence in a profession whose members hold influence over pupils and parents, and it took account of the judge’s finding that all the offences involved “a very significant degree of abuse of trust”. The panel recommended a prohibition order with immediate effect.

Current Status

On 15 January 2026 David Oatley, acting on behalf of the Secretary of State, decided that Richard Lees is prohibited from teaching indefinitely and cannot teach in any school, sixth form college, relevant youth accommodation or children’s home in England. The decision maker also decided, in view of the seriousness of the offences, that Lees “shall not be entitled to apply for restoration of his eligibility to teach”. The panel had recommended the order without a review period, citing his limited insight, lack of apparent remorse, continuing risk to women and girls, and a high risk of repetition. The order takes effect from the date it is served on him, with a right of appeal to the High Court within 28 days of notice. The outcome was published on 22 January 2026.

Impact on Their Career/Life

Lees’ teaching career is permanently closed. He served a two-year sentence and must comply with sex offender registration and a sexual harm prevention order for a decade. Most prohibition orders leave a route back after a review period; his does not. Because the order carries no review provision and he is not entitled to apply for restoration, no period of reflection, retraining or reapplication exists: the ban lasts for life. His only legal avenue was an appeal to the High Court within 28 days of notice of the order.

Sources

• Teaching Regulation Agency, “Teacher misconduct panel outcome: Mr Richard Lees,” published 22 January 2026 — source