Simon Tidbury

Introduction

Simon Tidbury is a former primary school teacher whose career ended over sexual offences committed against his own colleague at work. A classroom teacher at Bishop William Ward Church of England Primary School in Colchester from January 2014, he was convicted on 16 February 2021 of two counts of recording an image beneath a person’s clothing without consent and one count of operating equipment beneath another person’s clothing — upskirting offences under the Sexual Offences Act 2003 — with the victim a member of the school’s own staff and the offences admitted to have taken place on school premises. On 25 October 2022, decision maker Sarah Buxcey prohibited him from teaching indefinitely with no review period and no right to apply for restoration.

Background Information

Tidbury had taught at the school for over six years when he was arrested on 26 June 2020; his employment ended on 31 December 2020, midway between the arrest and the conviction. The criminal case produced a conviction on three counts on 16 February 2021, a restraining order protecting the victim, five years on the sex offenders register, a 31-day Horizon programme requirement, up to 20 days of rehabilitation activity and 100 hours of unpaid work. The offences did not result in a prison sentence, but the TRA decision treats the absence of custody as immaterial to the regulatory outcome.

The Controversy or Incident That Led to Their Cancellation

Convicted of voyeurism against a colleague. Tidbury admitted both the facts and that the conviction was for a relevant offence, in a statement of agreed facts signed on 16 May 2022; the case was decided without a hearing at his request.

The panel accepted the memorandum of conviction and his police record as proof of the offences: twice recording an image under a person’s clothing without consent in order to observe them, and once operating equipment beneath another person’s clothing without consent. The victim was a colleague at the school, and Tidbury admitted the offences were committed on school premises — the decision records that his actions “undermined his colleague’s right to feel safe and secure in her workplace”. The panel noted the guidance’s position that a conviction for any offence involving voyeurism, including upskirting, is likely to be a relevant offence for prohibition purposes, and found his behaviour “exploited his position of trust and should therefore be viewed very seriously in terms of its potential influence on pupils and its threat to the public interest”. The conduct amounted to a conviction of a relevant offence, the TRA’s most serious threshold.

Public Reaction and Consequences

The regulatory consequence was immediate and total. The panel found no evidence of any remorse or any insight into why he committed the offences or their impact on the victim and the school community, and no character evidence was filed on his behalf. Buxcey adopted the panel’s recommendation of no review period, writing that allowing one was not sufficient to maintain public confidence given the seriousness of the findings and the risk of harm. The school lost a long-serving teacher to a prosecution brought by its own staff member, and the published decision now sits alongside the criminal record for any future employer to find.

Current Status

Tidbury is prohibited from teaching indefinitely and cannot teach in any school, sixth form college, relevant youth accommodation or children’s home in England. The order has no review period, and Buxcey’s decision states that in view of the seriousness of the allegations he “shall not be entitled to apply for restoration of his eligibility to teach” — the permanent tier of the regulator’s sanctions. The criminal consequences run on their own terms: the restraining order and the five-year registration requirement were imposed at sentencing in 2021.

Impact on Their Career/Life

The case extends the regulator’s toughest tier to workplace voyeurism: no custody, one colleague as victim, and still a lifetime ban without review, because the offences were committed against a staff member on the school’s own premises and admitted as such. It also documents how a teaching career of six years survives an arrest — the employment ended four months before conviction — yet cannot survive the register of convictions that follows. For schools, the decision is a reminder that safeguarding duties run toward staff as well as pupils, and that a conviction for offences against a colleague is treated as a child-protection-adjacent failure of trust, not a private matter.

Sources

• Teaching Regulation Agency (GOV.UK), “Teacher misconduct panel outcome: Mr Simon Tidbury,” October 2022 — source