Mr Stephen Turner

Introduction

Mr Stephen Turner was a teacher at Judgemeadow Community College in Leicester from 1 August 1976 until 31 August 2000, teaching economics and PE and coaching cricket. In June 2024 a professional conduct panel of the Teaching Regulation Agency, hearing contested allegations, found proved that around 1987 to 1992 he engaged in inappropriate behaviour towards a pupil, referred to as Pupil X, and developed an inappropriate relationship with him — touching his thigh and genital area, making sexual comments, and telling him to keep the contact secret — conduct of a sexual nature and sexually motivated. On 17 June 2024, deciding on behalf of the Secretary of State for Education, Marc Cavey prohibited him from teaching indefinitely with no review period, and decided he shall not be entitled to apply for restoration of his eligibility to teach.

Background Information

The panel convened on 11 to 13 June 2024 by way of a virtual hearing in public, which was recorded. Mr Turner was not present and was not represented; the panel concluded his absence was voluntary and proceeded in the public interest. He denied allegations 1(a), 1(b), 1(d), 1(e), 1(f), 2(a) and 2(b), and admitted allegation 1(c) — allowing and/or permitting Pupil X in his vehicle — but not that this involved inappropriate behaviour.

The allegations surfaced decades later: in January 2020 Pupil X contacted the police alleging sexual assault. The police concluded their investigation that December with no further action, and the matter was referred to the TRA on 22 March 2021. With no contemporaneous documents, the panel had to weigh conflicting credibility. It found inconsistencies in Mr Turner’s evidence — his police statement that he had “never driven any student into the countryside” against his written account of dropping players off through countryside areas, and his claim not to remember Pupil X despite recalling conversations with his parents. Pupil X’s minor inconsistencies were put down to some 30 years having passed; the panel concluded he was reliable and credible and preferred his evidence.

The Controversy or Incident That Led to Their Cancellation

Pupil X’s account was that after Mr Turner first gave him a lift home, the drives continued down country roads, and Mr Turner began putting his hand on his crotch and genital area over his trousers, rubbing his penis through his trousers, and resting his hand on his thighs. The panel found allegations 1(a) and 1(b) — touching Pupil X’s thigh and genital area — proved on the balance of probabilities, noting Pupil X had been consistent about the areas of his body touched and that the incidents had made him feel dirty and ashamed. Happening on more than one occasion, it amounted to inappropriate behaviour and an inappropriate relationship.

On allegation 1(c), the panel noted that at the time it was not generally considered inappropriate for a teacher to give a pupil a lift home — but not to take a pupil to a layby down a country road, as Pupil X described in his police interview; in the context of the proved touching, the lifts formed part of the inappropriate behaviour and relationship. So were allegations 1(d) and 1(e) proved: that Mr Turner said to Pupil X ‘you’re getting big now’ and ‘you are getting hard’, or words to that effect — consistent across Pupil X’s police interview, written statement and oral evidence, and driven by the physical response the touching produced, not welfare.

Allegation 1(f) was also proved: it was more likely than not that Mr Turner told Pupil X not to say anything and that ’this is our secret’, or words to that effect — Pupil X recalled being told “don’t say nothing to nobody” and “this is our secret”, and said nothing and got out of the car. On allegation 2(a), applying section 78 of the Sexual Offences Act 2003, the panel found the touching of intimate parts of the body and the language inherently sexual, found no plausible innocent explanation, and concluded the conduct was sexually motivated. On 2(b), it found he lacked integrity in asking a pupil to keep the behaviour secret, knowing it was wrong — but did not find dishonesty.

Public Reaction and Consequences

The panel found the conduct amounted to both unacceptable professional conduct and conduct that may bring the profession into disrepute, breaching the Teachers’ Standards on proper boundaries and safeguarding; although the events predated national written standards, the conduct would have fallen short of expectations at the time. It concluded the findings were extremely serious — the touching of a pupil’s genital area and thigh, sexually motivated and of a sexual nature — and would damage the public perception of the profession at any time. There was no evidence of insight or remorse on Mr Turner’s part and no understanding of the impact on Pupil X. Serious sexual misconduct and any sexual misconduct involving a child — behaviours that militate against a review period — applied, so prohibition with immediate effect and no review period was recommended.

Current Status

On 17 June 2024 Marc Cavey decided on behalf of the Secretary of State that Mr Stephen Turner is prohibited from teaching indefinitely and cannot teach in any school, sixth form college, relevant youth accommodation or children’s home in England. He placed considerable weight on the serious nature of the misconduct found by the panel, which included sexually motivated behaviour toward a pupil, and on the panel’s comments regarding the lack of evidence of insight or remorse. In his judgement, the lack of insight exhibited by Mr Turner means that there is some risk of the repetition of this behaviour and this puts at risk the future wellbeing of pupils. No review period was allowed: allowing one would not be sufficient to maintain public confidence in the profession, given the very serious nature of the misconduct found and the lack of evidence of either insight or remorse. In view of the seriousness of the allegations found proved against him, Mr Turner shall not be entitled to apply for restoration of his eligibility to teach.

Impact on Their Career/Life

The prohibition is permanent in practical terms: no review period and no entitlement to apply for restoration. Mr Turner had left teaching in 2000 and told the panel he would never return, questioning the relevance of a prohibition order — but the panel concluded there was still a clear public interest in making one. There were no character references or other evidence of his ability as a teacher, no evidence his actions were not deliberate, and he offered nothing in mitigation and showed no empathy towards Pupil X, whose evidence the panel found credible and genuine more than thirty years on.

Sources

• Teaching Regulation Agency, “Teacher misconduct panel outcome: Mr Stephen Turner” — source