Mr Thomas Hancock

Introduction

Mr Thomas Hancock is a former schoolteacher in England whose career ended in a lifetime ban from the profession. He taught at a school — its name is redacted in the published decision — from 1 September 2014 until his dismissal on 26 March 2021, and he admitted four convictions arising from sexual conduct toward pupils: two counts of sexual activity with a female aged 13-17 in abuse of his position of trust, one count of causing a child to watch a sexual act, and one count of sexual assault on a female. Sentenced to a total of 16 months’ imprisonment, he was prohibited from teaching indefinitely by the Teaching Regulation Agency (TRA) with no entitlement to apply for restoration.

Background Information

Hancock’s employment at the school ran from 1 September 2014 until 26 March 2021, when he was dismissed. The case came to light when a pupil brought to the school’s attention Hancock’s behaviour towards another pupil, identified as Pupil A. Hancock was arrested and the school suspended him. Pupil B later raised further allegations regarding his behaviour towards her.

The matter reached the TRA as an allegation of conviction of a relevant offence, set out in a notice of meeting dated 18 January 2024. Hancock responded with a signed statement of agreed facts, dated 7 December 2023, admitting the facts of the allegations and his conviction. After weighing the public interest and the interests of justice, the TRA agreed to his request that the case be considered without a hearing. A panel of Mr Alan Wells (in the chair), Mrs Cathy Logan and Ms Nicola Hartley therefore considered it at a virtual meeting held in private on 30 January 2024, without the presenting officer or Hancock himself in attendance.

The Controversy or Incident That Led to Their Cancellation

Admitted misconduct. Mr Thomas Hancock admitted the allegations in a signed statement of agreed facts considered by a Teaching Regulation Agency panel. The panel found proved that he had been convicted of two counts of sexual activity with a female aged 13-17 amounting to an abuse of his position of trust, one count of causing a child to watch a sexual act contrary to the Sexual Offences Act 2003, and one count of sexual assault on a female. It accepted the certificate of conviction as conclusive proof of the convictions and the facts necessarily implied by them. Hancock was sentenced to a total of 16 months’ imprisonment, is subject to a Sexual Harm Prevention Order for 10 years and a Sex Offenders Notice for 10 years.

The four convictions were listed in the notice of meeting; the panel amended the fourth at the outset from “sexual activity on a female” to “sexual assault on a female”, treating the difference as a typographical error matched by both the signed statement of agreed facts and the certificate of conviction. In the statement, Hancock accepted that he was convicted on his own confession of the four counts. The panel also had sight of the sentencing remarks and the school’s disciplinary investigation notes, and noted that Hancock had built a relationship with the two pupils as a result of the trust built within a teacher and pupil relationship.

The sentencing remarks referred to a vast amount of inappropriate, sexual communication from Hancock to a pupil of an intimidating nature, and stated that in communication with one of the pupils he had referred to his ability to ‘massage’ her grades. The panel found this was not a one-off incident: Hancock had engaged in an inappropriate relationship with two pupils, the pupils were considered vulnerable, and he had abused his position of trust. He admitted his actions to the police and pleaded guilty, but provided no mitigation evidence to the panel. Although he stated in an email to the presenting officer that he knows his actions have impacted the lives of many families and individuals, the panel was not provided with evidence as to his level of insight or remorse.

Public Reaction and Consequences

The panel found the convictions relevant to teaching and to work with children, breaching the Teachers’ Standards on treating pupils with dignity, observing proper boundaries, and safeguarding pupils’ well-being. It found no criticism of Hancock’s teaching proficiency, but concluded that the seriousness of the offending behaviour was relevant to his fitness to be a teacher, and that the imprisonment was indicative of the seriousness of the offences. The panel described the case as one involving sexual activity, sexual communication with a child and controlling or coercive behaviour, and treated it as serious sexual misconduct in which he had used his professional position to influence or exploit pupils. It recommended a prohibition order with immediate effect and no review period.

Current Status

On 5 February 2024, Sarah Buxcey, deciding on behalf of the Secretary of State for Education, imposed a prohibition order preventing Hancock from teaching indefinitely in any school, sixth form college, relevant youth accommodation or children’s home in England. She decided that he shall not be entitled to apply for restoration of his eligibility to teach, accepting the panel’s view that a review period would be inappropriate for conduct it had found to be serious sexual misconduct. Buxcey gave considerable weight to the lack of evidence of full insight or remorse, which she judged left some risk of repetition of the behaviour. The order takes effect from the date it is served on him, and he has a right of appeal to the High Court within 28 days of notice.

Impact on Their Career/Life

The convictions ended Hancock’s teaching career twice over — first through his dismissal in March 2021, then through a prohibition order that can never be reviewed. Between those professional consequences sit the criminal ones: 16 months’ imprisonment, a 10-year Sexual Harm Prevention Order and 10 years on the sex offenders register. The panel acknowledged there was evidence that he had ability as an educator and a previously good history, but found those considerations outweighed by behaviour it described as calculated and motivated, directed at vulnerable pupils through the trust attached to a teacher’s role. Because the order carries no provision for a review period, there is no process by which he can return to teaching in England, and the published decision remains part of the permanent public record of the profession’s regulator.

Sources

• Teaching Regulation Agency, “Teacher misconduct panel outcome: Mr Thomas Hancock” — source