William Nuttycombe

Introduction

William Nuttycombe was a teacher at Aylesbury High School for six years until a school investigation found he had uploaded pornographic photographs and videos of himself to public social media accounts — including a solo sex act and sexual activity with another person — under a pseudonym that pupils and parents could find with a simple search. A Teaching Regulation Agency (TRA) panel in June 2023 found the facts proved on his own admissions in the investigation interview, branded the conduct serious sexual misconduct, and noted he had uploaded new explicit content less than six months after a prior warning about his social media use. Decision maker Sarah Buxcey prohibited him from teaching indefinitely with no review period and no right to apply for restoration.

Background Information

Nuttycombe taught at Aylesbury High School. His online presence spanned Instagram and Twitter accounts — one carrying a pseudonym — and pay-per-view sites including OnlyFans, JustForFans and 4MyFans, all linked from his Twitter page. His Instagram profile identified him as a teacher while linking to that Twitter profile. The material came to light when members of the public found the accounts and reported them to the school, which received screenshots of the images and videos. Witness A, investigating for the school, interviewed Nuttycombe, who admitted holding the Twitter and Instagram accounts, using the pseudonym, and that two videos — appendices 13 and 14 in the case bundle — were of him. He did not attend or respond to the TRA proceedings; the hearing went ahead in his absence in June 2023.

The Controversy or Incident That Led to Their Cancellation

Admitted in the school investigation, banned by the regulator. Nuttycombe admitted to the school investigator that the accounts were his and that the two explicit videos were of him; the panel found all three allegations proved on those admissions and the evidence before it.

The panel reviewed the images posted on Instagram and judged their captions “sexually suggestive and of a provocative nature”. Appendix 13 showed a solo sex act and appendix 14 sexual activity with another person, both carrying the JustForFans watermark. The panel concluded the watermark showed a desire to drive traffic from his Twitter page to his pay-per-view pages. Although his accounts were by then private, the panel found the public had been able to access the content before the reports, and that Witness A could correlate his real name to his pseudonym quickly through a simple Google search — so pupils and parents remained able to find him, or could purchase access to more. The panel found all three particulars proved: the uploads, the explicit sexual content, and the failure to keep the material from pupil and parent view.

The panel found the conduct amounted to both unacceptable professional conduct and conduct that may bring the profession into disrepute, listing as relevant factors that he was easily searchable, that his Instagram identified him as a teacher, and that the pay-per-view sites were commercial in nature. It noted he had been previously warned about inappropriate social media use and had uploaded inappropriate content again less than six months after that warning. It found his behaviour amounted to serious sexual misconduct and recommended prohibition without any review period, citing the absence of any insight or genuine remorse. Buxcey adopted the recommendation in full, giving particular weight to the previous warning and to the panel’s view that there was a continuing risk of repetition.

Public Reaction and Consequences

No press coverage attaches to the case; the published decision is the public record. The school’s consequences ran first: the public reports, the investigation interview, and the escalation to the TRA. The panel recorded mitigation that Nuttycombe said he was suffering from a health condition and was supporting a pupil with a mental health issue, but found no medical or other evidence was produced for either claim, and noted that no colleague references attesting to his teaching were provided despite his six years at the school. The earlier warning for the same category of conduct removed any argument that the uploads were a one-off lapse, and the panel held that publication of its findings alone would “unacceptably compromise the public interest”.

Current Status

Nuttycombe 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 further decided that he shall not be entitled to apply for restoration of his eligibility to teach. The determination is dated 20 June 2023, with Buxcey’s order dated 23 June 2023, effective from service. He retains a right of appeal to the King’s Bench Division of the High Court within 28 days of notice of the order; the published record shows none was filed.

Impact on Their Career/Life

Nuttycombe’s case extends teacher-misconduct findings to content created outside school entirely — no pupil featured in any of the material, and no allegation of classroom misconduct was made. The ban rests on three things the panel treated as compounding: the content was public and commercial, his teacher identity was attached to it one click away, and it recurred after a warning. For the regulator the case marks the boundary that a teacher’s lawful adult content business becomes professional misconduct when it is findable by the pupils and parents of the school that employs them — and that a prior warning converts a second upload into a career-ending event. The no-review, no-restoration outcome places the case in the same severest tier as sexual misconduct involving pupils.

Sources

• Dept for Education, “Teacher misconduct panel outcome: Mr William Nuttycombe” — source