Teacher cleared of wrongdoing over throwing child out of classroom

A professional conduct panel concluded there was not enough evidence that Terry Cripps had lifted the 14-year-old boy off the floor as was alleged – and that it would not have been unreasonable in the circumstances if he had.

The three-day Teaching Regulation Agency (TRA) hearing was told the incident at Woodlands School near Wem, which caters for pupils with social, emotional and mental health needs, happened just weeks after Mr Cripps took up a temporary teaching position in March 2019.

The incident had been witnessed by several other members of staff and was captured on CCTV, but the footage was over-written weeks later.

Electronic incident reports completed at the time had also been lost when the school moved to a new computer system, the hearing was told.

Mr Cripps, from Oswestry, maintained he had removed the child, identified as Pupil A, from the class using restraint techniques he was trained in, and that the boy’s feet had not left the floor.

However, this was in conflict with the testimony of headteacher Julia Taylor, who was not an eye witness but had viewed the footage before it was deleted.

She told the panel the boy was at least a foot off the ground when he was ejected from the classroom by Mr Cripps, landing on his back in the corridor.

Her evidence was backed up by statements prepared by other staff members who had been in the corridor, but Mr Cripps told the panel that the boy was known to run at doors and project himself off them, and suggested this was what they may have seen.

He also said that while removing Pupil A from the classroom he had been trying to shield him as another child, Pupil G, repeatedly attempted to slam the classroom door on the two of them.

Mr Cripps continued teaching at the school until his contract ended a few weeks later.

Delivering the panel’s findings, chair Marjorie Harris said it was “disappointing” that the CCTV footage and incident reports had been lost.

She said: “Both forms of evidence could have provided significant and potentially definitive evidence in relation to the alleged actions of Mr Cripps.”

Ms Harris said the panel had “reservations regarding the thoroughness of the process adopted” by Ms Taylor when she had viewed the CCTV footage and made a written transcript of what it showed.

The panel also noted that the transcript was not counter-signed by then-headteacher Robin Wilson, despite him having viewed the footage with Ms Taylor.

Ms Harris said the panel had concerns over inconsistencies between the CCTV transcript and Ms Taylor’s live evidence to the hearing.

In contrast, she said Mr Cripps had consistently denied lifting Pupil A off his feet, and that the witness testimony of another teacher backed up his account of being trapped in the doorway by Pupil G.

Ms Harris said Mr Cripps’ evidence was “plausible and credible” and concluded that, on the balance of probabilities, he had not lifted Pupil A off the floor.

She added: “The panel concluded that if Pupil A’s feet were momentarily off the floor due to the size differential between Mr Cripps and Pupil A, this would only have been for a very short period and a natural product of the physical forces involved.

“Alternatively, if Mr Cripps did lift Pupil A off the ground, the panel concluded he had good reason to do so.”

Ms Harris said this was because Pupil A had entered the classroom to cause disruption and Mr Cripps was entitled to use reasonable force to remove him in order to diffuse the situation.

She added that Pupil A was described as behaving “frantically”, and just days before the incident had made threats of violence towards Mr Cripps, concealed scissors up his sleeves, thrown an object at Mr Cripps’ face and punched him.

In light of its findings on the facts of the case, the panel concluded Mr Cripps had not breached professional standards.