A former deputy headteacher at a North Somerset school has been barred from teaching after a professional conduct panel found he sent sexual WhatsApp messages to female colleagues. Russell Gregory, 46, was deputy head in charge of 'ethos and outcomes' at Clevedon School, near Bristol.
Gregory had a WhatsApp group with two other female staff members. The panel heard that he continued to send sexually explicit messages 'despite staff members asking' him to cease. He also told a junior colleague who was cross with him: "I do love you when you're angry but bet you **** even more amazingly when you are angry".
Messages reported after colleague saw them
Gregory faced a disciplinary hearing at the school in 2023 after a male colleague saw the messages and reported them. A Department for Education professional conduct panel, sitting in July this year, ruled that Gregory should be banned from teaching - a decision he can appeal against in three years' time.
The panel heard that Gregory admitted to sending some of the messages but denied sending others - including the most explicit, in which he referenced a lesbian act and told them: "let's be honest, I would love to watch you two xxx together," followed by "Now that would be hot and ****ing sexy". Gregory refuted sending that message, despite WhatsApp indicating it originated from an account bearing his name and profile picture, and he also denied understanding the sexual term referenced.
Panel found denial 'not plausible'
The panel's members described this denial as 'not plausible', concluding that, based on the balance of probabilities, he did indeed send those messages. "Mr Gregory's conduct demonstrated a flagrant disregard for his role and responsibilities as a senior leader and member of the teaching profession," stated the panel's report. "Mr Gregory had a duty not to participate or encourage such inappropriate messaging."
The panel noted that some of the messages were not sent during the working day. However, it could not be said that the WhatsApp group had no connection to Mr Gregory's employment as a teacher, as the panel were told by Witness A, that some of the messages exchanged pertained to work related matters such as timetabling.
In his statement to the panel, Gregory said: "I deeply regret sending those messages as they tarnished what was an outstanding working relationship with this member of staff, and although we continued to have a strong working relationship after this incident, because it was dealt with, it was not the same and that is on me."
Conduct brought profession into disrepute
The panel concluded that Gregory had fallen 'significantly short of the standards expected of the profession'. "The panel determined that Mr Gregory's conduct would have a negative impact on his status as a teacher and the perception of the teaching profession as a whole," their report said.
"Mr Gregory was a senior leader at the School, and the Assistant Head for Ethos and Outcomes, and was therefore expected to be a positive role model, and display a high standard of behaviour towards pupils but also to staff," they added. "Owing to the disparity between the respective levels of seniority of the staff participating in the WhatsApp group, there was an evident power dynamic. The volume of the inappropriate and unprofessional messages exchanged (including those of a sexual nature), demonstrated a pattern of behaviour. This indicated that Mr Gregory's conduct was habitual. Accordingly, the panel was satisfied that Mr Gregory's conduct brought the profession into disrepute."
When advising the Secretary of State that Gregory should be permanently prohibited from teaching, the panel's chair stated: "I have considered the extent to which a prohibition order would protect others. The panel has observed, 'In light of the panel's findings against Mr Gregory, which included finding that Mr Gregory sent sexually motivated messages to staff members (including junior staff members), there was a strong public interest consideration in protecting members of staff at the School.'"
The panel chair added: "In my judgement, the lack of full insight means that there is some risk of the repetition of this behaviour, and this puts at risk the future wellbeing of others. I have therefore given this element considerable weight in reaching my decision. I have gone on to consider the extent to which a prohibition order would maintain public confidence in the profession."
"I am particularly mindful of the finding of sexual motivation, and in particular the panel's findings that this behaviour was directed towards more junior members of staff in this case, and the impact that such a finding has on the reputation of the profession," he added.
