A teacher who acknowledged having sex with a teen student has been permanently barred from the classroom.
When his wife was at work, 44-year-old Andrew Simms invited the 16-year-old girl to his house for sex.
The educator and father of two began teaching engineering at CTC Kingshurst College in 2014, where he later rose to the position of department head.
Pupil A disclosed to another teacher in January 2018 that Simms had sent her and another student improper texts, and that she was aware that Pupil B had been having sex with him.
Pupil B was picked up by Simms, who then took her to his house where they drank tea before going upstairs where they kissed and had full sex as Simms’ wife worked at night, according to evidence presented to a Teaching Regulation Agency disciplinary hearing.
According to Maurice McBride, who presided over the Teaching Regulation Agency hearing earlier this month, “Pupil B” notified Mr. Simms via text that her father was out and that she was at home and available to see him.
She was assured by Mr. Simms that he would come and pick her up early from the gym, which he did. Mr. Simms was seen by pupil B sporting shorts and a vest top at the time.
According to information provided to the TRA panel, the couple stayed together and frequently had sex at his place where he also purchased her clothes.
Additionally, while she was still a minor, he reportedly drove from the gym to meet her on the night of her prom.
Pupil B began to a different institution in September 2017, but they kept in touch since Simms was assisting her with her coursework.
But because Simms was married and had children, she began to feel bad about the sex because she had developed feelings for a male.
Student B informed the panel that when Simms was a college student, their connection evolved when she shared personal information.
After that, he often “checked in” with her before beginning to open up to her about his own family life.
Other students saw he was paying her “special attention,” and they also noticed that when she clashed with a classmate, none of them got in trouble.
The panel was told that when she tried the pull-up bar in the teacher’s office, he put his hands on her rear to lift her up.
He allowed her to add him to her list of friends during the same semester in 2017 by leaving his phone and the Snapchat app open in front of her.
Pupil B said that Simms requested that she give him pictures of herself throughout their texting exchange. Student B claimed to have emailed Mr. Simms several selfies, including several that were naked.
Although there was no proof of improper communications in court, the panel concluded that the accusation was established, at least in terms of photos, since “it was more likely than not that Mr Simms got an explicit picture of Pupil B.”
Student B stated that she last engaged in sexual activity with Mr. Simms in December 2017.
Up to Mr. Simms’ suspension, there was still texting, but after that moment, there was no more communication.
He made remarks to a female named Pupil A, calling her “beautiful,” and the panel discovered that he also said, “It’s a good thing we won’t be in the same area because I won’t be able to control myself around you.”
She said that she couldn’t take off her sweater because “she had nothing underneath” when he also questioned her whether she was wearing a bra after she complained that she was overheated.
Simms stated that “The TRA has to realize that they are dealing with young girls” in written representations.
The possibility of exaggeration and attention-seeking is very high.
The tribunal disapproved of that argument, prohibiting Simms from teaching for the rest of his life due to his repeated behavior with several students and lack of contrition.
“Andrew Simms is forbidden from teaching indefinitely and cannot teach in any school, sixth form college, appropriate youth accommodation, or children’s home in England,” said Sarah Buxcey on behalf of the Education Secretary.
In light of the gravity of the accusations that were determined to be true, she said, “I have concluded that Mr. Simms shall not be eligible to petition for restoration of his fitness to teach.”
Mr. McBride stated: “Mr. Simms violated the trust placed in him by engaging in a sexual connection with a student and improper communication with another student at the most serious end of the spectrum.”
Simms was charged with having intercourse with a 15-year-old after being interrogated by police and the college during the first investigation into the allegations.
He first denied having intercourse with the student, but authorities later discovered his DNA on a pink suspender belt the girl had given over.
According to Birmingham Crown Court’s prosecutor David Swinnerton, “He stated she had sent him a picture of herself in her underpants and felt imprisoned by her.” Then he made another foolish SMS exchange.
In the end, he acknowledged they had a sexual connection, but he said it hadn’t started until September 2017, after she turned 16.
Because the jury at Birmingham Crown Court agreed that the connection started after Simms became 16 years old, they ruled her not guilty of these offences.
Although there was no proof presented in court regarding improper messages, the TRA panel determined that the accusation was proven, at least in terms of photos, since “it was more likely than not that Mr. Simms got an explicit picture of Pupil B.”
The time of the sexual relationship was another issue where the TRA disagreed with the court’s decision.
It declared: “The panel found that it was more probable than not that Pupil B and Mr. Simms had their first sexual encounter on June 29, 2017.”
“Pupil B’s thorough narrative, including that she was very likely to recall the Prom Day and relating Mr. Simms’s appearance at the gym, was a convincing report,” said the investigating officer.
The fact that Mr. Simms visited a gym and did not convince the panel that he could not have been with Pupil B at any point that day.
Simms informed the watchdogs that he was not attending the hearing but that he was not offering any justifications for his behavior. Never again do I want to educate.