A Wisbech teacher who was jailed in 2014 after pleading guilty to seven offences of voyeurism has been banned from the country’s classrooms for life.
Christopher Morris, 34, whose address at the time of the court hearing was Main Road, Parson Drove, Wisbech, made secret films of women in the shower and bathroom after setting up covert cameras at a house in Preston where he was studying astrophysics between 2004 and 2009.
His voyeurism remained undetected until his ex-partner discovered the recordings following their break up.
Morris, who taught science at the Thomas Clarkson Academy at Wisbech, between 2009 and 2014 was jailed for 18 months at Preston Crown Court in May 2014. He was also placed on the sex offenders register for ten years, made subject of a 10 year sexual offences prevention order and banned from using or owning equipment which could be used for voyeurism.
Now on the recommendation of teachers disciplinary panel an order has been made on behalf of Education Secretary, Nicky Morgan, banning Morris from ever being allowed to teach again.
In its findings the National College of Teaching and Leadership (NCTL) panel says Morris pleaded guilty to charges which accused him of making the recordings for the purpose of “obtaining sexual gratification.”
The panel said that Morris had received a character reference from the principal of the Wisbech school which indicated he was “a good teacher,” who was “diligent” and “would give his time to support students who were underachieving.”
Nevertheless the panel’s findings say that despite his teaching proficiency the seriousness of Morris’s behaviour and the fact he was jailed for seven offences of voyeurism which were committed over a period of seven years were such that he should be banned from teaching and the way should not be left open for him to seek to ever have the ban lifted.
Backing the panel’s findings and imposing the ban on behalf of the education secretary, NCTL deputy director, Alan Meyrick said : “Mr Morris’ actions were deliberate and he was not acting under duress. The offences were judged serious enough to merit a custodial sentence.
“I agree with the panel’s recommendation that it is both appropriate and proportionate to impose a prohibition order upon Mr Morris. They have recommended that the prohibition order should be without provisions for a review period and I agree.”
Morris can appeal to the High Court against the decision.