A former high school teacher from Warrington who manipulated a young child with inappropriate messages, texting “I was horny,” and “you gay yet?” has been banned from teaching.
Lianne Barclay, 43, worked at Bridgewater High School, Warrington, from 2017-2019, when alarm bells were raised about her conduct towards a child.
A Teacher Regulation Agency (TRA) tribunal, which met in November, heard that Miss Barclay, who was employed as a food technology instructor at the school from 2017 but resigned whilst facing scrutiny in 2019, had been caught sending texts and voice messages – plus making phone calls – to a youngster who wasn’t a pupil at her school.
Multiple messages – sent between roughly March and July 2019 – were deemed sexual in character, delving into elements of Miss Barclay’s and the child’s sexuality.
The TRA tribunal found her conduct was sexually driven and constituted a failure to maintain appropriate boundaries with a minor under 16.
The tribunal’s findings include extracts from some of the texts and audio recordings Miss Barclay sent to Child A. One exchange saw Child A enquiring “How long ago did you come out?”, which the ex-teacher answered, before stating: “I was horny.”
In further messages Miss Barclay wrote: “I’m NOT QUIET,” alongside “F*** yes f*** yes.” Other texts said: “My neighbours hate me”, “I do”, “all night”, “when I’m this horny” and “Yes all night.”
In a separate exchange Miss Barclay declared: “I like sex”, “sorry” and “why I like younger ones – more Stanina”, “LOL”. The tribunal interpreted “Stanina” as a spelling mistake, believing the intended word was “stamina”, which could be deduced from the reference to intimate relations with younger individuals.
In another message Miss Barclay questioned Child A: “Brilliant, you gay yet? ?”, which the panel regarded as a private correspondence discussing Child A’s sexuality. Additional texts showed Miss Barclay writing: “Can’t wait for a cuddle”, “you’re mine,” and “I will never stop loving you.”
The TRA tribunal determined that irrespective of Miss Barclay’s motives, the substance of the communications sent to Child A were “by their very nature sexual and concerned Miss Barclay’s private life.” These exchanges were deemed intimate in character.
The TRA panel also examined voice messages sent from Miss Barclay to Child A. One stated: “Hey baby don’t get them red bed sheets. I don’t like them red bed sheets, no, can you get the blue ones cos you know that your girlfriend’s favourite colour is blue. Yes.”
Another audio recording from the ex-teacher featured her saying: “I am a mother f*****g princess don’t you dare call me a d***head you get those sheets that I want or you ain’t sleeping in bed with me tonight b****.”
After concerns were flagged, Child A was questioned by officers in August 2019. Miss Barclay was suspended from Bridgewater High School in Warrington, before the new term began on September 2. Officers interviewed her on October 18, 2019.
Miss Barclay resigned from her position at the school on August 31, 2020, although the school’s probe continued. The police investigation concluded on April 26, 2021, with no further action being pursued.
The panel found that while Child A wasn’t a pupil at Miss Barclay’s school, she attended another educational establishment, and Miss Barclay “ought to have recognised that it was not appropriate use of social media to engage in communications with a child of the nature of that found proven.”
Additionally, the panel “considered that the voice messages contained inappropriate language to be used by a teacher towards a child.” The frequency and timing of telephone contact also constituted a violation of professional boundaries.
Miss Barclay argued she had developed a friendship with Child A and because Child A wasn’t her student, she didn’t link her teaching position to their exchanges.
In her statements to the panel, she insisted that Child A was viewed as a family friend, describing her as “like a little sister to her” and saying she would “love a daughter like her”. She contended that “cuddling” is standard within family relationships and non-sexual cuddling isn’t improper.
She also claimed that “as a middle-aged homosexual woman these allegations are homophobic and discriminatory,” contending that the presumption of sexual intent lacked proper evidence. She offered her apologies to Child A’s family and others impacted, saying: “I am truly sorry.”
The panel ruled it was more likely than not that the messages were building towards a sexual relationship, at least from Miss Barclay’s viewpoint.
In their verdict, the panel found that Miss Barclay had committed unacceptable professional misconduct and her behaviour could damage the profession’s standing.
In conclusion, Marc Cavey, chief executive of the TRA, said:”Miss Barclay significantly breached the trust placed in her; and she acted in a manner that manipulated Child A, causing a considerable adverse impact to her welfare and her academic studies. It took the courage of Child A to raise her concerns for the conduct to cease. The panel was concerned that despite the passage of time since these matters came to light, Miss Barclay has not used that time to gain appropriate insight into her actions and to provide evidence that she has taken steps to reduce the risk of repetition by developing appropriate strategies to gain awareness of her actions and moderate her behaviour.
“The panel decided that the findings indicated a situation in which a review period would not be appropriate and, as such, decided that it would be proportionate, in all the circumstances, for the prohibition order to be recommended without provision for a review period.”
“I have considered whether not allowing a review period reflects the seriousness of the findings and is a proportionate period to achieve the aim of maintaining public confidence in the profession. In this case, factors mean that allowing a review period is not sufficient to achieve the aim of maintaining public confidence in the profession. These elements are the very serious nature of the misconduct found, which included a teacher abusing a position of trust and exhibiting sexually motivated behaviour towards a child, as well as the lack of evidence of insight and consequent risk of repetition.
“I consider therefore that allowing for no review period is necessary to maintain public confidence and is proportionate and in the public interest.
This means that Miss Lianne Barclay is prohibited from teaching indefinitely and cannot teach in any school, sixth form college, relevant youth accommodation or children’s home in England. Furthermore, in view of the seriousness of the allegations found proved against her, I have decided that Miss Barclay shall not be entitled to apply for restoration of her eligibility to teach.”
