Ex-Clitheroe Royal Grammar School teacher's hearing concludes

A misconduct hearing of long-serving teacher Simon Mumford was heard this week, starting on Tuesday, September 3 and finishing on Tuesday, September 6, after allegations were made that he behaved inappropriately with a pupil.

Mumford, who was the head of physics at Clitheroe Royal Grammar School between September 2013 and July 2023, admitted some of the allegations prior to the hearing.

The panel in the virtual hearing, led by Stephen Chappell and also made up of Peter Ward and Bernie Whittle, found Mumford’s actions “constituted behaviour which may bring the profession into disrepute” and they were satisfied he was “guilty of unacceptable professional conduct.”

The first allegation, which Mumford, of Lancaster, accepted, was that he organised and participated in an overnight camping trip with a female pupil, referred to as Pupil A, and her older sibling, to Priest’s Hole Cave in the Lake District.

Simon Mumford was the head of physics at Clitheroe Royal Grammar School for 10 years (Image: Google Maps/Archive)

Pupil A said in 2020, during the Covid-19 lockdown period, Mumford gave her the idea that she should go on a camping trip to the cave with her family. However, these conversations developed into those about the two of them attending the cave, with Mumford proposing he would take her by himself.

Evidence given by Pupil A was that Mumford, a teacher with more than 25 years of experience, had talked to her about how much he wanted to show her the view at the cave and what it was like to experience sleeping under the stars.

She stated her parents had given her permission to go on the trip as long as her elder sibling attended too.

On June 18, 2021, she took a bus to Clitheroe and met Mumford after he had finished work before he drove her to his house in Lancaster where he picked up his campervan and equipment.

Pupil A and Mumford travelled to the cave separately to her sibling, who met them there, and they set up camp.

The panel found that under no circumstances should Mumford have arranged a personal camping trip outside of the school setting. In doing so, he “had encouraged a relationship which went beyond a professional teacher-pupil relationship, therefore failing to maintain appropriate professional boundaries.”

The next allegation related to having contact with Pupil A outside of school hours, including conversations with them in person and/or on Microsoft Teams, and that he spent time alone with Pupil A.

Pupil A said when she was in year 11 at the school, she would have 1-to-1 conversations with Mumford in person and remotely, and that these were not always related to physics and often prompted by emails regarding her health and personal matters.

She said that while on the trip, she was encouraged to call Mumford ‘Simon’ as they were not in school.

READ MORE: Veteran teacher faces hearing over alleged 'sexual' actions towards pupil

The panel considered evidence from Mumford which said the role of a teacher is “not a 9-5 type of job” and the role involves conversations with pupils when needed to provide education, and that he provided an “open door policy” to speak to pupils about physics and other matters.

The panel found while 1-to-1 conversations may be appropriate in some circumstances, any discussion outside the school setting of which an unauthorised overnight trip was not. They also found Mumford and Pupil A did spend time alone together and that such behaviour “did not demonstrate an adherence to the appropriate professional boundaries.”

A further allegation was that Mumford kissed Pupil A on the cheek. Evidence heard said he did so on two occasions when leaning over and whispering ‘I love you’ into her ear.

Pupil A said her understanding was this was done in a fatherly manner rather than romantically. Mumford denied having kissed Pupil A in his written evidence, but in oral evidence said if he did so it would have been more like a “parental peck.”

The panel found it was more likely than not Mumford did kiss Pupil A on the cheek and whether or not it was fatherly or parental, such conduct was inappropriate.

The panel also proved allegations of touching Pupil A’s leg, which Mumford said if it did happen would have been by way of providing reassurance, and of Mumford placing his arm around Pupil A’s shoulder.

Dove Crag in the Lake District, where Priest's Hole Cave is located (Image: Archive/Milton Haworth)

Allegations of Mumford sleeping next to Pupil A and that he leaned over her were not proven.

The last allegation related to whether all of Mumford’s conduct was of a sexual nature and/or sexually motivated.

In her evidence, Pupil A said Mumford was a father figure and that his actions were paternal and not romantic.

Mumford said he made a “huge error of judgement” but did not do so because of any sexual motivation. He said it was a “wholly misguided” attempt to support a pupil and he thought he could help.

The panel found insufficient evidence to indicate the development of a romantic or sexual relationship and could not infer the other allegations were inherently sexual in nature.

Mr Chappell said the conduct, albeit inappropriate, was in the context of a paternal relationship.

The panel also said Mumford’s conduct involved breaches of the Teacher’s Standard, including:

• Teacher uphold public trust in the profession and uphold high standards of ethics and behaviour within and outside school by: i. treating pupils with dignity, building a relationship rooted in mutual respect, at all times observing proper boundaries appropriate to a teacher’s professional position. ii. Having regard to the need to safeguard a pupil’s wellbeing in accordance with the statutory provisions
• Teachers must have an understanding of and always act within the statutory frameworks which set out their professional duties and responsibilities

The panel’s decision on sanctions and prohibitions against Mumford will now be considered by the Secretary of State, with written conclusions likely to be published within three working days of Friday, September 6.