Teacher in Gloucestershire banned from profession over drug use
A panel has found Sheamol Ali guilty of unacceptable professional conduct
Last updated 28th Oct 2022
A Gloucestershire teacher has been barred from teaching after being found under the influence of cocaine while on the job.
A Teaching Regulation Agency panel has found Sheamol Ali guilty of unacceptable professional conduct that may bring the profession into disrepute while he was working at Katharine Lady Berkeley’s School between September 2020 and January 2021.
Mr Ali was employed by HIE Education Ltd, an education supply agency, as a supply teacher.
Between September 1, 2020 and January 27, 2021 Mr Ali worked as a supply teacher in the maths department at the Wotton-under-Edge school.
On January 26, 2021, Mr Ali was stopped by the police while driving and was arrested after they found marijuana and MDMA in his car. The police undertook a blood test which showed that Mr Ali had cocaine and marijuana in his system.
The police did not take any further action in respect of this matter. In a letter to the panel from Richard Nelson LLP Solicitors, Mr Ali admitted that he took a quantity of cocaine during the weekend of January 23/24 2021 and he accepted that he taught online lessons on January 25 and 26, 2021.
Mr Ali acknowledged that the police toxicology report confirmed that there were traces of cocaine in his system on January 26, but stated that he did not realise the substance would still be in his system three days after consumption.
Mr Ali said he did not experience any effects of the substance and he did not consider himself to be under the influence of cocaine at any time on January 25 and 26, 2021.
The letter stated that Mr Ali did not and would not take drugs whilst working as a teacher, nor would he work as a teacher whilst still under the influence of drugs.
It further stated that, because of the coronavirus pandemic, Mr Ali had been teaching remotely, and would not have taken cocaine at the weekend had he been due to teach in person.
The letter referred to the fact that the samples taken from Mr Ali were under the legal limit. As such, Mr Ali did not believe he was under the influence of cocaine whilst teaching on January 25 and January 26 2021.
However, the unsigned statement of agreed facts, which was prepared after the letter confirmed that Mr Ali admitted the allegation.
The statement of agreed facts also indicated that the legal limit in respect of cocaine is 50 micrograms of cocaine metabolites per litre of blood.
When the test was conducted on January 27 2021, Mr Ali had 44 micrograms of cocaine metabolites per litre of blood.
The panel noted that the drug test that took place at 12.45am on 27 January 2021 took place around nine hours after the end of the teaching day on January 26, 2021 and, at that time, Mr Ali was only just under the legal limit for cocaine in respect of driving.
It was accepted that Mr Ali had been teaching remotely on January 25 and 26, 2021 and Mr Ali admitted, as part of an internal investigation, that he had taken a large amount of cocaine over the weekend.
In the panel’s view, it was not relevant that Mr Ali was teaching remotely. He was still responsible for the pupils he taught on January 25 and 26, 2021.
Similarly, it was not relevant that, when the drug test took place in the early hours of January 27, 2021, Mr Ali was under the legal limit for driving. The cocaine was still in his system and would have been in his system while he was teaching.
The panel concluded on the balance of probabilities that Mr Ali was under the influence of cocaine when he engaged in teaching work on January 25 and 26, 2021.
The panel considered that Mr Ali was aware that he would have been under the influence of cocaine whilst teaching, given his comment that he would not have taken drugs that weekend had he been due to teach in person
Prior to this, on January 10, 2021, Mr Ali was approached by police who carried out a search of him and his vehicle. The police found marijuana and gave Mr Ali a formal warning but did not take any further action.
The panel considered character references provided by Mr Ali, which commented positively on his ability as a teacher.
However, the evidence before the panel did not suggest that Mr Ali demonstrated exceptionally high standards of personal and professional conduct or that he had contributed significantly to the education sector.
The panel took into account written representations from Mr Ali, in which he expressed remorse for his conduct.
The panel also considered the letter from Richard Nelson LLP Solicitors dated January 13, 2022, which stated that, in the run up to January 2021, Mr Ali was experiencing pressure of expectations.
Furthermore, the letter referred to the difficulties of the coronavirus pandemic and Mr Ali’s relative lack of experience as a teacher.
The letter also stated that Mr Ali had not taken drugs since the incident and no longer associated himself with the friend group that encouraged and/or influenced this behaviour.
While the panel took account of the mitigation provided by Mr Ali, it did not consider it to be particularly compelling. The panel noted that Mr Ali appeared to show some insight and remorse in respect of his conduct.
However, it considered that there was scope for Mr Ali to further reflect on his conduct and take steps to demonstrate the changes referred to in the correspondence before the panel. Mr Ali is prohibited from teaching indefinitely and cannot teach in any school, sixth form college, relevant youth accommodation or children’s home in England.
He may apply for the prohibition order to be set aside. But not until October 20, 2027, five years from the date of this order at the earliest.