Vile Scots carer struck off after sending express pictures to lady, 15, for “sexual gratification”

A VILE Scots carer has been struck off after sending photos of his penis to an underage lady for “sexual gratification“.

Connor Ferguson was faraway from the care register yesterday following an investigation into his behaviour in direction of the lady relationship again to 30 September 2022.

The residential youngster care employee was employed in Kirkintilloch, East Dunbartonshire when he acted inappropriately in direction of the minor.

Ferguson despatched the 15-year-old sexual pictures of himself – together with of his penis – in addition to speaking indecently together with her.

Doing so in pursuit of acquiring “sexual gratification” or of humiliating, distressing or alarming the unnamed lady, Ferguson additionally repeatedly made sexual remarks to her.

Because of his actions, Ferguson was convicted at Paisley Sheriff Court docket in October 2022, however subsequently did not notify his employer of mentioned conviction.

Paisley Sheriff Court docket. Credit: Google Maps.

This led to a listening to of care watchdog, the Scottish Social Companies Council (SSSC), to contemplate Ferguson’s health to practise.

The SSSC’s full report reads: “On 26 October 2022, while registered with the SSSC on the a part of the register for residential youngster care staff, you have been convicted at Paisley Sheriff Court docket particularly that:

“On 30 September 2022 you probably did coerce an older named youngster, aged 15, into taking a look at a sexual picture and talk indecently together with her in that you simply, for the needs of acquiring sexual gratification or of humiliating, distressing or alarming them, did by social media ship her sexual pictures of your self, together with of your penis, and repeatedly make sexual remarks to her.

“Between 26 October 2022 and 19 June 2023 while registered with the SSSC on the a part of the register for Residential Baby Care Staff you probably did:

“Fail to inform the SSSC of your conviction as specified by allegation 1.a. and by your actions at allegation 2.a, act dishonestly.”

The panel discovered that Ferguson’s health to practise was impaired, reasoning: “The behaviour which led to your conviction was extraordinarily severe.

“You coerced a baby to take a look at a sexual picture and communicated indecently with them.

“Your behaviour falls effectively beneath the requirements anticipated of a social service employee and positioned a baby at a severe threat of emotional and psychological hurt.

“Your conviction is basically incompatible with the requirements and values anticipated of a social service employee.

“Service customers have the correct to anticipate honesty and integrity from social service staff, nonetheless you did not notify the SSSC of your conviction and as such acted dishonestly.

“It’s a requirement of your registration with the SSSC that you’ll inform them about any
offences and convictions that will name into query your suitability to work within the sector.

“By failing to inform the SSSC that you simply had been convicted beneath part 33 and 34 of the Sexual Offences (Scotland) Act 2009 you probably did fail to permit the SSSC the chance to hold out a full threat evaluation to make sure that customers of providers in your care have been shielded from any pointless threat of hurt.

“Behaviour which includes dishonesty is troublesome to treatment. Your behaviour straight impacted on the wellbeing of a kid.

“As a social service employee, you shouldn’t behave inside or outdoors of labor in a approach which might deliver your suitability to work in social providers into query.

“You shouldn’t have communicated with the kid in an inappropriate approach by sending them sexual pictures of your self.

“Your communication with the kid was not applicable and falls effectively beneath the skilled requirements anticipated of you.”

Regardless of Ferguson possessing a beforehand good report, the SSSC discovered there to be “no proof of any perception or regret” for his behaviour.

Contemplating all earlier proof and components, the SSSC opted to take away Ferguson from the register.

They defined: “After referring to our selections steering, we determined to impose a elimination order, eradicating your registration from the SSSC register.

“We wrote to you on 4 July 2023 to inform you we wished to put a elimination order in your registration.

“After explaining the results and recommending you’re taking authorized recommendation, you haven’t requested for the case to be referred to a health to practise panel.

“We’re due to this fact permitted by the foundations to impose this elimination order.”

More From Author

A guide to civil litigation

Are you facing a legal disagreement or problem? We know that dealing with legal matters…

A guide to some of the most impactful UK law cases

In the ever-evolving landscape of the UK legal system, certain cases shape the course of…

What is Joint Tenancy? – Thomas & Thomas Solicitors Ltd

In this blog, we’ll unravel the intricacies of property co-ownership, specifically the difference between ‘Joint…