A sick Ayrshire carer, who was convicted at Kilmarnock Sheriff Court of possessing indecent photographs of children, and for having an image of an act of beastiality, has been struck off.
The Scottish Social Services Council (SSSC) said they had “significant” ongoing public protection and public interest “concerns” over the carer’s behaviour.
However, the regulatory body has taken the rare step of NOT NAMING the perpetrator. The carer’s name has been redacted from the regulatory body’s notice of decision, as has their town of employment.
SSSC papers would only confirm in their findings the fact that the beast was convicted at Kilmarnock Sheriff Court on November 14 last year. Two charges relate to when they were employed as a practitioner in a care home service for adults.
The caregiver was found guilty on an additional accusation that they had a “extreme pornographic image” between November 23, 2021, and March 16, 2022, inclusive, that explicitly and realistically depicted “beastiality.”
The carer’s actions were deemed “extremely serious” and “fundamentally incompatible” with the values of the caring profession in SSSC documents.
According to the report, social service providers should not act in a way that would raise doubts about their suitability for employment in the social services, either within or outside of the workplace. It is the responsibility of social service providers to protect the most vulnerable people. The public has a right to anticipate that social workers, in whom they put their faith and confidence, will respect the law rather than
“You (name redacted) have been convicted of possessing indecent images of children and images depicting in an explicit and realistic way beastiality. Your conduct is extremely serious and constitutes a gross breach of trust. Your actions represent conduct which is fundamentally incompatible with the principles of the social services profession and professional registration.”
The report continues: “The behaviour is extremely serious and your actions have contributed to the serious harming of children and represent clear attitudinal and values concerns. You have been prosecuted and convicted of two separate charges. Given the nature of the convictions and the fact that this was a significant pattern of offending behaviour, we consider there is a high risk of repetition.”
The regulatory body admitted there were significant ongoing public protection and public interest concerns as a result of the carer’s behaviour and subsequent conviction, adding: “This type of behaviour is fundamentally incompatible with the values of the profession and the public would have extreme concerns about your continued registration.”
The SSSC added: “The SSSC considers a Removal Order is the most appropriate sanction as it is both necessary and justified in the public interest and to maintain the continuing trust and confidence in the social service profession and the SSSC as the regulator of the profession.”
Ayrshire Live did contact the SSSC over their decision to redact the carer’s identity. We cited an overwhelming public interest reason for the individual to be named publicly, given the gravity of the offences they were convicted for.
However, in response the SSSC said there “are times” when they “do not publish” information in their decision notices, the reasons for which are set out in Section 13 of their Public Information Policy, which can be found here.
A spokesperson for the SSSC said: “Our Public Information Policy outlines why we may not publish information in our Notices of Decision. We consider what is published, or not, based on the individual circumstances of each fitness to practise case.
“Fitness to Practise investigations and decisions are not about punishing workers. Our role is to protect people who use services and maintain public confidence in the workforce.
“The vast majority of registered social service workers do a very good job often under difficult circumstances. It is essential that registered workers maintain proper standards of conduct, act with integrity and abide by the SSSC Code of Practice for Social Service Workers.
“We take failure to do so seriously and if we consider fitness to practise is impaired, we will take action to safeguard standards in the profession and protect the public.
Leave a Reply