A teacher has been banned for life from the profession for distributing an indecent image of children - after a recommendation that he should be able to reapply to teach after five years was overturned.

Mark Attwood, who was employed since 2005 as head of performing arts, ICT and business at Nottingham Academy, was arrested in November 2017 on suspicion of making and/or possessing indecent images of children.

Mr Attwood received a caution from Nottinghamshire Police contrary to Section 1 of the Protection of Children Act 1978.

He admitted to a professional conduct panel of the Teaching Regulation Agency that he had distributed an indecent photograph or pseudo-photograph of children, had received a police caution for this and that this amounted to unacceptable professional conduct. He was suspended by the school and summarily dismissed in March 2018.

The panel noted the caution itself stated that: “Mr Attwood admitted re-tweeting images of girls aged between 16-20. Most images were borderline category C images. There was one image of three girls that were around 8 years”.

The panel found that Department for Education advice was that such conduct would normally deserve a lifetime ban but said it would instead recommend that Mr Attwood should be allowed after five years to apply for reinstatement in the profession.

This was because the caution related to only one image, which was at the less serious end of the scale, and Mr Attwood will be on the sex offenders’ register for two years.

It also noted that the conduct occurred during a period of stress and that Mr Attwood had recognised the issues that led to this.

The panel said: “Given his achievements at the school prior to this misconduct, Mr Attwood may be able to make a positive contribution if he could demonstrate his suitability to re-enter the profession at a future date.”

But this was rejected by the secretary of state’s decision maker Alan Meyrick, who said: “I consider that this is a case where no review period is necessary to achieve the aim of maintaining public confidence in the profession.”

Mr Meyrick said the evidence showed that Mr Attwood not only possessed the offending image but “proactively distributed it” and that it was impossible that he could have mistaken the three young girls for adults.

“In my view, despite the remorse shown, the misconduct found proven is so serious that a prohibition order with no review is necessary to maintain public confidence in the profession,” Mr Meyrick concluded.