• Do YOU have a story? Email William.G.Hallowell@dailymail.co.uk
• See more Daily Mail on Google - save us as a Preferred Source

A teacher who failed to disclose that his paedophile fiancé was convicted of ten sexual offences against young boys has been struck off.

Thomas Ridgway, 31, was suspended from Heathfield, an independent girls' school in Ascot, Berkshire, after his partner Matthew Linfield was jailed for six-and-a-half years for his sick crimes.

However the £56,000-a-year private school only became aware that the photography teacher's fiancé was a paedophile after an email from a member of the public.

An employment tribunal has now banned Mr Ridgway from teaching after he failed to disclose Linfield's conviction, and later prison sentence, or that Linfield was subsequently added to the sex offender register for life.

Mr Ridgway, who began working at Heathfield as a photography technician in 2019, denied the allegations but was found guilty by a Teaching Regulation Agency (TRA) panel.

There is no suggestion that Mr Ridgway was accused of any crime himself.

However, from social media posts reviewed by the Daily Mail, it appears Mr Ridgway and his paedophile fiancé continued their romantic relationship after Linfield was convicted up as the teacher posted selfies of them together up until the paedophile had been sentenced.

In June 2023, Linfield was convicted after being reported to police in April 2021 for offering a boy money in exchange for sexual favours before sending the child an indecent image of himself, according to local media at the time.

Thomas Ridgway (left) has been struck off after he failed to disclosed that his paedophile fiancé Matthew Linfield (right) had been convicted of child sex offences. This image was posted online by Mr Ridgway in August 2023, two months after Linfield's conviction

Mr Ridgway had worked as a photography teacher at the £56,000-a-year independent girls' school Heathfield in Berkshire (pictured). He resigned in February 2024 shortly after he was suspended the previous month

It was then discovered that Linfield had pressured a second victim between the ages of 11 and 13 into engaging in sexual activity in return for money and food.

The paedophile had sexually assaulted a third victim on several occasions and in December 2023 was jailed for six-and-a-half years.

In total, Linfield was convicted of ten offences of sexual activity with a boy. They all occurred in the Lancashire towns of Burnley and Colne.

But social media posts have revealed that Mr Ridgway appeared to have remained in a relationship with Linfield after he was convicted, as the photography teacher shared images of the pair together in October 2023 – four months after the conviction but two months before Linfield was jailed in December.

As the last photos of the couple together on social media date back to October 2023, it is not known whether they are still in a romantic relationship.

However, Mr Ridgway was represented at the tribunal by Brian Linfield, who is believed to be a relative of the teacher's then-fiancé.

Mr Ridgway was accused of not disclosing to Heathfield School that Linfield was being investigated by police for the sexual offences in or around 2023.

The tribunal found this allegation not proved.

However, Mr Ridgway was also accused of not disclosing Linfield's conviction or prison sentence and the fact that his fiancé was ordered to sign the sex offender register between June 19, 2023 and December 14, 2023.

The TRA found these allegations proved and the 31-year-old, who did not give evidence, has now been struck off.

The tribunal heard that Mr Ridgway had known Linfield since around 2018 and that the couple had been living together since January 2022.

Heathfield were first made aware of Linfield's conviction after a member of the public sent an email to the school including a link to a news article from the sentencing – after which staff approached Mr Ridgway and he told them of the conviction.

Pictured: Convicted child sex offender Matthew Linfield is pictured in a police mugshot

The photography teacher said the cases were historical and that prior to Linfield's remand the pair had been living together.

In a meeting, Mr Ridgway was noted as having told colleagues regarding his fiancé's crimes: 'I have known since the start. We have always been open about things, even things he has not been proud about.

'I was not aware of all the ins and outs, but I was aware of things that had occurred previously. I was made aware of all the allegations against Person A (who is believed to be Linfield) in 2021…'

However, according to tribunal documents, Mr Ridgway claimed he was 'given no information as to what the actual allegations were, only that they were very serious (REDACTED) allegations'.

The teacher 'relied upon, in particular, upon the fact that Person A: was never arrested; was not subject to a trial; and refused to allow him to attend any court appearance, police interview or solicitor appointment', according to tribunal documents.

'Person A's evidence was that he never "fully discussed the situation" with Mr Ridgway and if asked, would just say that 'my solicitor was now on the case.'

'He stated that when he travelled to court on 19 June 2023, all he said on his return was "it went OK".

'Person A also stated that he "swore (Brian Linfield) to silence" and that Mr (Brian) Linfield "couldn't disclose to (Mr Ridgway) anything I had not.'

Mr Ridgway denied knowledge of his fiance's conviction and that he could therefore not disclose it. In a witness statement, he said: 'I believe his conviction was when he was sentenced!

'I am now aware after the fact that (Person A's) appearance at Magistrates court on 19 June 2023 stands as date convicted. I was not at all aware of that fact so could not disclose it...

'Prior to conviction I had directly asked (Brian Linfield) if there was anything I needed to disclose as I worked at a school…

'In December 2023 just before going back to Burnley (Person A) sat me down and explained that he may be going to prison….

'Following conviction (Brian Linfield) travelled down and explained to me and (REDACTED) exactly what (Person A) had been convicted of. He explained the details of the offences admitted.'

However the TRA ruled: 'Mr Ridgway knew on 6 December 2023 of Person A's conviction and sentence and did not disclose it to the school.

'It was also satisfied that at some point after 6 December 2023, he was aware of the full circumstances of the offences, including that they involved sexual offences against children, and did not disclose those details to the school.'

However, in ruling on whether Mr Ridgway's failure to disclose his fiance's conviction was 'dishonest and or lacked integrity', the tribunal found that he 'did not make a deliberate decision to conceal these matters from the school, consciously knowing that he should have done'.

The TRA said: 'It was apparent that he was very badly affected by Person A's incarceration.

'The panel also concluded he was naïve and it was very apparent that he sought advice from, and was led by, Mr (Brian) Linfield.

'On that basis, the panel did not consider that Mr Ridgway was deliberately attempting to mislead the school.

'It did not, therefore, consider that Mr Ridgway's actions were dishonest by the standards of ordinary decent people.

'However, the panel concluded that Mr Ridgway's actions did lack integrity. Person A's conviction and sentence was materially relevant to the school.

'It had obvious reputational implications and the school needed to be in possession of all material information in order to undertake a risk assessment...

'Person A's conviction and sentence should have been disclosed at the earliest opportunity, which was 6 December 2023 at the latest.

'Insofar as Mr Ridgway seemingly deferred to Mr Linfield, that was a derogation of duty on his part insofar as he had his own, professional obligations.'

The tribunal added that the teacher had been at work between December 6 and December 15, 2023 - meaning he had 'ample opportunity to disclose these matters, which he should have done immediately'.

The panel said: 'Insofar as Mr Linfield suggested they planned to disclose matters at the start of January 2024, whereby 15 December 2023 was the last day of term, that was plainly inappropriate in the circumstances. Mr Ridgway should have realised that at the time.

'The school's code of conduct and Mr Ridgway's obligations were clear and he had therefore shown a disregard for the duties and the responsibilities upon him as a teacher.'

It was found that Mr Ridgway's failure to disclose Linfield's conviction lacked integrity but did not amount to unacceptable professional conduct.

He was subsequently banned from teaching indefinitely and cannot teach in any school, sixth form college, relevant youth accommodation or children's home in England.

However, Mr Ridgway has a right of appeal to the High Court within 28 days of the prohibition or he can apply for it to be lifted in August 2028.