How has this man been allowed near children?

[Pyjamatimenow]

Anyone with more legal knowledge / safeguarding knowledge understand how this has been allowed to happen? Local piano, singing and musical theatre teacher has just been given ten months for sending sexual message to a 14 year old and planning to take her to London. He and his wife ran the theatre and business together. Lots of eyewitnesses say he has been in and around children and young people from the time of the arrest until the conviction, continuing to take part in shows etc. I just don’t understand it. The victim impact statement is really sad. I have problems with anxiety, having my own children, I find this so worrying that authorities didn’t make sure he had no contact.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c4g010z0071o
https://news.lancashire.police.uk/news/2026/january/piano-teacher-jailed-for-sexual-communication-with-a-child/

Unless the bail conditions stipulated it not to be her, then no.

Especially considering his wife seems to think he's blameless.

@drspouse exactly. I don’t understand how a woman could receive evidence that her husband has been sending sexual messages to a 14 year old and carry on as normal?

My daughter has been around this man, how did I not know until I opened this thread yesterday? I’ve spoken to this man and left my child in his presence whilst he was under investigation. As parents we asked him a question once and he said he didn’t have access to his computer for a while, we all commented and thought it was strange and assumed it must be broken or something but now we know the police had it. Why were parents not told? You assume leaving your child at a place owned by the council they would be safe. I’m beyond shocked and concerned.

You didn’t know until this post? Sorry if I’m reading that wrong. There are lots of posts on community Facebook groups if you have access with more info and Wyre borough council made a statement

Lancashire Police said he was bailed under strict conditions not to have any contact with anyone under the age of 18.
But he was not prosecuted over breaching the conditions last year.

He clearly wasn’t allowed to have contact with under 18s. I’m not sure who’s in charge of checking things like this are being adhered to as he seemed to have got away with it.

Its very unlikely those were the bail conditions, in nearly 25 years I have not seen bail conditions like that, very rarely specifying a specific child unless its the victim. It will to have been supervised with children and/or with their parents consent.

Nope, those were the bail conditions. It’s clearly stated in news articles.

From a bbc news : A theatre school boss continued to work while he was banned from having contact with children and was being investigated for sending sexually explicit messages to a 14-year-old girl.

www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c4g010z0071o

Did they print a copy of the bail conditions?

No I literally haven’t heard anything or been told anything. I just saw this man’s face and recognised him. I’m not on social media.

So the answer to your question @Pyjamatimenow is that no, he wasn’t legally allowed to work with minors. But unfortunately somehow he did.

The few days I was there the council safeguard team came and asked questions, so the council must have known he was still around children did nothing.

Because although we like to tell ourselves that society is protecting children, it's really doing a terrible job.

As a teacher if there is any allegations at all of a safeguarding issue we are suspended. It just isn't safe to continue having contact with children. It would be reinstated after a trial or investigation. I don't understand why this isn't the case with anyone who works with children. Innocent until proven guilty surely doesn't hold in this context as further children could be put at risk.

This man should not have been allowed anywhere near children after his arrest. If you read the article it sounds as if his wife has stood by him aswell.

He wants fucking castrating.

Thats the school/LA position though, sounds as if he ran his own company, was he self employed?

Reading between the lines, LADO seem to have been informed but again reading between the lines seem to have not advised suspension. I have a feeling there isnt a requirement legally to suspend but its a safeguarding decision taken by the employer

Yes him and his wife rented the theatre from the council. The council have issued a statement that basically says it wasn’t down to them. They weren’t responsible for the day to day running of it

Once again he WAS banned from working with children . The issue is he breached his bail conditions and seemed to have gotten away with it .

You can ask questions or express dismay about why the ban wasn’t enforced/supervised ,but no he wasn’t allowed to work with kids.

So I’m not sure why some people keep saying he shouldn’t have been allowed - he literally wasn’t.

@This2shallpas you’re quite right of course. I suppose the question is more why wasn’t it enforced properly.

Were you the poster that I asked whether you had seen a copy of the bail conditions?

He would have been on bail though, bail conditions can require you not do certain things, not be in contact with certain people.

Whoever set the bail conditions (judge or police) is at fault here as much as anyone.

The original report wasn't clear and didn't use the exact wording, which is important. Regardless, there has now been further reporting...

Higgins was arrested in September 2024 and released on bail with conditions that limited his access to children.

Lancashire Police said those conditions initially forbade him from "any contact with any child under the age of 18 unless fleeting, inadvertent or approved by Children's Social Care".

Such conditions would have been extremely unusual in the circumstances of this case. It seems they were either reviewed or challenged, and ultimately amended.

The force said the conditions were later altered to prevent contact with "any child under the age of 18, unless it was supervised by a responsible adult who has been assessed by Children's Social Care as competent and able to safeguard".

The report also states that he stopped all 1-2-1 tutoring with minors while on bail.

RE: The original reporting that he'd been arrested for breaching his bail conditions.

New reporting states that he was arrested on suspicion of breaching his bail conditions, and released when the CPS found that the legal test hadn't been met. There's still no information as to what actually led to this arrest.