And you think that's a good thing? hmm It also means the police can find you innocent but a professional body find you guilty.
Yes, I think that's a good thing. For a start, behaviour doesn't have to be criminal to meet the threshold to make you incompetent to do your job. For example, the police may investigate a claim of rape from a pupil against a teacher. The police may find that there is insufficient evidence to prosecute or even confirm intercourse took place. But a professional panel can look at the case more holistically and see if there was behaviour surrounding the case which feel short of criminal behaviour but made them unfit to practice. For example inappropriate messaging, spending long periods of time alone in hotel rooms with pupils on school trips, buying presents to groom pupils, inviting pupils to his home or giving unaccompanied lifts.
It would be totally appropriate in that situation for a teacher to be struck off. Could you imagine if a teacher with that background went on to do the same again? There would be outrage he was allowed to continue to practice, particularly if it was hushed up.
I am absolutely not saying that there shouldn't be disciplinary proceedings and dismissals; I am questioning the wisdom of putting this information in the public threshold.
One of the problems with these type of highly responsible but public sector jobs is that if you don't make disciplinary procedures public there is no real incentive for panels not to err on the side of allowing poor staff to continue working. Unlike the private sector they are not losing money so the panel doesn't have that incentive. It's also unlikely that the panel have children in their class or parents being cared for by them or are at danger of being flung in the cells by them. The only real incentive they have to make a fair decision is the public scrutiny that decision will have and therefore the need to make sure the decision will stand up to that scrutiny. It's checks and balances, and will sometimes work out in the favour of the person on the receiving end as the scrutiny will protect them from harsh arbitrary decisions too.