A cover teacher who flirted with students on Snapchat has been banned from the profession.

Alessio Pimpinelli taught at The Judd School in Tonbridge between November 2021 and May 2022.

Concerns were first raised about the 30-year-old by a member of staff in April 2022 when he began having improper conversations with pupils via the app.

A teacher misconduct panel hearing, held last month, was told how the teacher had exchanged messages of an inappropriate and sexual nature with one or more pupil on Snapchat. He was described as being “quite flirtatious”.

Screenshots between the teacher and a pupil, known as Pupil C, were considered by the panel.

Messages sent by Mr Pimpinelli, who did not attend the hearing, included: “There are quite a few in your year group taking a fancy to me,” and “even Pupil B could see how much you fancy me”.

He also commented the word “hot” after receiving a picture of Pupil C on the messaging app.

As well as this, he said “you are clearly naked”, to which the student responded “I’m wearing pants, Alessio”.

He then went on to say: “You are still naked. Anyway, I was thinking instead of taking those silly pictures of me we could just take a nice one together. I’ve done the same with Pupil G today, that cutie.”

Pupil C messaged back “why would I do that” and the teacher responded “because you love me. And we shall preserve a nice memories for the two of us”.

In a witness statement, Pupil C stated he thought the messages between them became more sexually suggestive over time.

The panel found that Mr Pimpinelli added “one or more” pupils on the messaging app between March and April 2022.

One person, known as Witness A, stated she had overhead some conversations between pupils talking about a cover teacher who had added them on Snapchat and been open about his sexuality.

In her witness statement, Witness A said one pupil shared concerns about the teacher being “flirtatious” on the app. This was reported to the school.

One student, known as Pupil B, said Mr Pimpinelli added him on Snapchat and once he accepted the request, the teacher started a conversation with him “straight away”.

Pupil C stated that the teacher typed his Snapchat username into his mobile phone during a lesson and added himself.

It was claimed Mr Pimpinelli added Pupil B, Pupil E and Pupil F on top of this.

It was also found that he had met/arranged to meet one or more pupils outside of the school grounds.

“On the balance of probabilities, and in the absence of a plausible innocent explanation, [his] conduct was sexually motivated, in that it was done in pursuit of a future sexual relationship...”

A screenshot shows he invited Pupil C to play pool and said he would drive to pick him up.

The cover teacher also repeatedly asked the pupil whether he wanted to meet for a cigarette, in four separate messages.

On another occasion, Pupil B said he had invited Mr Pimpinelli bowling but did not think he would turn up.

When he did, the boy claimed to have been bought a non-alcoholic drink by the teacher, who ordered himself a gin and tonic.

The same pupil said he met up with him eight says later for a walk and that Mr Pimpinelli offered to give him a lift home from school on one occasion via a Snapchat message.

However, the teacher denied this and stated he bumped into Pupil B outside the bowling alley while on a walk, and that he did not arrange to meet him. He also said he only bought a drink for himself.

“My biggest mistake lies in having agreed to share my social media platform with the students...”

The panel considered that, although there was no direct evidence he arranged to meet Pupil B at the bowling place, there was sufficient corroborating evidence another pupil’s account.

Due to the “persistent and cumulative nature” of the messages between Mr Pimpinelli and one or more pupils, the panel concluded that “on the balance of probabilities, and in the absence of a plausible innocent explanation, [his] conduct was sexually motivated, in that it was done in pursuit of a future sexual relationship”.

It was “satisfied that the conduct of Mr Pimpinelli amounted to misconduct of a serious nature which fell significantly short of the standards expected of the profession”.

As a result, it was satisfied he was guilty of unacceptable professional conduct.

In May 2022, the school made a referral to the the Local Authority Designated Officer and Kent Police, and on May 10 the teacher was arrested for sexual grooming, abuse of position of trust of a sexual nature and of sexual communication with a child.

In November of that year, he was informed that police would be taking no further action.

In his written statement, Mr Pimpinelli said: “My biggest mistake lies in having agreed to share my social media platform with the students.

“It was the students who encouraged me to install the platform Snapchat in the first place and then added me.”

He has now been banned from teaching indefinitely and cannot teach in any school, sixth form college, relevant youth accommodation or children’s home in England.

“The findings of misconduct are particularly serious as they include sending inappropriate and sexual messages to pupils...”

Panel member David Oatley concluded: “In this case, the panel has found all of the allegations proven and found that those proven facts amount to unacceptable professional conduct and conduct that may bring the profession into disrepute.

“The findings of misconduct are particularly serious as they include sending inappropriate and sexual messages to pupils and arranging to meet one or more pupils outside of the school grounds. The panel found that this conduct was sexually motivated.

“Furthermore, in view of the seriousness of the allegations found proved against him, I have decided that Mr Pimpinelli shall not be entitled to apply for restoration of his eligibility to teach.

“This order takes effect from the date on which it is served on the teacher.

“Mr Pimpinelli has a right of appeal to the King’s Bench Division of the High Court within 28 days from the date he is given notice of this order.”

The panel added that the now former teacher showed a “lack of remorse” and “sought to attribute responsibility to the pupils rather than himself”.