Mr William Santos
Please note that the decision can take up to 5 working days to be uploaded onto the HCPTS website. Please contact one of our Hearings Team Managers via email@example.com or +44 (0)808 164 3084 if you require any further information.
Between 13 July 2015 and 17 February 2016, during the course of your employment as a Radiographer at InHealth Limited, you:
1. on or around 19 January 2016:
a. stated to Patient A:
i. “Can I tell you a secret, I want to have sex with an English girl, If I had sex with an English girl I could die" or words to that effect;
ii. "DO YOU NOT LIKE ME THEN, I HAVE HEARD GREAT THINGS" or words to that effect.
iii. "WHAT DO YOU THINK ABOUT WHAT I SAID EARLIER" or words to that effect.
b. sent Patient A a private message on Facebook, stating:
i. "HI [Patient A], I APOLOGIZE FOR WHAT HAPPEN TODAY, I HOPE YOU'RE NOT GONNA HATE ME" or words to that effect;
c. pulled up Patient A's gown and/or brushed Patient A's breast with your hand.
2. The matters described in paragraph 1(a)(i) and 1(a)(ii) were sexually motivated.
3. The matters described in paragraphs 1 to 2 constitute misconduct.
4. By reason of your misconduct, your fitness to practise is impaired.
Proof of Service
1. The Panel was aware that written notice of these proceedings was posted to the Registrant at his registered address by first class post on 15 February 2018. It was also emailed to his registered email address on the same date. There has been no formal acknowledgement that the notice was received by the Registrant, but the Panel is conscious that the obligation on the HCPC is to dispatch the appropriate documents and the Panel is aware that in June 2016 the Registrant had emailed to the HCPC “I am now out of the country and no plans of coming back”. There has been no communication from him since. Good service, in the view of the Panel, has been performed.
Proceeding in the absence of the Registrant
2. Mr Mason submitted that it was appropriate in this case to proceed in the absence of the Registrant. The Panel accepted the advice of the Legal Assessor and paid due regard to the HCPTS Practice Note on Proceeding in the Absence of the Registrant.
3. For the reasons stated above, it seems to the Panel that the Registrant has decided to sever communication with his regulatory body.
4. This is a mandatory review. There has been no application for an adjournment. In these circumstances, the Panel has determined that it is in the interests of justice for this hearing to proceed in the absence of the Registrant.
5. The Registrant was employed as a Senior Radiographer with InHealth Limited and he worked at Eastbourne District General Hospital (the Hospital) from 13 July 2015 until 17 February 2016.
6. On 19 January 2016, Patient A attended the hospital for an MRI scan on her small bowel. During that appointment, the Registrant made inappropriate comments to her, as particularised within 1(a)(i) and (ii) of the Allegation. These were proved to have been sexually motivated. The Registrant later sent to Patient A a private message of apology via Facebook.
7. On 30 March 2017, at his Substantive Hearing, the Registrant’s fitness to practise was found to be impaired by reason of sexual misconduct and the sanction imposed was one of a Suspension Order for 12 months. That hearing was held in the absence of the Registrant who had indicated in 2016 (full details at paragraph 1) that he had gone abroad with no intention to return to the U.K. Nevertheless, that panel suggested in its determination that any reviewing panel might be assisted by the future attendance of the Registrant and his provision of evidence that he has understood the gravity of his misconduct. Furthermore, a recommendation was made that he should provide written evidence of his reflections upon the panel’s findings, and a plan to ensure non-repetition of his misconduct. Testimonials and evidence that the Registrant has kept his professional knowledge up-to-date were also matters that the Substantive Hearing panel considered might be helpful to the Registrant’s cause, come the review.
8. Mr Mason submitted that the fitness to practise of the Registrant remains impaired and that the appropriate sanction now to be imposed was that of a Striking Off Order. His principal ground for contending this is that there has been no engagement whatsoever by the Registrant since June 2016.
9. The Panel listened with care to the submission made and determined, particularly in the absence of the attendance of the Registrant today and the absence also of the provision of any of the documents recommended by the Substantive Hearing panel, that the fitness to practise of this Registrant remains impaired. The Panel echoes the views of the previous panel to the effect that the misconduct found proved is remediable, but it is faced with the unquestioned fact that the Registrant has failed to engage with his professional body for nearly two years. There is, thus, no information as to what, if anything, the Registrant is currently doing, or even in which country he is living.
10. In all these circumstances, it is plain to the Panel that no suitable Conditions of Practice can be formulated and that an extension of the Order of suspension would achieve nothing. Consequently, the only proportionate and appropriate sanction to impose now is that of a Striking Off Order.
No notes available
History of Hearings for Mr William Santos
|Date||Panel||Hearing type||Outcomes / Status|
|16/03/2018||Conduct and Competence Committee||Review Hearing||Struck off|