'The evidence shows a teacher preying on children for his sexual needs,' education regulator finds

A high school economics teacher accused of having oral sex with a 17-year-old pupil and inviting the boy back to his house the next day to watch porn, has been found guilty of misconduct, fired and his name entered in the Child Protection Register. 

The case, lodged with the Education Labour Relations Council by the Northern Cape education department, related to the conduct of economic and management sciences teacher Neo Hendrick Seseng, at the Ikakanyeng Secondary School in Dikhing Village in Kuruman. 

Seseng was employed by the school in April last year, and the offences took place in his first month on the job. He was suspended in April this year, and this week the school was ordered to terminate his employment with immediate effect. 

Seseng was said to have been at his home in the village over the Freedom Day long weekend in April last year. According to the case laid against him by the education department, Seseng had befriended and grown close to the boy, they would regularly share lunches and the pupil would visit the teacher at his home. 

The boy’s 16-yearold sister testified that Seseng was her favourite teacher, and she had gone along to visit him on the long weekend with her brother. 

The girl, who cannot be identified to protect the identity of her brother, said they would visit frequently and the teacher offered them cold drinks and cupcakes. On one occasion he offered her brother a beer. 

She told ELRC commissioner David Pietersen they would sometimes watch TV at the teacher’s house, but the signal connection was poor. She said she had not noticed anything strange happening between her brother and Seseng. 

The boy, identified during the hearing as Mr M, was the second witness called to testify. He said he had had a fight with one of the boys at school, and that Seseng had witnessed the altercation. After that he had offered to adopt Mr M as a special learner. 

He said the teacher invited him to his house and he had gone. Seseng, he said, offered him beer and wine and they had both become intoxicated. They were drinking in Seseng’s bedroom when Seseng began touching him.

He said the teacher undressed, kissed him and performed oral sex. At the time he was drunk and had almost passed out. 

Mr M said he went home after waking up, but went back to visit Seseng again the next day, taking his sister with him. He said Seseng was not happy with him having brought his sister along. 

Mr M went back to visit again the next day and found Seseng at home watching porn on TV. This frightened him, and he left. He then decided to report Seseng to the school, adding that Seseng would frequently talk about sex in class and on one occasion had described Mr M’s genitals in front of his girlfriend. 

Mr M said on another occasion the teacher had invited him and three other boys to visit him at home. He had locked them all in his bedroom and gave them a case of beer. They managed to get out and left the house. 

He said the teacher would often kiss him at school in front of others and this made him so uncomfortable that he skipped classes for an entire month. 

Seseng testified on his own behalf. He pleaded not guilty to all the charges. He said that he did not know Mr M or his sister, and told Pietersen that he was a queer man. 

He admitted that he was attracted to men, and explained that he had approached Mr M’s mother when he started the mentoring adoption process with her son. He denied having provided alcohol to any pupils.

He said he believed the school had trumped up the charges against him because of his sexuality.

I fail to understand why a teacher would want to adopt a learner whom he/she knows for only two days.

—  ELRC commissioner David Pietersen

In evaluating the evidence, Pietersen noted that Seseng had not denied inviting Mr M to visit him at home, and that while he denied knowing Mr M and his sister, he admitted to starting adoption proceedings.

“I fail to understand why a teacher would want to adopt a learner whom he/she knows for only two days. The adoption process discussed here is not the formal type of adoption under family law, but rather a particular type of teacher/learner adoption, which takes place at schools by teachers for the purpose of mentoring and paying special attention to the learners involved,” Pietersen noted. 

He said Mr M’s version and that of his sister were consistent, and though they had testified independently in camera, their stories matched and were therefore regarded as credible and reliable. 

“Mr M gave evidence that the teacher gave him alcohol and that the alleged sexual assault took place after he was heavily intoxicated and close to passing out. Other than a blanket denial of the submission, the teacher, in his defence, said he was working on his studies,” Pietersen said. 

He added there was no evidence why a pupil in the position of Mr M would make up such a story, while the teen's version painted a picture of a teacher who preys on pupils for his sexual needs. 

Pietersen found that Seseng had sexually assaulted Mr M, and that he had again violated the boy by showing him pornographic material. He found Seseng guilty of contravening the Employment of Educators Act, and of showing a porn movie to a boy.