A FORMER north Cumbria secondary school teacher secretly filmed a woman as they had sex — and later posted screenshot images from the intimate videos in busy public places.

Carlisle Crown Court heard how “highly controlling and narcissistic” Curtis Clarke, 39, filmed the pair’s sexual encounters on his phone, creating four separate pieces of footage.

The woman was not aware Clarke had done this, nor had she consented to it in any way.

These voyeurism crimes came to light as he tried to humiliate his victim after she repeatedly tried to cut contact with him. He did this by posting intimate images of her — taken from one of the secret videos — on both a Carlisle pub toilet wall days before Christmas and at a bus stop on a busy city route.

Her name, address and phone number were shown and there were grotesque descriptions of her which, said prosecutor Tim Evans, amounted to “an apparent advertisement for sexual favours”.

After Clarke was arrested, the voyeurism videos were recovered from a storage device. His fingerprints were found by police on the pub toilet poster. CCTV captured him in that area.

Clarke admitted two revenge porn offences and was convicted by jurors after a crown court trial of four voyeurism charges which he had denied.

A News & Star investigation revealed that Clarke had advertised his services as a self-employed McKenzie friend — offering paid-for support to people involved in family court cases.

Mr Evans told Clarke’s sentencing hearing today (Friday) the illegally obtained video footage was sensitively edited during earlier court proceedings in a bid to limit the victim’s ordeal of giving evidence to the jury.

But Mr Evans said: “As a result of the instructions and, indeed, false evidence in the trial, one of the videos had to be played in open court in its original, uncensored form.” This was to refute Clarke’s bogus claims.

Jurors also heard how he had made requests to the woman for intimate images which she flatly refused to provide.

In a powerful impact statement, the woman outlined what Mr Evans said was “overwhelming damage” done by Clarke’s voyeurism and revenge porn offending. She had been left feeling “crushed inside”.

She stated: “The whole incident has been devastating for me. I have gone through such a rollercoaster of emotions which I’m still on."

Detailing the harrowing effect of Clarke’s posters, the woman added: “I had strangers calling me and teasing me over two nights. Each phone call resurfaced the devastation.

"For nights I just sat on the couch waiting for my phone to ring. Even when the posters were taken down, I continued to be called as the posters had been photographed and were being circulated that way. Because of this my own mobile phone became a threat to me.”

Clarke had since penned a letter of apology which the woman had said she would not read, regarding it as “insulting”. “This is typical of him, trying to manipulate the situation,” she had said.

Character references had been produced in support of Clarke attesting to a more positive side to him. “But as the complainant puts it, that was the danger,” said Mr Evans. “He was Jekyll and Hyde.”

Defence barrister Ben Berkson, mitigating said Clarke was suspended at school following his arrest and ultimately dismissed, “much to his shame”.

“It is a career he will never return to, if he is being honest with himself,” said Mr Berkson. “His parents say for themselves how Mr Clarke could have been a head teacher. He has thrown that all away and starts again from scratch.”

Clarke devoted his time to helping others, had engaged in charity work for several years, hoped to set up a youth club, had left Cumbria and was the primary carer for a three-month old child.

Clarke, previously of Carlisle and latterly of Grovebury Farm Close, Leighton Buzzard, was given an immediate 29-month jail term.

Judge Nicholas Barker concluded that Clarke was “self-serving, highly controlling and narcissistic”, branding him “manipulative and exploitative”.

Of the revenge porn poster offending, the judge added: “It was calculated, it was deeply malicious and it was designed by you to be vindictive and to have lasting impact on her — and it is clear that it did.”