An Edinburgh play assistant who worked at a primary school has been struck off the social services register after he sent lewd messages and images to someone he believed to be a 14 year old boy.

Euan Tomney, 21, was actually corresponding with an account belonging to an adult who was a member of a vigilante group which attempts to out paedophiles who groom children.

Mr Tomney, who worked as a play assistant at Edinburgh's Blackhall Primary, lost his job when his activities were exposed by the group. He was placed on the sex offenders register in December at Edinburgh Sheriff Court, after pleading guilty to sending written communication and sexual images to a person he believed to be Ben Holmes a 14-year-old boy. He was also handed an 18 month supervision order.

Now the Scottish Social Services Council's fitness to practice panel has ruled that he should be removed from the Register for Practitioners in Day Care of Children Services.

Thinking he was corresponding with 'Ben Holmes', Tomney sent a series of sexual messages and pictures of his genitals to AA, a member of the self-styled 'paedophile hunters' group Groom Resisters Scotland. 

The SSSC panel ruling said his behaviour "constituted a serious public protection risk". it added: "You deliberately sent sexual communications and an image to someone who you thought was a child. Although AA turned out to be an adult, this was irrelevant and did not detract from the seriousness of your behaviour. If AA had been a child, there was a risk that you could have caused that child significant harm."

This was "fundamentally at odds" with being a social services worker, particularly in roles with children. While he had not offended previously, Tomney's behaviour involved multiple incidents over an eight day period and was carried out from three separate addresses.

In addition, he had shown no remorse and failed to cooperate with the SSSC investigation, the ruling says. The panel concluded a warning or a suspension would be inadequate punishment and would fail to ensure the public were protected. 

"There is little evidence that you acknowledge your failings and the pattern of behaviour and lack of insight suggest the behaviour is likely to be repeated," the panel said, ruling Tomney should be struck off.