We investigated nine linked inquiries known collectively as Operation Hotton, following referrals from the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS). The allegations stemmed largely from conduct matters occurring between 2016 and 2018.
In total, we investigated 14 police officers. Most officers held the rank of police constable and the majority were based at Charing Cross Police Station. Most of the officers worked on Impact Teams which dealt with disorder and crime in the West End. These teams have now been disbanded.
Operation Hotton began with an allegation of bullying and sexual harassment. The matter was referred to us in June 2018. The progressive investigation strands included the following allegations:
- bullying, harassment and sexual harassment of other police officers
- police officers having sex while on duty
- concerns a police officer assaulted his partner and demonstrated misogynist behaviour and actions
- the use of steroids by police officers
- deletion of material that was relevant to an ongoing criminal investigation
- officers engaging in conversations on WhatsApp that were discriminatory in nature
- failure to report, challenge, or appropriately deal with such allegations
During our investigation, we obtained and reviewed a substantial volume of evidence. To progress Operation Hotton, we carried out an extensive witness appeal. Due to the number of officers implicated in conduct matters and our concerns about possible systemic issues, we approached the MPS for assistance in securing cooperation from further police witnesses to prove or disprove the allegations. We reviewed statements and held meetings with witnesses in response to the witness appeal. We also reviewed detailed meeting notes between MPS officers and our investigators.
We interviewed subject officers and took statements from police colleagues who had worked either directly or indirectly with any subject officer. While investigating specific allegations, we seized electronic devices and analysed content on mobile and IT equipment belonging to officers. We also reviewed relevant data from MPS databases.
Throughout Operation Hotton, we cross-referenced evidence gathered from different strands of the investigation. We also compared the evidence to relevant policing policies, procedures, and guidance. We continuously consulted ‘The Code of Ethics’ which sets out the principles and standards of behaviour that will promote, reinforce and support the highest standard from everyone who works in policing in England and Wales.
Our investigation concluded in March 2020. We waited for all associated proceedings to be complete before publishing our findings. All misconduct meetings and hearings were finalised in September 2021.
14 officers were put under notice that they were being investigated. Two officers were dismissed for gross misconduct and put on the barred list preventing future employment with the police. One of the officers resigned prior to these hearings. A further four officers attended misconduct meetings and a fifth would have attended a misconduct meeting had they not resigned from the force. A further two officers received Management Action and another officer received practice requiring improvement. One of the officers who attended a misconduct meeting also received practice requiring improvement.
Certain officers were subject to investigation across multiple strands. Our findings have been grouped by each investigation strand.
The officer to which the original allegation related to, was criminally investigated, and found guilty of Improper use of public electronic communications network under Section 127 of the Communications Act 2003. The officer was dismissed and placed on the barred list.
Three officers had a case to answer for misconduct in relation to failing to report, challenge, or appropriately deal with the allegation of bullying, sexual harassment and harassment. A disciplinary panel proved misconduct for all officers. One officer received a written warning while two officers had no further action.
The main allegation regarding sex in a police station was not proven however misconduct was proven by a disciplinary panel for an officer’s failure to report or challenge the alleged conduct. The officer received management action.
Gross misconduct was proven for two officers concerned with a police officer assaulting his partner, misogynist behaviour/actions and drug use. Both officers were placed on the barred list.
Gross misconduct was proven for an officer during the investigation into alleged steroid use and the failure to challenge or report this conduct. The officer was placed on the barred list. Another officer received management action after misconduct was proven.
One of our investigation strands was discontinued and resulted in no further action.
Gross misconduct was proven for an officer subject to the allegation that evidential material, relevant to an ongoing criminal investigation, was deleted. The officer was placed on the barred list and another officer received management action.
Gross misconduct was proven for two officers subject to an allegation that discriminatory actions and behaviours were identified from WhatsApp messages. Both officers were placed on the barred list. Additionally, six officers received management action.
Misconduct was proven for an officer subject to the allegation that they engaged in conversations that were discriminatory in nature. The allegation that two officers engaged in sexual activity while on duty was not proven. An officer resigned prior to the completion of the misconduct investigation.
Each investigative strand had its own final report that dealt with the alleged conduct. However, throughout the course of the investigation, concerns emerged about cultural and structural issues.
We identified behavioural themes about the attitudes and behaviour of police officers that ran through the investigations. These included bullying and aggressive behaviour; ‘banter’ used to excuse oppressive and offensive behaviours; discrimination; toxic masculinity, misogyny and sexual harassment; challenging and reporting improper conduct.
We also found several structural issues relating to working practices that enabled the behaviour to go unchecked. Such working practices included the nature of work, shift patterns, isolation and acting up in unofficial promotions.
To address these cultural issues, we issued organisational learning to the MPS. We made 15 learning recommendations to improve policing and public confidence in the police complaints system and prevent a recurrence of similar incidents, under Paragraph 28A of Schedule 3 of the Police Reform Act 2002.
We issued a learning report to the MPS with our thematic findings.
An act of parliament that provides the core framework of police powers to combat crime and provide codes of practice for the exercise of these powers.
Leads and manages the development of the police service in England, Wales and Northern Ireland.
The body that represents the interests of all police constables, sergeants, and inspectors.
Deals with someone’s inability or failure to perform to a satisfactory level, but without breaching the Standards of Professional Behaviour.
Focuses on putting an issue right and preventing it from happening again by encouraging those involved to reflect on their actions and learn. It is not a disciplinary process or a disciplinary outcome.
Department within a police force that deals with complaints and conduct matters.
Refers to lower-level misconduct or performance-related issues, which are dealt with in a proportionate and constructive manner.
This means doing what is appropriate in the circumstances, taking into account the facts and the context in which the complaint has been raised, within the framework of legislation and guidance.
The average is calculated using the individual results of the forces in that most similar force group.
An investigation carried out by IOPC staff.
Carried out by the police under their own direction and control. The IOPC sets the terms of reference and receives the investigation report when it is complete. Complainants have a right of appeal following a supervised investigation (unless it is an investigation into a direction and control matter).
This act sets out how the police complaints system operates.
How a police force is run, for example policing standards or policing policy.
An investigation carried out by the police under the direction and control of the IOPC.
The organisation that is responsible for assessing how to deal with a complaint. For example – whether it can be handled locally or reaches the criteria for referral to the IOPC. The appropriate authority may be the chief officer of the police force or the PCC for the force. If a complaint investigation finds that someone has a case to answer for misconduct, the appropriate authority is responsible for arranging any misconduct proceedings. If you make a complaint, the appropriate authority for your case will contact you.
An intelligence-led agency with law enforcement powers, it is also responsible for reducing the harm that is caused to people and communities by serious organised crime.
Policing bodies include police and crime commissioners, the Common Council for the City of London, or the Mayor's Office for Policing and Crime.
Investigations carried out entirely by the police. Complainants have a right of appeal following a local investigation (unless it is an investigation into a direction and control matter).
IOPC guidance to the police service and police authorities on the handling of complaints.
A complaint or recordable conduct matter that doesn’t need to be referred to the IOPC, but where the seriousness or circumstances justifies referral.
Parameters within which an investigation is conducted.
A person is adversely affected if he or she suffers any form of loss or damage, distress or inconvenience, if he or she is put in danger or is otherwise unduly put at risk of being adversely affected.
This is where a manager deals with the way someone has behaved. It can include: showing the police officer or member of staff how their behaviour fell short of expectations set out in the Standards of Professional Behaviour; identifying expectations for future conduct; or addressing any underlying causes of misconduct.
This could be the Police and Crime Commissioner, the Common Council for the City of London, or the Mayor's Office for Policing and Crime.
A flexible process for dealing with complaints that can be adapted to the needs of the complainant. It may involve, for example, providing information and an explanation, an apology, or a meeting between the complainant and the officer involved.
A flexible process for dealing with complaints that can be adapted to the needs of the complainant. It may involve, for example, providing information and an explanation, an apology, or a meeting between the complainant and the officer involved.
A breach of standards of professional behaviour by police officers or staff so serious it could justify their dismissal.
A matter where no complaint has been received, but where there is an indication that a person serving with the police may have committed a criminal offence or behaved in a manner that would justify disciplinary proceedings.
Disapplication means that a police force may handle a complaint in whatever way it thinks fit, including not dealing with it under complaints legislation. This may only happen in certain circumstances where the complaint fits one or more of the grounds for disapplication set out in law.
The ending of an ongoing investigation into a complaint, conduct matter or DSI matter. An investigation may only be discontinued if it meets one or more of the grounds for discontinuance set out in law.
Quarter 1 covers 1 April - 30 June
Quarter 2 covers 1 April - 30 September
Quarter 3 covers 1 April - 31 December
Quarter 4 covers the full financial year (1 April - 31 March).
You can request a review/appeal if you’re not satisfied with how your complaint has been handled.
Used to house anyone who has been detained.
Complainants have the right to appeal to the IOPC if a police force did not record their complaint or notify the correct police force if it was made originally to the wrong force.
The purpose of an investigation is to establish the facts behind a complaint, conduct matter, or DSI matter and reach conclusions. An investigator looks into matters and produces a report that sets out and analyses the evidence. There are three types of investigations: local, directed and independent.
The ending of an ongoing investigation into a complaint, conduct matter or DSI matter. An investigation may only be discontinued if it meets one or more of the grounds for discontinuance set out in law.
The type of behaviour being complained about. A single complaint case can have one or many allegations attached.
A person who makes a complaint about the conduct of someone serving with the police.
The ending of an ongoing investigation into a complaint, conduct matter or DSI matter. An investigation may only be discontinued if it meets one or more of the grounds for discontinuance set out in law.
List of officers and staff who have been dismissed from policing, or would have been if they had not retired or resigned.
The type of behaviour being complained about. A single complaint case can have one or many allegations attached.
Disapplication means that a police force may handle a complaint in whatever way it thinks fit, including not dealing with it under complaints legislation. This may only happen in certain circumstances where the complaint fits one or more of the grounds for disapplication set out in law.
An independent judicial officer, the coroner enquires into deaths reported to him/her.
A breach of the Standards of Professional Behaviour that would justify at least a written warning.
No further action may be taken with regard to a complaint if the complainant decides to retract their allegation(s).
A record is made of a complaint, giving it formal status as a complaint under the Police Reform Act 2002.
This is a format where information is written in plain English and short sentences.
The IOPC must be notified about specific types of complaint or incidents to be able to decide how they should be dealt with.
No further action may be taken with regard to a complaint if the complainant decides to retract their allegation(s).
Casework involves assessing appeals. Casework staff also have a role in overseeing the police complaints system to help ensure police forces handle complaints in the best possible way.
Disapplication means that a police force may handle a complaint in whatever way it thinks fit, including not dealing with it under complaints legislation. This may only happen in certain circumstances where the complaint fits one or more of the grounds for disapplication set out in law.
Conduct includes acts, omissions, statements and decisions (whether actual, alleged or inferred). For example: language used and the manner or tone of communications.
You can request a review/appeal if you’re not satisfied with how your complaint has been handled.
You can request a review/appeal if you’re not satisfied with how your complaint has been handled.
