Cleveland Police Chief Constable Sean Price and Deputy Chief Constable Derek Bonnard to face misconduct hearings
Aug 22, 2012
The Independent Police Complaints Commission's managed investigation into conduct allegations against Cleveland Police's Chief Constable, Sean Price, and his deputy, Derek Bonnard has resulted in a decision that both officers will face a misconduct hearing.
The findings from the investigation were passed to Cleveland Police Authority's Professional Standards Sub-Committee, which has responded by recommending both officers have a case to answer for gross misconduct and should face a hearing. The IPCC has agreed with those recommendations.
The decision to put the officers before a hearing relates to an investigation into a range of conduct allegations including matters relating to the misuse of public funds and the misuse of corporate credit cards. It has been decided Chief Constable Price has a case to answer in relation to 11 matters, while DCC Bonnard has a case to answer in relation to six matters.
Arrangements for the future hearings now rest with Cleveland Police Authority.
The conduct investigation was conducted under IPCC management by Keith Bristow, Director General (Designate) of the National Crime Agency. The investigation findings were shared with the Crown Prosecution Service which concluded there was insufficient evidence to bring criminal charges.
This investigation was separate to the continuing criminal investigation, Operation Sacristy, which is being led by Mr Bristow, into allegations against Mr Price, Mr Bonnard and others with links to Cleveland Police Authority.
The decision in relation to the managed investigation is separate to one previously made by Cleveland Police Authority in early August that Chief Constable Price should face a hearing following the IPCC's independent investigation into an allegation that he used undue influence to have an individual appointed to the force.
The IPCC will not be in a position to publish its findings from the investigations until all misconduct matters are concluded.
In addition to the investigations described above, the IPCC has also begun an independent investigation into the circumstances surrounding the arrest of a Cleveland Police officer by North Yorkshire Police in April 2011. The officer was arrested on suspicion of being drunk and disorderly in Northallerton on 4 April 2011. The officer was released subsequently with no further action being taken. The matter was referred to the IPCC by both Cleveland Police and Cleveland Police Authority on 23 May and 28 May 2012 in relation to the officer's conduct, an allegation that she failed to report her arrest to her employers and an allegation that Chief Constable Price was aware of the matter and also failed to report it.
For further information, contact the IPCC press office on 0161 246 8633
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.
Department within a police force that deals with complaints and conduct matters.
The average is calculated using the individual results of the forces in that most similar force group.
An investigation carried out by IPCC staff.
Carried out by the police under their own direction and control. The IPCC 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 IPCC.
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.
The appropriate authority can be:
- the chief officer of the police force
- the Police and Crime Commissioner responsible for the police force you complained about
- the Mayor's Office for Policing and Crime (if your complaint is about the Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police Service)
- the Common Council for the City of London (if your complaint is about the Commissioner of the City of London police).
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).
A person is adversely affected is 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.
IPCC guidance to the police service and police authorities on the handling of complaints.
Parameters within which an investigation is conducted.
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 explanation, an apology, or a meeting between the complainant and the officer complained about.
Consists of a chair, two deputy chairs, and commissioners – each responsible for specific police forces, guardianship work and individual cases.
Disapplication means that a police force may handle a complaint in whatever manner it thinks fit, including not dealing with it under complaints legislation. This may only take place in certain limited 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.
Used to house anyone who has been detained.
Complainants have the right to appeal to the IPCC 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 a complaint and produces a report that details the outcome of each allegation. There are four types of investigation: local investigation, supervised investigation, managed investigation and independent investigation.
A person who makes a complaint about the conduct of someone serving with the police.
The type of behaviour being complained about. A single complaint case can have one or many allegations attached.
An independent judicial officer, the coroner enquires into deaths reported to him/her.
A record is made of a complaint, giving it formal status as a complaint under the Police Reform Act 2002.
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.
The IPCC must be notified about specific types of complaint or incidents to be able to decide how they should be dealt with.
Conduct includes acts, omissions, statements and decisions (whether actual, alleged or inferred). For example: language used and the manner or tone of communications.
An application by a complainant for a police decision to be reviewed.