We investigated a number of allegations raised by the colleagues of a Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) officer. At the time the allegations were raised, the officer (officer A) was an acting Detective Sergeant (A/DS), line managing a number of police constables (PCs). These PCs approached a senior officer and reported a number of instances when Officer A’s behaviour had caused them concern. Many of the allegations dated from when Officer A was acting as a Detective Sergeant.
The allegations included Officer A having possession of offensive weapons, using racist and derogatory language, having obtained and shared a photograph of a personal nature from a colleague’s phone without her consent, behaving in a bullying manner towards subordinates, and moving a key piece of evidence in an attempt to strengthen a case against a suspect in a burglary investigation.
These allegations came to our attention on 22 January 2016 as a conduct referral.
Officer A was suspended from duty in June 2016 following further allegations that arose during the course of our investigation.
In the course of our investigation we obtained over 100 statements from police officers and members of the public, and examined over 350 documents and 100 exhibits. We also examined a number of national and local policies.
All of the officers who reported concerns provided us with detailed witness accounts. We also obtained additional statements from other MPS officers, police staff and members of the public.
We interviewed Officer A under criminal caution three times regarding the allegations.
When interviewed regarding the allegation that they had provided factually inaccurate information in a statement as to where a key piece of evidence was found, Officer A declined to answer any questions in interview, choosing instead to provide two written responses, denying the allegation.
We also investigated concerns raised by a number of the officers whom Officer A worked with that Officer A had used racially offensive and discriminatory language in person, in emails and via WhatsApp messenger in regards to the ethnicity, sexuality and perceived disability of members of the public and colleagues. Evidence indicated that Officer A appeared to use words, phrases and epithets that may be perceived as offensive on a regular basis. Officer A’s use of words that were racist or misogynistic or otherwise offensive appeared contrary to the Code of Ethics.
Evidence suggested that Officer A possessed offensive weapons and had on occasion carried a knuckleduster while on duty. Other evidence indicated that the officer had interviewed a man who was on bail without authority, and had obtained and shared a personal photograph of a colleague without her authorisation.
On the basis of the evidence available we were of the opinion that a reasonable tribunal, properly directed, could find that Officer A had a case to answer for gross misconduct.
We completed our investigation in November 2017. We sent our report to the MPS who determined that the officer had a case to answer for gross misconduct.
Officer A attended a gross misconduct hearing in autumn 2019. The independent panel considered the following allegations:
Allegation 1: the independent panel noted that Officer A completed a statement saying they had found a stolen battery in a suspect’s bag during a police search. Other evidence contradicted their evidence. The panel found that Officer A had made an untruthful statement and that the allegation was proven and amounted to gross misconduct
.Allegation 2: at the hearing, Officer A admitted to using some offensive and/or discriminatory language between 11 April 2014 and 14 January 2016. Officer A denied using other language of a racist nature, as heard by other officers. The Panel accepted the officers’ account and concluded that Officer A had used the racist language, and that the allegation was proven.
Allegation 3: a colleague of Officer A alleged viewing a photo of a colleague of a personal nature on Officer A’s mobile phone. Although the Panel did not see the photograph, the Panel noted that a degree of trust and evidence existed between Officer A and the colleague who made the allegations, and rejected Officer A’s account that their colleague had made it up. The allegation was found proven at the level of gross misconduct.
Allegation 4: a knuckleduster was allegedly seen in Officer A’s bag, and Officer A also admitted being in a possession of a police-issued lock knife they should have returned when leaving the specialist police unit that had issued it. The allegation was found proven at the level of misconduct.
Allegation 5: Officer A was alleged to have attended the home address of a suspect on bail without authorisation. The panel found the allegation proven at the level of misconduct.
The panel considered a further allegation, but found this to be unproven.
Officer A was dismissed without notice. Officer A will now be placed on the College of Policing’s barred list, preventing them from working within the Police Service.
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.
