North Yorkshire Police have concluded a misconduct hearing of an officer – he faced accusations of unwanted, abusive, controlling, and/or coercive behaviour, during three relationships, dating back to 1998.
It was concluded that the officer’s conduct breached the Standards of Professional Behaviour relating to Discreditable Conduct and Authority, Respect and Courtesy and individually and/or cumulatively amounts to gross misconduct.
The officer was dismissed with immediate effect, but had already resigned from North Yorkshire Police on 11 August 2023. The officer refused to engage with the misconduct hearing, other than saying he denied all the allegations.
As a criminal matter, this was investigated by another force area, with a case submitted to the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS), who took the decision to take no further action.
A spokesperson for North Yorkshire Police said:
A police investigation has been carried out in another force area.
We understand that a file was submitted to the CPS for a charging decision and the decision was that no further action would be taken.
As this was not in the North Yorkshire Police area or a North Yorkshire Police investigation, we are unable to make any further comment regarding the outcome.
The hearing was chaired by an independent legally qualified person – a solicitor not on the payroll of North Yorkshire Police.
The hearing went ahead without the officer present. The officer has been afforded anonymity, both during, and following the hearing – that was the decision from the chair of the meeting.
The witnesses were not required to attend, nor did they elect to attend.
As the officer was not present to answer the allegations, it complicated the hearing, and the hearing needed to demonstrate that it had considered fairly the allegations. Given the denial by the officer of all allegations, the hearing approached all claims as if the officer would deny them.
The allegations were from 3 people, between 1998 and 2001, 2005 to 2016, and 2016 and 2017.
In statements the three witnesses described a violent, abusive, and controlling individual.
The reports from the witnesses have been attached in the misconduct hearing outcome, attached at the end of this item. Rather than extract some of incidents here, they can be read in full there.
The Misconduct Panel received an evidential bundle in excess of 1000 pages, additional video recorded interviews,
A detailed psychological report was give from Dr. Carolyn John which was used by the panel in making decisions concerning the officer’s disability and its effect upon his personality and behaviour.
A mitigating factor, that the panel took into account, was the officer’s disability and diagnosed health problems which was said put him “in a less advantageous position compared to others in terms of his ability to cope with relationships”. This was documented in Dr. Carolyn John’s report. In the outcome report it was said the panel recognised and gave recognition and weight to the affect these health issues would have had upon the officer’s conduct at times of stress and increased anxiety.
- Gross Misconduct
- Dismissal without Notice
From the hearing report:
The Panel considered the harm caused by his gross misconduct, including harm to the three victims, the aggravating and mitigating factors, the nature of the proven multiple allegations, the interests of the public and of the police and the Panel concluded having applied the COP (College of Policing) Guidance on Outcomes that the only sanction suitable to fulfil the threefold purposes of the misconduct regime and also to reflect the seriousness of the gross misconduct was dismissal without notice.
Deputy Chief Constable Mabs Hussain, said:
There is absolutely no place for this behaviour in the police service. We demand the highest level of integrity from our officers and staff to ensure that the people we serve can have complete trust in us.
The misconduct outcome sends a clear message and reassurance to the public that we will not tolerate such appalling behaviour from anyone within our ranks and will ensure action is taken.
Misconduct outcome – Constable Z
NORTH YORKSHIRE POLICE
PROFESSIONAL STANDARDS DEPARTMENT
REGULATION 43 NOTICE
NOTICE OF OUTCOME OF MISCONDUCT PROCEEDINGS REGARDING ALLEGED BREACH OF STANDARDS OF PROFESSIONAL BEHAVIOUR
REGULATION 43 POLICE (CONDUCT) REGULATIONS 2020 |
Name: | Police Constable Z | Rank & Number: | Police Constable |
Name of complainant ( if applicable): | Persons A, B, and C. | ||
Case reference number: | CM/11/21 |
You are hereby given notification of the outcome of misconduct proceedings which relate to your alleged breach of the Standards of Professional Behaviour. Details are as follows:
Misconduct Hearing
Date(s) of misconduct proceedings: | 30 and 31 August 2023 |
Location: | North Yorkshire Police Headquarters, Alverton Court, Crosby Road, Northallerton. |
Allegation | It is alleged that you, Police Constable Z breached the Standards of Professional Behaviour in that: you breached the Standards of Professional Behaviour for
police officers, specifically the standards of: 1. Authority, Respect and Courtesy; and 2. Discreditable conduct. It is alleged that you Officer Z subjected three females A, B, and C to unwanted, abusive, controlling, and/or coercive behaviour during the course of your relationships with them. And it is contended that (if proven) the allegations amount to gross misconduct.
Behaviour towards female person A
1. Between 1998 and 2001, you subjected person A to unwanted, abusive, controlling and /or coercive behaviour. In particular, you:
a) Verbally abused her calling her a “bitch” b) Sought to control and/monitor how person A would spend her time; c) Threatened that her son, aged about 8 at the time, would end up in a “body bag” or words to that effect; d) Subjected her to physical abuse by; i. Placing a knife to her throat; ii. Strangling her and/or putting your hands around her throat; e) Subjected her to displays of anger including punching a door in her presence; f) Sought to control and/or apply pressure in relation to what person A should wear; g) Accused her of cheating and/or being interested in other men.
Behaviour towards person B 2. Between December 2005 and March 2016, you subjected person B to unwanted, abusive, controlling and/or coercive behaviour. In particular you: a) Attempted to belittle her and/or reduce her confidence by telling her that she was fat, lazy, ugly and other such insults; b) Sought to isolate person B from her friends and family; c) Sought to control and/or monitor how person B spent her time; d) Frequently attended at person B’s place of work unannounced in furtherance of your attempts to control and/or coerce; e) Subjected her to displays of anger including throwing items and/or slamming doors in her presence; f) Sought to control and/or apply pressure in relation to what person B should wear; g) Accused her of cheating and/or being interested in other men.
Behaviour towards person C. 3. Between July 2016 and February 2017, you subjected person C to unwanted, abusive, controlling and/or coercive behaviour. In particular, you: a) Verbally abused and/or attempted to belittle person C, including accusing her of having a mental health problem and/or being an alcoholic, making reference to her weight and telling her she was unable to “keep her legs shut” or words to that effect; b) Sought to control and/or monitor how person C spent her time; c) Subjected her to physical abuse by nipping, biting, applying pressure to the pubic bone, shoving her, squeezing her wrists and placing a sharp object against her skin; d) Subjected her to displays of anger including throwing your laptop and/or hitting a wall; e) Accused her of cheating and/or being interested in other men.
The above conduct breached the Standards of Professional Behaviour relating to Discreditable Conduct and Authority, Respect and Courtesy and individually and/or cumulatively amounts to gross misconduct. |
Person or persons conducting misconduct meeting:
Gerald Sydenham LQC PMP NE |
Ms. Amanda J. Harvey |
Superintendent 1341 Fran Naughton |
Determination of your alleged breach of the Standards of Professional Behaviour
x Gross Misconduct
Outcome (if alleged breach found to be misconduct or gross misconduct)
Misconduct Hearing
x Dismissal without notice
Person conducting misconduct meeting / chairing misconduct hearing:
Details of reasons for determination and outcome are stated below.
Signature: | G Sydenham | Date: | 31/08/2023 |
Determination and Outcome of Misconduct Meeting / Misconduct Hearing
Reasons for determination:
Chair G. Sydenham G. Sydenham Signed 31 August 2023. Police Member Superintendent F. Naughton Independent Member Ms. Amanda J. Harvey |