Subscribe to trusted local news
In a time of both misinformation and too much information, quality journalism is more crucial than ever. By subscribing, you can help us get the story right.
- Subscription costs less than £1 a week with an annual plan.
Already a subscriber? Log in here.
29
May
North Yorks Police officer suppressed evidence and lied to colleagues, hearing finds
A former North Yorkshire Police officer breached a number of professional standards, a recent misconduct hearing was told.
A misconduct hearing into allegations made against the ex-police constable, who was referred to only as ‘former officer’, was held at the force’s headquarters in Northallerton on May 12 and May 13.
The hearing was held in private, but the outcome was published last week.
He faced four allegations of breaching standards of professional behaviour.
He was accused of "removing items" after an unnamed person had been arrested for an undisclosed offence on September 9, 2022, thereby "frustrating the lawful search of the premises".
According to the outcome report, the former officer was also accused of lying to Cleveland Police officers on October 1, 2022. It says:
You discussed the arrest [of] another for [undisclosed offences], you lied, telling officers that you had reported the others arrest to the Professional Standard Department and also stated that you have been interviewed in relation to aiding and abetting the offence, when in fact you had not reported the arrest to Professional Standards nor had you been interviewed.
On September 9, 2022, the former officer was conducting a search of a house in relation to an undisclosed offence.
He was accused of sending another North Yorkshire Police officer a series of messages at the time in which he stated he had moved a “massive knife before the police came around” and had “hidden a bullet”.
The final allegation says:
It was found that following the arrest of another, on 9 September 2022, for [an undisclosed offence] you have failed to declare this information to North Yorkshire Police as per the Notifiable Association Procedure, therefore failing to abide by lawful orders and instructions.
Conclusions
A panel, chaired by assistant chief constable Catherine Clarke, found all allegations were proven in their entirety.
Three of the accusations were found to amount to gross misconduct. The fourth, the panel found, amounted to misconduct.
The former officer’s behaviour also breached a number of professional standards, including honesty and integrity, discreditable conduct, and orders and instructions.
Allegation one: removing items
The panel established the former officer had told colleagues on two separate occasions that he had removed and hidden items following an arrest on September 9, 2022.
The report does not disclose where the items were hidden or what such items were.
According to the report, the former officer’s interference with the execution of a police search and the suppression of evidence “violates a fundamental police function”.
It also has the potential to undermine public safety and would significantly undermine public confidence in policing, the report adds.
Allegation two: lying to colleagues
The report also says honesty is a fundamental requirement of police officers and the former officer’s lack of honesty would undermine the confidence of colleagues, have an enduring impact on the former officer’s trustworthiness, and significantly affect the public’s view of policing.
Allegation three: sending messages to a colleague
The former officer was found to have "placed a colleague at risk of compromise" when he messaged them about an ongoing police operation, including to say he moved a "massive knife before the police came around".
The panel was shown records of the messages and the former officer admitted to sending them.
Allegation four: failing to follow policy
During the hearing, the panel took into account the contents of the Notifiable Association Policy and the former officer's admissions that he did not follow correct procedure.
This allegation was found to be misconduct. The report says:
This is because the former officer had received recent training on the policy, refers during the search to need to inform Professional Standards Department and, if unclear about the policy, it was incumbent on him to check it.
The panel concluded that this amounted to misconduct rather than gross misconduct due to the former officer being relatively new in service, the lack of evidence from his supervising officer who was named by him as the main person notified, and the potential for a lack of knowledge to be addressed by training and reflection.
The panel concluded the former officer would have been dismissed from the force had he still been serving.
He was also placed on the police barred list.
The Stray Ferret asked North Yorkshire Police where the former officer was based when serving in the force, but a spokesperson said it was unable to add to the information published.
1