PSNI officer sacked after having sex with vulnerable woman while on duty

Behaviour of disgraced policeman described as ‘abhorrent’ by the force

THE conduct of a former police officer sacked after a Police Ombudsman investigation found he had sex with a vulnerable woman while on duty was “abhorrent”, the PSNI has said.

The police officer had sex with the woman at an Antrim industrial estate in 2016, with the incident later coming to light in 2019 when the woman called 999 to seek assistance.

Following the publication of a report yesterday, Chief Superintendent Stephen Wright said: “The officer’s conduct in this case was completely abhorrent.

“He was rightly dismissed in 2022, following a formal misconduct investigation and hearing.

“As a police officer, he was trusted with helping a woman whom he knew to be vulnerable. Instead of protecting her, he used his authority to take advantage of her.

“This was an appalling and despicable breach of trust and, as our panel found, amounted to gross misconduct. Such actions fall far short of the standards expected of police officers, and will not be tolerated by the PSNI.”

Police Ombudsman Marie Anderson said the officer’s dismissal by the PSNI demonstrated that “predatory behaviour has no place in policing”.

When the woman called for assistance in 2019, officers were concerned for her safety. They took her to Antrim Police Station where she told officers that she had been at the same station in 2016 to report a burglary when an officer made inappropriate comments and touched her sexually.

The woman said a short time after having consensual sex with the officer in a secluded area of trees in the industrial estate, he called to warn her not to tell anyone about what had happened.

Mrs Anderson said the officer preyed on a woman who was “obviously vulnerable”.

“The incident occurred in a public space while the officer was on duty. He lied repeatedly to my investigators even when faced with mounting evidence of serious misconduct. In short his behaviour was reprehensible and ill befits the standards required of police officers,” she said.

“Police often come into people’s lives at a time when they are at their most vulnerable, and during such times those members of the public should be protected rather than exploited,” she added. “Such behaviour is a fundamental betrayal of public trust. When proven, it is serious corruption and will not be tolerated.

“My office is investigating a number of cases involving similar allegations against other police officers.

“I would urge anyone who believes they have been targeted by a police officer for sexual gain to immediately contact my office so that their concerns can be thoroughly and independently investigated.”

Mrs Anderson began her investigation after the PSNI informed her about the woman’s claims.

Data obtained from police systems showed officer had travelled to the industrial estate in an unmarked police car similar in colour to a description provided by his victim’s friend.

His personal phone records were examined, revealing that he had called the woman seven times within two hours on the afternoon of the incident.

When initially interviewed by Police Ombudsman investigators, the officer claimed his only contact with the woman had been to provide her with an update about the progress of the burglary investigation – and that he had been in the industrial estate on patrol with colleagues.

When challenged that other members of his crew had at the time been in Newtownabbey, he responded that they must have been called to another job.

He later claimed the multiple calls made to the victim had been to seek more information about a bracelet stolen during the burglary, but there was no mention of the bracelet in the police file and no other officers could recall enquiries in relation to it.

After completing their investigation, Police Ombudsman investigators submitted files to the PPS in relation to the offences of sexual assault and misconduct in public office.

The PPS directed no prosecution, after which the Police Ombudsman submitted a file to the PSNI’S Professional Standards Department recommending that the officer should be disciplined.

In March 2022, a police misconduct hearing reached a unanimous decision that he should be dismissed for multiple breaches of the PSNI code of ethics.

Panel members found the officer guilty of gross misconduct, and noted that any lesser sanction than dismissal would have been “manifestly inadequate”.

In December 2022 his dismissal was upheld following an appeal.

“Cases such as these can be challenging. In this case, the victim was vulnerable and unwilling to make a complaint due to fear and intimidation,” Mrs Anderson said.