No justice as retiring police escape disciplinary hearings

MORE than 30 West Midlands Police officers have avoided potential disciplinary action since 2010 by retiring before hearings against them could be completed.

The Post has obtained Freedom of Information figures from West Midlands Police, which confirmed that 33 officers faced accusations that included corruption, perjury and assault but opted to retire before misconduct proceedings were completed.

Between April 2011 and March 2016, the officers quit the force while under investigation for a total of 62 allegations that also included harassment, discriminatory behaviour and unlawful arrest or detention.

New rules brought in last year by the then Home Secretary, Theresa May, prevent police officers from resigning or retiring to avoid disciplinary action in gross misconduct cases that could lead to dismissal.

The former Home Secretary introduced the new measures in January 2015 and said the idea of officers avoiding disciplinary action by leaving had directly damaged public confidence in the police.

The wider changes to the rules around police misconduct hearings also opened them up to the press and public for the first time and introduced legally qualified independent chairs.

The 33 officers who left the West Midlands force in the last five years included 18 constables, nine sergeants and six officers of a rank of inspector or above.

Across the whole of the UK, 129 police officers retired while misconduct investigations were ongoing.

A chief police officer or crime commissioner is now only able to consent to an officer’s resignation or retirement if they are deemed medically unfit or in other exceptional circumstances.

Those exceptional circumstances could include cases where a covert criminal investigation could be prejudiced.

Speaking at the time of the changes, Mrs May said: “The abil- ity of officers to avoid potential dismissal by resigning or retiring is an unacceptable situation.

“Direct damage has been done to public confidence by cases in which officers escaped justice by resigning or retiring where they might have been dismissed.

“These regulations aim to ensure that officers are held to account for their actions, that the truth can be established, that victims of police misconduct and their families are provided justice and that the police learn the full lessons of each incidence of serious misconduct.”

Detective Chief Inspector Brian Carmichael, from West Midlands Police’s Professional Standards Department, said: “New legislation came into place in January 2015 which means that officers going through gross misconduct procedures can now not retire.

“An employee may offer their resignation but we do not have to accept it. Even if they do resign we can still pursue any criminal matters against them and make a pension forfeiture application to the Home Office subject to their criteria.

“In some cases it may be in the public interest to accept a police officer’s resignation rather than going through a potentially long, expensive inquiry which is costly to the public purse.

“Should anyone resign with disciplinary matters pending or in progress it will be officially recorded that they resigned whilst under investigation and would be disclosed to any prospective future employers should they contact us for a reference.” Honesty and integrity .................................................. 1 Authority, respect and courtesy .............................. 1 Orders and instructions ............................................... 1 Duties and responsibilities ........................................ 1 Fitness for duty ................................................................ 1 Discreditable conduct .................................................. 3 Breach Code C PACE ....................................................... 3 Corrupt practice ............................................................... 2 Discriminatory behaviour........................................... 1 Improper disclosure of information ...................... 1 Incivility, impoliteness and intolerance ............... 6 Irregularity in evidence/perjury .............................. 2 Lack of fairness and impartiality ............................. 4 Mishandling of property ............................................. 2 Oppressive conduct or harassment ....................... 2 Other ..................................................................................... 4 Other assault ..................................................................... 4 Other irregularity in procedure ............................... 5 Other neglect or failure in duty ............................... 14 Unlawful/unnecessary arrest or detention ........ 4 Rank Inspector and above ......................................................6 Sergeant ..............................................................................9 Constable ......................................................................... 18

The ability of officers to avoid potential dismissal by resigning or retiring is an unacceptable Theresa May