Cop kept private videos of his ex ‘just in case’
A POLICE officer who told his ex-partner he kept copies of private videos of her “in case there was ever a need for them”, as he continued to send abusive messages following the breakdown of their relationship, has been dismissed.
Police Constable 4997 Paul Roberts, of South Wales Police, confessed to various allegations at a Police Misconduct Hearing on August 27 and 28, where a panel decided that the officer’s actions led to professional misconduct.
The allegations refer to contact Mr Roberts had with his former partner, who was described as Witness A during the proceedings. He admitted that during January 2020 his partner sent him a message ending the relationship between them.
Following the relationship breakdown the hearing was told Mr Roberts went on to send the woman several messages from various social media platforms, which he admitted.
Reading through the allegations, hearing chairman Andrew Clemes discussed some of the messages Mr
Roberts sent.
He told the hearing the police officer used a variety of messaging services including Facebook, WhatsApp, emailing services and even Witness A’s own business website to try to contact her.
He also continued to message her even when he was told not to, and after he had been blocked.
Mr Clemes said: “You told her on WhatsApp she had been a total waste of time. That you hated her.”
Mr Roberts was also said to have sent another message to Witness A, which said: “I have kept some videos of you.” He told her he kept them in case there was “ever a need for them”. It was heard Mr Roberts also messaged her saying: “People will see you for who you really are.”
Other messages were said to have read: “I don’t give a f*** about you”, and “What a b***h you f***ing are.”
Mr Roberts also messaged, saying: “I hope your business falls on its face”, as well as rating the business a 1/5 online, and claiming there were problems with the company’s “reliability and trust”.
Presenting Officer Barney Branston described the messages that were sent to Witness A as “nasty”.
He told the hearing: “I don’t say he’s predatory, but I do say there is an element of planning, and thinking, deliberate messages. “There is clearly a nastiness.” Mr Branston said no physical harm was inflicted at any time, but the situation had had an emotional impact on Witness A.
“He must have credit for giving open admissions at interview stage,” he added.
Giving evidence at the hearing, Mr Roberts said he had continued to work as a police officer ever since the allegations were made.
He also had a key role throughout the coronavirus pandemic, and didn’t take any time off as a result of the allegations made against him.
The hearing heard that Mr Roberts had never been subject to disciplinary proceedings in his 12-year career with the police.
Mr Roberts said: “I chose South Wales Police and left a good career.
“My aim was to try to maintain that good career, and give what I could to the job.”
Tim Evans, on behalf of Mr Roberts, added that the incidents didn’t involve the workplace.
He said: “These are two adults who had a relationship.”
Discussing his client, he added: “This is not somebody who decided he was going to do something.
“This is someone who had an emotional reaction to something. It destroyed him in some ways. Witness A makes it clear it was completely out of character. It was a dreadful reaction to something that really hurt him.”
Mr Clemes informed Mr Roberts that he would be dismissed without notice, adding the decision was taken with the “importance of maintaining public confidence in policing a primary concern”.
Mr Clemes said aggravating factors included “premeditated, planned and targeted behaviour” and “messaging with obsessive intent”.
“The seriousness of your misconduct is incompatible with the expectations of a police officer,” he said.
Mr Roberts was also barred from applying for jobs within the police in the future.