Top policeman arrested over ‘misconduct’

‘Presumption of innocence’

A LEADING police officer has been arrested and suspended from duty on suspicion of gross misconduct, it emerged last night.

Adrian Roberts, the Assistant Chief Constable of Cleveland Police, is being investigated by his own force, which refused to disclose details of the allegations against him.

The case was referred to the Independent Office of Police Conduct, but the watchdog said the alleged misconduct occurred outside England and Wales so was not in its jurisdiction.

Mr Roberts, who has worked for the force for 31 years, spent a year in Sierra Leone to help professionalise and develop the police service during the ebola crisis, prior to his appointment in Cleveland in 2017.

The force defended the decision not to reveal the reason for his arrest, saying it was in line with guidelines.

The top ranks of the Cleveland force have been in turmoil for years. In January, Richard Lewis, the former deputy chief constable of Dyfed-Powys police, Wales, became its fifth chief constable in just six years.

It is not the first time Mr Roberts, who last year earned around £113,000, has made headlines. Eight years ago he caused controversy when his Citroen was clocked doing 35mph in a 30mph zone, in Stockton-on-Tees.

He claimed he could not remember who was driving and a colleague decided Mr Roberts, then a detective superintendent and head of the traffic division who installed the camera, could not be identified as being behind the wheel and wrote the ticket off.

But other officers at the force were so angered by the apparently ‘cosy deal’, that they along with hundreds of members of the public, complained. The matter was investigated but no action taken. The decision not to award the fixed penalty was later described by the then chief constable Barry Saw as a ‘misjudgment of monumental proportions’.

Last night Cleveland Police confirmed an officer had been arrested and released under investigation.

A spokesman insisted said Mr Roberts’ suspension was a ‘neutral act’ and said there was a ‘presumption of innocence’ in any investigation.