Police No evidence pair abused roles for sexual purposes
TWO Gloucestershire police officers won’t face a misconduct hearing over allegations they abused their positions for sexual purposes while attempting to recruit a vulnerable woman as an informant.
An investigation by the Independent Office of Police Conduct (IOPC) found no evidence to support an allegation that the officers abused their position for a “sexual or emotionally improper purpose.”
The IOPC did find the officers had a case to answer over abusing their position to make the complainant an unofficial informant, taking advantage of her vulnerabilities and placing her at risk. One officer was also found to have a case to answer for misconduct over using a second woman as an unofficial informant.
In agreement with the IOPC, Gloucestershire Constabulary has determined that the officers won’t face disciplinary proceedings. Both will instead go through a “reflective practice” review process.
In a statement to Gloucestershire Live, Gloucestershire Constabulary said: “The IOPC found that there was no evidence to support an allegation that the officers abused their position for a sexual or emotionally improper purpose. The other findings of their investigation indicated deviations from best practice in relation to speaking with individuals as a source of intelligence, and the IOPC accepted the reflective practice outcome.
“This is not a disciplinary process, but is designed to give line managers, officers and staff an opportunity to learn and develop. The IOPC did not identify any learning recommendations from their investigation.”
When the IOPC first released its findings, Gloucestershire Constabulary put forward its view that disciplinary proceedings should not be brought and that the most constructive outcome, both in the public interest and in the interests of the officers, would be for the misconduct to be addressed through reflective review.
The IOPC said: “We considered the points raised by the force and agreed that engagement with the reflective review process would benefit both officers, the force and the public interest.”
The allegations date back to 2020 and an investigation into a woman’s home allegedly being used by others for drug dealing, a crime known as “cuckooing”. The woman complained about the conduct of two officers involved in the investigation.
The IOPC report says it was alleged by the woman that the officers abused their positions for sexual purposes and to obtain intelligence from the victim as an unofficial informant. It was further alleged that they tried to get them to destroy evidence to cover their activity.
Initial evidence obtained by the IOPC investigation indicated that the two officers had potentially abused their positions in their “interactions with a vulnerable victim of crime.” The IOPC interviewed the officers and examined their mobile phones, and its investigators also obtained accounts from several witnesses, including the complainant.
In March last year the investigation concluded. But the IOPC says it waited for all associated proceedings to be complete before publishing its findings. The resulting report, published this month, confirms the officers as having no case to answer over allegations that they abused their position for any sexual or emotionally improper purpose.
The report says IOPC investigators did find the officers had a case to answer over abusing their position to make the complainant an unofficial informant, taking advantage of her vulnerabilities and placing her at risk. One officer was also found to have a case to answer for misconduct over using a second woman as an unofficial informant. These are the issues that, with IOPC agreement, the reflective practice process is intended to address.