New job, new claim of racism from ‘poster girl’ who sued the Met
After winning payout, former firearms officer demands £144,000 from IPCC for discrimination
A SCOTLAND YARD “poster girl” who successfully sued the force for racial discrimination has launched a similar action against her new employers.
Carol Howard, a former firearms police officer, won a £37,000 payout after lodging a claim against the Met.
She is now suing the Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC) , after accusing them of being “institutionally racist and corrupt”.
The 39-year-old told an employment tribunal that the watchdog frustrated inquiries to protect accused officers.
Ms Howard, of Coulsdon, Surrey, is seeking a £144,000 payout for alleged racial discrimination and victimisation during her six-month stint at the IPCC.
She told the tribunal: “The white managers I worked with are not independent and believe that their duty is not to investigate wrong-doing officers, but to protect the reputation of the police force concerned and its senior officers in particular.
“They are corrupt,” she added. Ms Howard’s photograph appeared on Scotland Yard promotional material, complete with a Heckler & Koch semiautomatic rifle, publicising efforts to protect the 2012 London Olympics.
The mother-of-one won her tribunal against the Met in July 2014 before leaving her job in 2015 after 14 years of service. She went on to join the IPCC as an investigator the following year.
However, soon after winning her tribunal she claimed she was subject to a “witch-hunt” which included the allegations that she had physically assaulted her ex-partner and was in possession of indecent child images.
Robert Mccabe, her ex-partner, told police she had attacked him 14 months earlier. Ms Howard said that he repeatedly tried to retract his claims but was ignored. Police also discovered a picture on her phone of her daughter, aged six, sleeping naked in bed, and she was then accused of possessing an indecent image of a child.
She told the Daily Mail it was “a blatant witch-hunt” adding: “I can only conclude it’s a punishment for my case against the Met.”
According to Ms Howard, the IPCC was worried that hiring her “could be regarded by the Met as an act of ‘revenge’ against the police” and that she was banned from any cases involving the Met. She told the tribunal that black and ethnic minority IPCC officers told her they were “treated differently” within a “hostile working environment”.
She added: “In my view, the IPCC is an institutionally racist employer. It is therefore unfit to investigate claims of race discrimination against the police.
“It is corrupt and not fit for purpose. It is neither independent nor impartial. It protects senior white police officers.”
She left the IPCC after it decided against renewing her six-month contract in March 2017. The IPCC was replaced in January by the Independent Office for Police Conduct.
The IPCC strongly rejects all the allegations made and is vigorously contesting Ms Howard’s tribunal claim.
Her tribunal against the Met in 2014 found that she had been bullied, harassed and victimised and the £37,000 awarded to her included aggravated damages for distress that she suffered at the hands of a “malicious, vindictive and spiteful” colleague.