A Sussex Police officer has been sacked without notice for gross misconduct after having been found to have “carried out acts and made comments of a sexual nature which were inappropriate”.
A misconduct hearing was told that the anonymous officer was off duty at a social event on Sunday 23 April when he behaved in a way that prompted a complaint.
Sussex Police said: “The officer … carried out acts of a sexual nature and made inappropriate comments towards colleagues and members of the public who were in attendance.”
A panel, chaired by Assistant Chief Constable Peter Gardner, of Surrey Police, said today (Tuesday 11 February) that the behaviour breached the standards of professional behaviour that were expected.
The officer, whose gender was not revealed, breached the required standards in respect of authority, respect and courtesy and discreditable conduct, amounting to gross misconduct.
Sussex Police said: “The officer will now be added to the College of Policing Barred list which will prevent a return to policing.”
The misconduct hearing took place at Sussex Police headquarters, in Lewes, over two days, starting yesterday (Monday 10 February).
Assistant Chief Constable Gardner granted the officer anonymity and chaired a panel that also included two independent members.
After the hearing, Detective Superintendent Andy Wolstenholme, the deputy head of professional standards for Sussex Police, said: “The officer’s actions were unwanted and invasive.
“This was extremely concerning because police officers and staff must behave in a manner that does not discredit the police service or undermine public confidence, whether on or off duty.
“All staff are aware of the standards of professional behaviour and the force remains committed to holding officers to account where they fall below the high standards the public rightly expect.”
Sussex Police has been criticised for granting so many officers anonymity in serious disciplinary cases.
Reforms 10 years ago were intended to ensure that proceedings would be properly “open and visible” to try to restore public trust and confidence in policing.
The reforms were introduced by Theresa May when she was Home Secretary. She later served as Prime Minister and now sits in the House of Lords.
She criticised the continuing lack of transparency in a first-person piece for The Times which she made available for Brighton and Hove News, given local concerns.
And Katy Bourne wants to be mayor? Hilarious
You’ve said it’s a ‘he’ despite saying gender not getting revealed.
So this public servant, paid by the taxpayer, gets away without being named or prosecuted.
I agree on the first point to a degree. The inference from the article is that Sussex keeps the names private at a higher rate than other forces.
On your second it’s possible that the CPS determined that the actions complained of didn’t meet criminal standards.
Perhaps this is why they weren’t named as they haven’t been charged with a crime let alone been found guilty in a court. Maybe that’s coming?
Professional and / or employment standards often have different criteria to criminal ones. You could be sacked from a job for doing something that isn’t a crime for example.