A PSNI officer has been dismissed after a Police Ombudsman investigation found he had initiated a sexual relationship with a woman he met in the course of his duties, failed to disclose multiple conflicts of interest, intimidated a former partner, attempted to falsify evidence and asked a colleague to lie.
Police Ombudsman, Jacqui Durkin, has described the police officer’s behaviour as a “catalogue of corruption” which had “the potential to do serious damage to public trust and confidence in policing.”
The case was referred to the Police Ombudsman by the Chief Constable for independent investigation and stemmed from an assault allegation made to the police by one woman, Woman A, against another, Woman B, towards the end of 2018. Woman B then also made a counter assault allegation against Woman A.
The police officer responsible for investigating the allegations, Police Officer A, asked a colleague, Police Officer B, to take a statement from Woman B which he duly did.
Police Officer B did not disclose that he had been in a sexual relationship with Woman A in 2016 and was still in contact with her socially.
Within 24 hours of meeting Woman B to take her statement, he had contacted her through Facebook and Snapchat and then began a sexual relationship with her. A short time later they were living together and had a child before their relationship ended in early 2020.
In the circumstances where the officer already had a direct conflict of interest, his subsequent actions have been described as ‘appalling’ by Police Ombudsman Jacqui Durkin: “Every action he took from the point he chose not to disclose his original conflict of interest with Woman A compounded his failure.
“It is appalling that within 24 hours of meeting Woman B, he had taken advantage of his position as a police officer to contact her and to form an inappropriate relationship with her.
“The power imbalance between a police officer and a woman who is not only accused of a crime but has also alleged that she was a victim of a crime herself, could not be more stark.
“Police Officers know the standards which are expected of them and the professional boundaries which they must not cross.”
Some five weeks after Police Officer B had taken Woman B’s original handwritten statement, he created a typed version, changed the date on which it had been taken, and brought it home to be signed by her. She told Police Ombudsman investigators that while she was unaware of the implications of signing the altered statement, her account of what happened had not been changed.
As well as obtaining her fresh signature and falsely recording the date, Police Officer B also replaced his own name with that of Police Officer A.
He asked Police Officer A to sign the statement, telling him that he knew Woman B because she lived close to some of his family members. Police Officer A refused to sign the statement and reported the matter to his supervising sergeant.
While the supervising sergeant did not recall the issue of the second statement being raised with him, both statements were found in PSNI records. Police Ombudsman investigators verified that the original statement, and not the one with alterations, had been submitted to the Public Prosecution Service for Northern Ireland (PPS).
A further conflict of interest also emerged when Police Ombudsman investigators found that a week prior to meeting with Woman B to take her statement, Police Officer B had been appointed as the investigating officer for an assault allegation involving Woman B’s former boyfriend. That investigation continued until March 2019, overlapping with the relationship between Police Officer B and Woman B.
Although he was aware the man was a former boyfriend, at no time did Police Officer B disclose, as required, that he was living with Woman B, in an intimate relationship with her and that she was expecting his child.
“At this point, Police Officer B has not one, but three separate conflicts of interest in ongoing criminal investigations. He has not disclosed his original relationship with Woman A. He has not disclosed his relationship with Woman B and also attempted to conceal it by falsifying an official record and trying to make a colleague complicit in his lie. And finally, he has not disclosed that he is investigating Woman B’s ex-boyfriend.
“Each of these conflicts compromised his position as a police officer and brought his integrity, independence and impartiality into question at any future criminal proceedings. This behaviour can do serious damage to public trust and confidence in policing and it is vital that officers who choose to behave in this way know there will be serious consequences,” said Ms Durkin.
The Police Ombudsman investigation also extended to a further incident in 2021 when another woman who had been in a relationship with Police Officer B reported to police she had received a threatening, anonymous letter.
The letter was sent a short time after Police Officer B had been made aware that he was being investigated for his contact with vulnerable women. It included an intimate photograph of the woman and also made threats that more photos would be sent to her family. The only person she had shared the photo with was her former boyfriend, Police Officer B. Two weeks before she received the letter, she had also received a phone notification that he had downloaded all of the images she had shared with him.
When examined, the police officer’s phone contained 51 images of the woman including intimate photos similar to the one she had received anonymously through the post.
“Members of the public rightly expect police officers to behave ethically and uphold the highest professional standards. In this case, they have been failed by someone who did not declare a conflict of interest at any time and who abused his position for sexual purposes, one of the most serious forms of police corruption.
“One case of this kind of abuse of position for sexual purposes is one case too many. However, these cases account for 36% of the most serious cases under investigation currently by my Office.
“This officer abused his position with a woman who was vulnerable, given she was not only accused of a crime but also alleged she was a victim of crime. He lied, he attempted to get a colleague to support his deceit and he sought to bully and intimidate a woman he had previously been in a relationship with.
“This was not a series of mistakes. It was calculated behaviour from the moment this police officer chose not to declare his first conflict of interest until he was reported, arrested, suspended and dismissed. This was a catalogue of corruption,” said Ms Durkin.
At the conclusion of the investigation a file was sent to the PPS. The PPS directed no prosecution and a misconduct file was subsequently sent to the Police Service of Northern Ireland’s (PSNI’s) Professional Standards Department. The PSNI misconduct panel found that Police Officer B had misconducted himself by breaching the PSNI Code of Ethics and he was dismissed.
Police Officer B was arrested by Police Ombudsman investigators as part of the investigation. During the associated search operation, a USB memory stick containing the entire contents of a missing person’s laptop was found. As a result of a separate Police Ombudsman investigation into this matter, Police Officer B was found to have committed gross misconduct and received a final written warning.
