PSD Misconduct and Complaint Transparency Data - April to June 2024
Northamptonshire Police currently comprises of 1,490.33 Full Time Equivalent (FTE) Police Officers, 80.50 FTE Police Community Support Officers (PCSO), 1018.79 Other Members of Police Staff, together with a further 109 Special Constables; a total of 2,589.62 FTE individuals.
During the fourth quarter of the year 2024, the Force dealt with 45,976 reported incidents and investigated 14,939 crimes which led to 2,739 arrests.
During this period the Professional Standards Department (PSD) recorded a total of 271 new Complaint cases (public complaints) and 30 new Misconduct cases (internal matters).
During this period PSD formally investigated and finalised a total of 19 cases of Misconduct, involving 14 Police Officers and 4 members of Police Staff and 1 Special Constable (NB: some of these matters may have been recorded in previous reporting period):
- 5 case resulted in a finding of no case to answer
- 7 cases resulted in a case to answer for which Reflective Practice was the outcome
- 3 cases resulted in a case to answer and were assessed as amounting to Misconduct (1)
- 3 case resulted in a case to answer and were assessed as amounting to Gross Misconduct (2)(3); these related to 2 Police Office, 0 Special Constables and 1 member of Police Staff who attended a Gross Misconduct hearing
- 0 cases resulted with no action due to the individual leaving the Force
(1) Misconduct is defined as a Breach of Standards of Professional Behaviour so serious that if either admitted or proven, a Written Warning could be justified, as described in Schedule 2 to the Police (Conduct) Regulations 2020. These matters are heard at a Misconduct Meeting.
(2) Gross Misconduct is defined as a Breach of the Standards of Professional Behaviour so serious that if either admitted or proven, dismissal from the Police Service would be justified. These matters are heard at a Misconduct Hearing.
(3) Note that where Officers or Members of Police Staff are dismissed because of misconduct proceedings or who resign or retire during misconduct proceedings, appropriate vetting records are maintained and can and will be disclosed in the event such an Officer or Member of Staff seeks employment with another Law Enforcement Agency.
During this period PSD had cause to arrange additional disciplinary proceedings under the Police Reform Act, in respect of Complaint cases being finalised:
- 1 case resulted in a case to answer and were assessed as amounting to Misconduct (2)
- 0 Gross Misconduct went through the HR Dismissal process.
Misconduct Meeting Outcomes during this period:
| Date | Breach of Standards | Outcome |
|---|---|---|
| May 2024 |
It was alleged that a Police Officer used PAVA on the member of public who was not displaying any immediate or physical threat. The Officer also carried out a search on the member of publics bag without any lawful power to do so. If proven, this is a breach of the Standards of Professional behaviour relating to Use of Force, Authority, Respect and Courtesy. Taking everything into consideration, the chair found the matter to be proven for misconduct and determined that the appropriate outcome was a written warning. |
Proven Outcome: Written Warning |
| May 2024 |
It was alleged that a Police Officer used a tactic that was unreasonable, unjustified, and unnecessary. If proven, this is a breach of the Standards of Professional behaviour relating to Use of Force. Taking everything into consideration the chair found the matter to be proven for Misconduct and determined that the appropriate outcome was an 18-month written warning. |
Proven Outcome: Written Warning |
Misconduct Hearing Outcomes during this period:
| Date | Breach of Standards | Outcome |
|---|---|---|
|
June 2024 Hearing |
The Staff member concerned breached the Standards of Professional Behaviour relating to Confidentiality, Instructions and Discreditable Conduct. The panel have concluded the hearing and had the PCSO had not already resigned this would have resulted in a Gross Misconduct and dismissal would have been the outcome. |
Proven Outcome: Would have been dismissal |
|
June 2024 Hearing |
The officer concerned breached the Standards of Professional Behaviour relating to Authority, Respect and Courtesy, Equality and Diversity, Honesty and Integrity, Use of Force, Duties and Responsibilities and Discreditable Conduct. The panel found some allegations against the Officer proven and Standards of Professional Behaviour had been breached such that there had been Gross Misconduct. The outcome was a final written warning for five years. |
Proven Outcome: Final written warning for 5 years |
Special Case Hearing Outcomes during this period (chaired by the Chief Constable):
| Date | Breach of Standards | Outcome |
|---|---|---|
|
May 2024 Resigned prior to hearing |
A Misconduct Hearing took place in May 2024 in relation to a Police Officer. The Officer breach the Standards of Behaviour relating to Discreditable Conduct and Confidentiality regarding sharing confidential information to family and friends without a Policing Purpose. The Chief Constable considered the available evidence and found Gross Misconduct. The Chief Constable determined that, had the officer still been serving, he would have been dismissed. |
Proven Outcome: Would have been dismissal |
The PDF version of this document can be found below.