Police officer who had sexual relationship with woman he met on duty sacked

The investigation by the Police Ombudsman found he had also failed to disclose multiple conflicts of interest, intimidated a former partner, attempted to falsify evidence and asked a colleague to lie.

A Police Service of Northern Ireland (PSNI) officer has been dismissed after a watchdog investigation found he had initiated a sexual relationship with a woman he met on duty.

The investigation by the Police Ombudsman found he had also failed to disclose multiple conflicts of interest, intimidated a former partner, attempted to falsify evidence and asked a colleague to lie.

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.

The ombudsman said 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.

The ombudsman said a short time later they were living together and had a child before their relationship ended in early 2020.

Ms Durkin described the actions of the officer as “appalling”.

She said: “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.” She said that 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.

The ombudsman said that 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.

The ombudsman said that a further conflict of interest also emerged when her 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.

She said that though he was aware the man was a former boyfriend, police officer B did not disclose that he was living with woman B, in an intimate relationship with her and that she was expecting his child.

Ms Durkin said: “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.” The 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.

The ombudsman said 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.

Ms Durkin said: “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.” 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 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.

Chief Superintendent Stephen Murray, head of the PSNI’s professional standards department, said: “The serious misconduct identified in this case is unacceptable and clearly falls far below the standards the public rightly expects, at all times, from police officers and staff.

“Police officers are entrusted with significant powers and responsibilities. That trust must never be abused for personal or sexual gain.

“Abuse of position for sexual purposes is wholly unacceptable, it is a serious abuse of authority and a breach of the trust placed in policing by the public.

“The behaviour found in this case was simply intolerable.” He added: “We recognise the harm this type of behaviour can cause to those directly affected and the wider damage it does to public confidence in policing.

“We have significantly strengthened our processes around conflicts of interests to ensure officers are clear that they must be declared and properly managed to prevent even the suggestion of corruption.”