The officer is accused of failing to include vital CCTV footage and mobile phone data and then writing to one of the investigators to ask her not to mention footage even existed.
As a result of her actions a trial into a chemsex drug dealing gang collapsed and another linked case did not go ahead.
And who is she?
However, a disciplinary panel has ruled she can only be referred to as "Officer A" throughout.
Even though you only need to Google to find it...
It was ruled that she will not be identified after an order was made to protect her mental health.
This is despite the officer having previously been named in court.
And the name being freely available. And a glance at the image of her showing - perhaps - another reason for the leniency...
At the time of the collapsed cases Judge Shani Barnes condemned the officer as “cavalier, disinterested and dismissive.”
She said: “I am confronted by an officer in the case admitting in writing that there were discs in a box with surveillance unseen, unscheduled, undisclosed.
“The attitude she expressed in writing reveals a cavalier, dismissive attitude to her duties as a responsible disclosure officer.
“She was disinterested in fulfilling her obligation to ensure that all material was viewed, scheduled and, where appropriate, provided to the defence.”
Another triumph for increasing diversity in the police farce, I'm sure you'll agree!
7 comments:
Just a note here on Judge Shani's English: "disinterested" in describing a policeman's attitude is actually a compliment since it implies that the DC was impartial in her "work". Rather the DC was "uninterested".
Whatever: I suspect the DC will get a metaphorical rap over the knuckles and then a transfer - with promotion - to the diversity team in Brighton or the Met. Reminds me of the meteoric career of (Dame) Lin Homer - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lin_Homer : a permanent failure whose serial incompetence was rewarded with increasingly senior positions, concomitant financial rewards and a DCB.
Umbongo
I was just about to make the very same point. It's depressing. Lin Homer is a name I regularly pull out to illustrate how certain turds are seemingly impossible to flush away. I'm a Brummie and remember when she was our electoral Czarina and was caught with boxes of ballots in her office. She should have gone to prison, not catapulted up the public sector hierarchy.
She would fit in perfectly in our Police control room. Every time I ring them they are cavalier, dismissive and disinterested. Their main objective is to persuade you the matter isn't a crime because it's a civil offence, often not the truth but it puts many less well informed callers off. If that fails they promise to get back to you but never do or in one really good case they claimed they couldn't find my post code and then told me I was in a different town about 18 miles away. Modern UK policing at its best.
She would fit in perfectly in our Police control room. Every time I ring them they are cavalier, dismissive and disinterested. Their main objective is to persuade you the matter isn't a crime because it's a civil offence, often not the truth but it puts many less well informed callers off. If that fails they promise to get back to you but never do or in one really good case they claimed they couldn't find my post code and then told me I was in a different town about 18 miles away. Modern UK policing at its best.
Her actions, or inactions as the case may be, amount to gross negligence, which is a 'dismissed from the Police force' offence. It could also be construed as perverting the course of justice, which is an offence with a maximum penalty of life imprisonment. In either case, it is obvious that she is not fit for purpose, and if she is not sacked, that same allegation could be levelled at her Chief Constable, otherwise what sort of message is being passed to other officers?
Penseivat
I am a long-since retired Police Officer, I retired in the rank of Chief Inspector. Some years ago I took up Agency work and was employed by the Sussex Police as a Case review and disclosure officer. I had to review all cases sent my way to ensure that ALL material subject to the disclosure rules was compiled for transmission to the Defending Counsel. From day one I was subjected to demands from officers both senior and subordinate not to reveal certain matters to the Defending Counsel. I left the job after just under six weeks because I could not abide the blatant dishonesty going on.
I am posting this as Anonymous as I know that the vindictiveness of the Sussex Police would extend to personal harassment should my identity be known.
"I suspect the DC will get a metaphorical rap over the knuckles and then a transfer - with promotion - to the diversity team in Brighton or the Met. "
I fear you're right. More Lin Homers are doubtless being incubated in the moist, warm recesses of the Civil Service as I type.
"She should have gone to prison, not catapulted up the public sector hierarchy."
In the public sector, it's actually not only possible, but recommended that one fails upwardly...
"Every time I ring them they are cavalier, dismissive and disinterested. Their main objective is to persuade you the matter isn't a crime..."
Keeping the crime figures down somehow!
"...otherwise what sort of message is being passed to other officers?"
One that clearly anonymous at 23:36 learned early!
Post a Comment