A serving officer has been dismissed from the Metropolitan Police for sexual activity with a child.
A misconduct hearing heard a number of allegations against Officer A, attached to East Area Command Unit, which were proven at the level of gross misconduct.
The panel found Officer A breached police standards of professional behaviour in relation to discreditable conduct, duties and responsibilities and honesty and integrity.
Chief Superintendent Stuart Bell, of the East Area Command Unit, said: “This officer betrayed their role as a police officer and their oath to uphold the law by exploiting and abusing a child, who was below the age of consent.
“I want to make it clear there is absolutely no place for officers like this in the Met. We are determined to root out officers who are not fit to wear the uniform and serve the public.”
The hearing followed an allegation of serious sexual assault made against Officer A in September 2019.
A full criminal investigation was launched by officers from East Area Command Unit, supported by specialist officers who are trained in sexual offences investigation and the officer was suspended from duty and later arrested.
A file on the case was submitted to the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS). The CPS reviewed all the evidence and decided the case against Officer A did not meet the full test code for a criminal prosecution.
This decision was challenged by way of the Victim’s Right of Review process, but was not successful.
However, officers from the Met’s Directorate of Professional Standards continued the misconduct investigation and considered there was a case to answer. The matter was then referred for a full misconduct hearing.
The hearing heard how on, or about, 16 August 2019, Officer A made contact with Child A on social media and arranged to meet them.
Officer A engaged in sexual activity with Child A on various dates between 16 and 27 August 2019.
The hearing also found that on 26 August 2019, Officer A allowed Child A, a runaway child, to stay with them without alerting police or social services.
The following day, Officer A asked Child A – as a ‘missing person’ – to attend Romford police station and then ask for them, but not mention their relationship. Officer A did not make any formal police record that a ‘missing person’ had been found. Officer A then took Child A to social services.
After hearing all the evidence the panel, led by an independent legally qualified chair, determined that Officer A should be dismissed without notice.
Officer A will now be added to the Barred List held by the College of Policing. Those appearing on the list cannot be employed by police, local policing bodies (PCCs), the Independent Office for Police Conduct or Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary and Fire and Rescue Services.
Stay up to date with all of our latest updates and content by following us on our social media accounts!
We have created community pages where we will share our up-to-date stories happening in the area. Add the area closest to where you live.
Support Local Journalism
We at The Havering Daily appreciate your support of quality journalism. Your generous donation, no matter the size, allows us to continue bringing unbiased and informative news to the community. Your contribution helps us maintain our independence and allows us to continue providing high-quality journalism. Thank you for valuing the work we do and for supporting our mission.