Officers who lied to public receive final written warnings

Two PSNI officers who lied to members of the public have received final written warnings.

The two incidents, one which concerned an assault in a bar and another from a woman who suspected money had been stolen from her late father, were investigated by the office of the Police Ombudsman.

The ombudsman recommended that the PSNI should take disciplinary action against both officers.

Police Ombudsman’s director of investigations Nikki Davis said: “Incidents of operational dishonesty such as these are viewed extremely seriously within policing.

“The PSNI disciplinary panels noted that dishonesty would normally result in dismissal, but concluded that there were mitigating circumstances in both cases which meant that a final written warning was the appropriate sanction.”

In one case, the ombudsman said that an officer falsely recorded that an investigation into the suspected theft of over £14,000 had been closed with the complainant’s consent.

The woman, who lived in England, reported to police that all but a few pounds had been taken from her late father’s bank account in the months leading up to, and the days following, his death in 2020.

A PSNI disciplinary hearing found that the officer had made “inadequate” inquiries before falsely noting on police systems that the complainant had agreed to the investigation being closed pending further evidence.

The ombudsman said the officer also recorded that he had spoken to the woman and her solicitor “numerous times at length”, and that the complainant had been “more than happy” with police actions and thankful for their efforts.

However, the disciplinary panel noted the ombudsman’s finding that the officer had spoken to the complainant only three times before closing the case, and had not spoken at all to her solicitor.

They also noted that the woman had not been aware that the case had been closed, that she had sent six emails after then to seek updates from the officer, none of which were acknowledged or responded to.

The panel considered mitigation, which included the officer’s relative inexperience and failings in the standard of supervision provided to him, and imposed a final written warning.

This related to failures to keep accurate records, to provide a prompt and thorough investigation, to update the complainant, and for conduct likely to bring the police service into disrepute.

The officer’s supervisor also received a disciplinary sanction.

In the second case, an officer accepted that he had misled the victim of an assault at a north coast bar in 2021 by falsely stating that he had viewed CCTV of the attack.

The officer was also criticised for closing the case by issuing the perpetrator with a Community Resolution Notice (CRN).

Ombudsman investigators found that the injuries caused were too serious to be resolved through a CRN, and that the officer had failed to follow police procedures by checking whether the injured party was content with the outcome.

The PSNI disciplinary panel noted, however, that the officer had informed his line manager immediately after learning that the injured party was dissatisfied, resulting in swift action to minimise the harm caused.

The panel also recognised that it had been an isolated incident, and that the officer, who was inexperienced, was remorseful.

The sanction related not only to dishonesty, but also to a failure to follow police policy, and behaviour likely to bring discredit on the PSNI.

Chief Superintendent Stephen Murray, head of the PSNI’s Professional Standards Department, said officers were expected to act with “professionalism and integrity at all times”.

He said: “As a result of these investigations, two constables were provided with final written warnings, alongside management advice for a sergeant.”

Mr Murray added: “Where the conduct of an officer is alleged to have fallen short of these high standards, as identified in these cases, it is right that they should face an impartial, thorough inquiry by the Police Ombudsman’s office and the relevant misconduct proceedings progressed.

“The misconduct findings by the panels confirm that actions of these officers do not represent the expectations of the Police Service of Northern Ireland or the victims in these cases.”