A Kent Police officer has been given a final written warning after being found guilty of gross misconduct, following our investigation.
Police Sergeant Melwyn Moore faced seven allegations for the way in which a suspect was treated in custody at the directed hearing which concluded on 12 February 2020.
The case was proven against six of the allegations. They were:
• being discourteous to a man when booking in to custody
• failing to get sufficient information about the man to make a risk assessment
• leaving the man handcuffed in the prone position in a locked cell alone following complaints the man could not breathe
• inaccurately recording how the man had been left in the cell
• inaccurately recording the use of force
• creating a post on social media where he referred to the man in a derogatory manner.
• failing to get sufficient information about the man to make a risk assessment
• leaving the man handcuffed in the prone position in a locked cell alone following complaints the man could not breathe
• inaccurately recording how the man had been left in the cell
• inaccurately recording the use of force
• creating a post on social media where he referred to the man in a derogatory manner.
A seventh allegation of using excessive force against the man in custody was not proven. The misconduct panel decided the six proven allegations taken together amounted to gross misconduct and that PS Moore would be given a final written warning.
The man who made the complaint had been taken into Tonbridge Police Station on suspicion of being drunk and disorderly on 31 December 2016. While in his cell, officers tried to remove his jacket and a restraint followed.
He was charged with being drunk and disorderly and of assaulting two officers – including PS Moore. All the charges were dismissed at a later magistrates’ court hearing.
Following the criminal proceedings, Kent Police made a referral to the IOPC where we began our independent investigation, interviewed PS Moore under caution, examined witness accounts from officers and viewed CCTV.
It showed how PS Moore was rude to the man when booking him into custody, and carried out no risk assessment, and did not provide him with his rights – and this set in motion a chain of events with poor decision-making that ended with him writing a derogatory post on social media about the man.
The CCTV evidence showed several officers restrained the suspect and PS Moore kicked him, although the panel decided this was not excessive force. All officers then left him lying in his cell, handcuffed to the rear, in a prone position. Footage showed the man reported to be struggling to breathe on three occasions and a police constable twice suggested that he should be moved. PS Moore directed the police officer to not move the man and leave him handcuffed.
Afterwards, he then made inaccurate claims in his statement of events which the IOPC felt brought into doubt his honesty and integrity. PS Moore’s inaccurate statement was found by the hearing to be unprofessional or poor completion of paperwork rather than intentionally dishonest.
We completed our investigation in May 2019 and found PS Moore had a case to answer for both gross misconduct and misconduct in respect of the seven allegations. Kent Police agreed with the case to answer of gross misconduct for two allegations, one allegation of misconduct and disagreed with the other four allegations. Where Kent Police disagreed, we directed them to arrange a hearing.
It concluded on 12 February 2020 and the panel ruled the case was proven.
IOPC Regional Director Sarah Green, said:
“Our investigation - which included examining CCTV footage of the incident in question - and the subsequent independent misconduct hearing gave a clear insight as to what happened in the Tonbridge custody suite on 31 December 2016.
“The independent panel has agreed this was a serious breach of professional standards and that his conduct across the whole incident fell well short of what would be expected of a custody sergeant.
“Looking after the welfare of detainees and working professionally to engage with detainees who wish to raise matters of concern at the booking-in desk is a fundamental requirement of good custody practice.
“The officer chose to be dismissive and dis-courteous. Matters then deteriorated which led to the events in the cell.
“This case highlights the benefit of an independent body appropriately using its powers to require a hearing so that officers can properly be held to account for their actions before a disciplinary panel.”
An act of parliament that provides the core framework of police powers to combat crime and provide codes of practice for the exercise of these powers.
Leads and manages the development of the police service in England, Wales and Northern Ireland.
The body that represents the interests of all police constables, sergeants, and inspectors.
Deals with someone’s inability or failure to perform to a satisfactory level, but without breaching the Standards of Professional Behaviour.
Focuses on putting an issue right and preventing it from happening again by encouraging those involved to reflect on their actions and learn. It is not a disciplinary process or a disciplinary outcome.
Department within a police force that deals with complaints and conduct matters.
Refers to lower-level misconduct or performance-related issues, which are dealt with in a proportionate and constructive manner.
This means doing what is appropriate in the circumstances, taking into account the facts and the context in which the complaint has been raised, within the framework of legislation and guidance.
The average is calculated using the individual results of the forces in that most similar force group.
An investigation carried out by IOPC staff.
Carried out by the police under their own direction and control. The IOPC sets the terms of reference and receives the investigation report when it is complete. Complainants have a right of appeal following a supervised investigation (unless it is an investigation into a direction and control matter).
This act sets out how the police complaints system operates.
How a police force is run, for example policing standards or policing policy.
An investigation carried out by the police under the direction and control of the IOPC.
The organisation that is responsible for assessing how to deal with a complaint. For example – whether it can be handled locally or reaches the criteria for referral to the IOPC. The appropriate authority may be the chief officer of the police force or the PCC for the force. If a complaint investigation finds that someone has a case to answer for misconduct, the appropriate authority is responsible for arranging any misconduct proceedings. If you make a complaint, the appropriate authority for your case will contact you.
An intelligence-led agency with law enforcement powers, it is also responsible for reducing the harm that is caused to people and communities by serious organised crime.
Policing bodies include police and crime commissioners, the Common Council for the City of London, or the Mayor's Office for Policing and Crime.
Investigations carried out entirely by the police. Complainants have a right of appeal following a local investigation (unless it is an investigation into a direction and control matter).
IOPC guidance to the police service and police authorities on the handling of complaints.
A complaint or recordable conduct matter that doesn’t need to be referred to the IOPC, but where the seriousness or circumstances justifies referral.
Parameters within which an investigation is conducted.
A person is adversely affected if he or she suffers any form of loss or damage, distress or inconvenience, if he or she is put in danger or is otherwise unduly put at risk of being adversely affected.
This is where a manager deals with the way someone has behaved. It can include: showing the police officer or member of staff how their behaviour fell short of expectations set out in the Standards of Professional Behaviour; identifying expectations for future conduct; or addressing any underlying causes of misconduct.
This could be the Police and Crime Commissioner, the Common Council for the City of London, or the Mayor's Office for Policing and Crime.
A flexible process for dealing with complaints that can be adapted to the needs of the complainant. It may involve, for example, providing information and an explanation, an apology, or a meeting between the complainant and the officer involved.
A flexible process for dealing with complaints that can be adapted to the needs of the complainant. It may involve, for example, providing information and an explanation, an apology, or a meeting between the complainant and the officer involved.
A breach of standards of professional behaviour by police officers or staff so serious it could justify their dismissal.
A matter where no complaint has been received, but where there is an indication that a person serving with the police may have committed a criminal offence or behaved in a manner that would justify disciplinary proceedings.
Disapplication means that a police force may handle a complaint in whatever way it thinks fit, including not dealing with it under complaints legislation. This may only happen in certain circumstances where the complaint fits one or more of the grounds for disapplication set out in law.
The ending of an ongoing investigation into a complaint, conduct matter or DSI matter. An investigation may only be discontinued if it meets one or more of the grounds for discontinuance set out in law.
Quarter 1 covers 1 April - 30 June
Quarter 2 covers 1 April - 30 September
Quarter 3 covers 1 April - 31 December
Quarter 4 covers the full financial year (1 April - 31 March).
You can request a review/appeal if you’re not satisfied with how your complaint has been handled.
Used to house anyone who has been detained.
Complainants have the right to appeal to the IOPC if a police force did not record their complaint or notify the correct police force if it was made originally to the wrong force.
The purpose of an investigation is to establish the facts behind a complaint, conduct matter, or DSI matter and reach conclusions. An investigator looks into matters and produces a report that sets out and analyses the evidence. There are three types of investigations: local, directed and independent.
The ending of an ongoing investigation into a complaint, conduct matter or DSI matter. An investigation may only be discontinued if it meets one or more of the grounds for discontinuance set out in law.
The type of behaviour being complained about. A single complaint case can have one or many allegations attached.
A person who makes a complaint about the conduct of someone serving with the police.
The ending of an ongoing investigation into a complaint, conduct matter or DSI matter. An investigation may only be discontinued if it meets one or more of the grounds for discontinuance set out in law.
List of officers and staff who have been dismissed from policing, or would have been if they had not retired or resigned.
The type of behaviour being complained about. A single complaint case can have one or many allegations attached.
Disapplication means that a police force may handle a complaint in whatever way it thinks fit, including not dealing with it under complaints legislation. This may only happen in certain circumstances where the complaint fits one or more of the grounds for disapplication set out in law.
An independent judicial officer, the coroner enquires into deaths reported to him/her.
A breach of the Standards of Professional Behaviour that would justify at least a written warning.
No further action may be taken with regard to a complaint if the complainant decides to retract their allegation(s).
A record is made of a complaint, giving it formal status as a complaint under the Police Reform Act 2002.
This is a format where information is written in plain English and short sentences.
The IOPC must be notified about specific types of complaint or incidents to be able to decide how they should be dealt with.
No further action may be taken with regard to a complaint if the complainant decides to retract their allegation(s).
Casework involves assessing appeals. Casework staff also have a role in overseeing the police complaints system to help ensure police forces handle complaints in the best possible way.
Disapplication means that a police force may handle a complaint in whatever way it thinks fit, including not dealing with it under complaints legislation. This may only happen in certain circumstances where the complaint fits one or more of the grounds for disapplication set out in law.
Conduct includes acts, omissions, statements and decisions (whether actual, alleged or inferred). For example: language used and the manner or tone of communications.
You can request a review/appeal if you’re not satisfied with how your complaint has been handled.
You can request a review/appeal if you’re not satisfied with how your complaint has been handled.