(43) chasing the conduct issues.

I thought that it was about time to see Chief Constable Anthony Bangham about what had happened to date. I didn’t want him to be able to say at a later date that he wasn’t aware of the actions of his staff. On 19th October 2017 I phoned his office and spoke to his secretary. I told her I would like a meeting with him. She said that she would try to arrange this through his Staff Officer.

So, where we’re we? The conduct issues. On 20th October 2017, I received an update from DS Nicholas Husbands…

And so, to summarise……………………………………………………………………………….. 1. I was to attend a misconduct meeting for repeating confidential and sensitive information in respect of Public Prosecutor, Stephen Davies. 2. I was to receive Management Action, a non disciplinary outcome, for complaining to Public Prosecutor Suzanne Llewelyn. (For which I had originally been served a notice for Gross Misconduct for breaching the Data Protection Act)……………………………………………………………………………………. 3. If no further action was being taken in respect of the criminal offence of Malfeasance in a Public Office, then there would be no case to answer in respect of the Gross Misconduct notice I was served.

Ok…….I was just a bit confused about receiving ‘Management Action’ for breaching the Data Protection Act. This is like, ‘words of advice’ for something I hadn’t agreed that I had done! Mmmmm…………… I responded on the same day…

2.185. Where the appropriate authority consider that there is a case to answer in respect of misconduct and that management action would not be appropriate because the case to answer is considered serious enough that if proven or admitted it would justify at least a written warning being given then a misconduct meeting/hearing should be arranged. The police officer shall, subject to the harm test, be given a copy of the investigation report (or the part of the report which is relevant to him or her), any other relevant documents gathered during the course of the investigation and a copy of his or her statement to the investigator. These documents should be supplied to the officer as soon as possible after the decision has been made to refer the matter to a meeting or a hearing.

I didn’t think this was an unreasonable request given that the complaint had been made a year before!!

DS Husbands responded on 23rd October 2017…

Why was DS Husbands holding his cards so closely to his chest? Why didn’t he want to have integrity, transparency and respect?

On 24th October 2017 I received confirmation that the Chief Constable,Anthony Bangham would meet with me on 15th November. Also on this day, Chief Inspector Dean Jones rang to tell me that I should hear about the decision from the CPS, (re Malfeasance in Public Office), within 4 weeks. This doubled up as a welfare call! He told me that it should all be drawing to a conclusion. That was nice!………….Anyway, back to DS Husbands…

And his response on 27th October…

And his response …

And on 2nd November DS Husbands wrote…

DS Husbands then sent this to myself and Fed Rep 2 on 8th November. It seemed to be taking a rather long time to ‘identify’ a senior officer to chair the meeting. Were they looking for a special kind of senior officer?

On 13th November, 2017 DS Husbands was going to serve me with my notice for Misconduct along with the associated investigation documents. What would these reveal? I wonder!!

---

Post Navigation: