A police constable has been issued with a two-year final written warning following a gross misconduct hearing.
The hearing found that, on 14 separate days between 2nd June 2023 and 4th July 2023, while off-duty PC David Tweddle had accessed multiple police incident logs without a policing purpose and/ or without lawful authority.
It was found this was a breach of the standards of professional behaviour, namely discreditable conduct; confidentiality; and orders and instructions; and that this amounts to gross misconduct.
The officer joined the force at the age of 30 on 13 September 2021. He was based at Melton Mowbray Police Station. He was a probationer at the time of these incidents.
The officer was on his rest days when he accessed STORM on his work mobile phone at home. He was not on duty at the time. He read 286 different STORM logs on 364 occasions on 14 days over a period of about a month.
Some of the logs the officer accessed related to the area where the officer worked and some did not. On 4th June the officer accessed 26 storm logs and only 11 related to where he worked.
Some of the searches were extensive. On 5th June, the officer accessed an incident on 7 occasions. The data included details of the aggrieved, their injuries, names and addresses of witnesses and details relating to the suspect. The officer was involved in the incident when he returned to duty the next day
On 13th June, the officer viewed 26 logs of which only one related to the area where he worked. The officer viewed personal data of the complainant and sensitive personal data relating to their mental health as well as details of the suspect. This matter would not have involved the officer and would have been dealt with by specialist officers. On the same day he viewed an out of force deployment incident which he would not have been involved in.
On 2nd July the officer viewed another incident and accessed personal data.
The officer has accepted that he accessed the STORM logs as alleged. He contends that he accessed the systems to increase his own personal knowledge.
He thought he would be able to learn from actions taken by other officers. It was done to help his own personal development. He has denied that he observed the information to satisfy his personal/general curiosity. He considers he was naïve but his actions were well intended.
The hearing outcome says that the officer was based at a rural station in Leicestershire which did not have the same level or type of criminal activity experienced in other parts of the county. He suggests he therefore read about other incidents elsewhere to increase his knowledge of criminal activity and policing responses
Any access to the STORM site contained a warning on the first occasion that the officer logged on. The warning was not to access the information without a legitimate policing purpose. This warning did not appear again on his phone if the officer remained logged in on his phone. It would appear again if he logged in again having logged out.
The officer initially thought that his general learning constituted a legitimate policing purpose but now accepts that it did not. The officer had been trained in policing purposes having attended a course on 14 September 2021.
The officer was aware that STORM access is recorded and knew his activities would be traceable.
There is no evidence that the officer inappropriately passed on any of the information he obtained via his searches. He kept this information to himself save that the officer did use some of the information he had obtained by his searches to assist his policing role. On one occasion he only needed a limited briefing about an incident because he had read about it.
The allegations solely relate to accessing the STORM system. The officer did not carry out any further searches e.g. exploring NICHE to obtain further information about offenders, incidents or disposals.
Detective Superintendent Ali Tompkins, head of the force’s Professional Standards Department, said: “It is both a public expectation and a legal requirement that any information obtained during the course of policing duties should be treated in the strictest confidence, properly protected and used only for legitimate policing purposes.”
“Under no circumstances should anyone access or use police information for personal benefit.
“We continue to provide training and updates in force in relation to this and we continue to take the appropriate action when concerns are reported to us.”
The officer has provided numerous character references. They refer to his desire to learn and develop as an officer.
The officer did carry out other policing work on his rest days as he carried out some laptop work and some training.
Comments