Disgraced Hampshire police officers are being struck off in private

In the last three years, the force has struck off seven officers following private hearings where the press and public were excluded.

The Home Office states that police forces must be transparent “where possible” when it comes to misconduct hearings.

However a recent investigation by the New Statesman magazine has found a trend nationally where forces are increasingly holding hearings in private.

Since 2018, Hampshire Constabulary has held 20 misconduct hearings.

Official Home Office guidance on police misconduct hearings states: “The presumption should be of transparency where possible.”

But dismissals may be “heard in private" when the naming of an officer could risk the identification of a vulnerable victim, or it may affect the welfare of the officer themselves.

Regulations state that any officer dismissed from the force should have their name placed on the College of Policing’s “barred list” - a public register.

But in contrast to the medical profession, the education profession and the legal profession dismissed officers can only be found on the “barred list” if a member of the public already knows the name of the officer they are searching for.

The investigation discovered 18 names on the list from Hampshire Constabulary, added in the period from January 2018 to June 2021- the names were then checked against police websites and public news sources for record of their dismissal.

The investigation revealed no public record, either in newspapers or on police archives of three officers from Hampshire constabulary who had been dismissed in public hearings since 2018.

Offences these officers were dismissed for, included sending inappropriate images, sharing sensitive information, lying about visiting a victim and drug driving.

When contacted, Hampshire Constabulary said they had published, and since removed the details of the three officers after the ‘required time period of at least 28 calendar days’.

These are the three officers and their reasons for dismissal:

Harry Sidney Christopher Betts

Harry Betts was dismissed on July 31, 2018 after he sent inappropriate photographs of himself to a female recipient who knew he was a police officer. He also was found to have taken photographs of sensitive information and forwarded one of the photographs to another employee without there being an operational need to do so. In addition, he discussed operational police matters with another employee with no policing purpose, accessed a Hampshire Constabulary computer system without there being any operational need or policing purpose and sent inappropriate messages and images to others using his mobile phone, and failed to challenge or report the improper conduct of colleagues about the nature of their messages.

Clare Proudfoot

Clare Proudfoot was dismissed on July 10, 2020, after failing to visit a victim of crime as instructed by her sergeant and then falsifying records on Hampshire Constabulary Computer System.

Prior to her dismissal, Ms Proudfoot was commended by the Chief Constable as one of Hampshire's bravest police officers after she helped to save a man from killing himself by holding on to him on a bridge for half an hour.

Ben Jevons

On the July 6, 2019, Ben Jevons was stopped by a traffic officer in Hayling Island, a drug wipe test came back positive for cocaine. He was arrested and when in custody provided a sample of blood for analysis. On July 24, 2020 Hampshire Police were notified that the sample was positive for cocaine. Jevons then appeared at Portsmouth Magistrates Court where he pleaded to drug driving and he was disqualified from driving for 12 months and ordered to pay a fine of £80.

A spokesperson for the force told the Gazette: “Hampshire Constabulary is fully supportive of the misconduct regulations around gross misconduct hearings and the presumption that they should be held in public, however police officers are able to make formal representations for matters to be held in private, and that decision is taken by an independently appointed Legally Qualified Chair.

“It is the LQC’s decision to determine whether any representations put forward outweigh the public interest of being heard in public, and if so, they can rule that the matter is dealt with in a fully private hearing. Police misconduct is an employment matter relating to unacceptable behaviour in the workplace, and the right to privacy of the officers and their families must be considered, alongside any medical or security issues.

“If the decision is taken to hold a hearing in private, then the force must abide by the legal restrictions put in place and this is the position for all forces. Any allegation against a police officer is taken extremely seriously and thoroughly investigated by our Professional Standards Department with oversight from the Independent Office for Police Conduct where required.

“Names are published in line with any rulings made and in line with the regulations. The officers’ names and outcomes were published on the force website and removed after the required time period of at least 28 calendar days.”

More secret police dismissals remain

The Gazette has managed to find the majority of the names of officers on the Police Barred List who were kept secret. However, some cases still remain secret.

Hampshire Police told The Gazette that between 2018 to 2021, 20 officers were kicked out of the force for gross misconduct.

Of those, seven were held in private.

It may be the case that these officers were not published on the barred list as details would be against the interests of national security, might prejudice the investigation of criminal or civil proceedings or result in a "significant risk of harm" to any person.