A Sussex Police officer was guilty of gross misconduct when he had a relationship with a vulnerable woman after meeting her through his work.
The force said: “A former police officer accused of engaging in an inappropriate relationship with a member of the public has had gross misconduct proven against him.
“Ex-PC A, who has been granted anonymity, engaged in a sexual relationship with a vulnerable woman between February and August 2020.
“Ex-PC A had met the woman in the course of his policing duties, and continued to meet her on and off duty, on multiple occasions, for non-policing purposes.
“The allegations were reported to Sussex Police in August 2020 and an investigation was launched while he was suspended from duty.
“Ex-PC A resigned from the force on Tuesday 31 August 2021.
“Following a one-day misconduct hearing on Wednesday (27 August), it was found ex-PC A’s behaviour amounted to gross misconduct as a breach of authority, respect and courtesy, discreditable conduct and honesty and integrity.
“He would have been dismissed without notice had he not already resigned and will be placed on the police barred list to prevent him serving as an officer in future.”
Detective Chief Inspector Sarah Gillies said: “Police officers have a duty to protect vulnerable people, offering a professional service based on trust and compassion.
“This officer abused his position and let down a vulnerable woman who came to Sussex Police for help.
“He has also let down his colleagues across the force who work hard every day to earn the public’s trust and confidence.
“Our communities deserve much better than this and we will continue to root out and remove any officers, staff and volunteers who are not fit to represent Sussex Police.”
Why hasn’t he been named?
It will be a protection order for the victim where an application would’ve been made providing evidence that naming the officer would’ve increased the likelihood of the victims identity being revealed. Those documents would be sealed so I’ve no way of actually knowing but I’d suggest the PO would’ve come from the victims counsel as any application made to the benefit of the POS who did this would’ve been strongly challenged by opposing counsel and in such cases are very dimly viewed by the Bench. Playing out using historical evidence of how such things normally play out I’d at least hope that the above is the case. As Sussex Police gave evidence of no support towards him there wouldn’t even be an aspect of their own desire to seek one for the attacker.