A probationer PC who exchanged dozens of ‘inappropriate’ messages with the mum of a missing girl was found guilty of gross misconduct.

A Thames Valley Police panel said ‘former PC X’, whose identity has been kept secret, would have been sacked had he not resigned from the force earlier this year.

Chairman Ogheneruona Iguyovwe noted that the officer, who did not give evidence to the misconduct hearing, had shown ‘no remorse’ and had ‘failed to accept any responsibility for his actions, refusing to accept even his actions amounted to misconduct’.

The panel found that many of the 311 messages exchanged between Mr X and the mum ‘Person A’, whom he met when her child went missing last March, had no policing purpose – and that he had knowingly deleted the texts from his force-issued mobile phone.

Other allegations brought by Thames Valley Police were found not proven, including a claim that he had searched about Ms ‘A’ on police computer systems ‘without a proper policing purpose’ and that he had sex with a colleague at her home on a work from home day last June.

Both Mr X and his female colleague – given the name ‘Ms E’ – denied having sex on the day. Both admitted sleeping together previously, when off duty, and acknowledges exchanging inappropriate ‘sexuallly explicit banter’ texts but said on June 29 Mr X came to the house to complete online training modules on serious crime prevention orders and stopping a 'marauding terrorist attack'.

He had also spoken to the woman about personal health issues, which she flagged to her inspector the following day, the misconduct panel heard.

Edward Barham, for Thames Valley Police, asked the panel to find that the former officer would have been sacked had he not resigned from the force.

The ‘only appropriate outcome’ was dismissal in order to maintain public confidence in the police ad deterring misconduct in other officers, he said.

Nigel Snell, for the former officer, said Mr X continued to believe he had committed no breach of the professional standards.

He had been a ‘very inexperienced probationary officer’ at the time and unaware of College of Policing guidance around communications with members of the public. ‘Person A’ believed ‘no discredit’ had been brought on Thames Valley Police, Mr Snell added.

Mr X’s service record noted that he had received three letters of appreciation from members of the public praising his professionalism. Receiving those letters was ‘highly unusual for response officers’, the hearing was told.

Prior to the hearing, panel chairman Ms Iguyovwe ruled that the former constable’s identity could not be reported. She did this after hearing submissions from Thames Valley Police Federation about the officer’s ‘welfare’.

Prior to the hearing, this newspaper made representations asking for reporting restrictions to be lifted, which were refused.

Read more from this author

This story was written by Tom Seaward. He joined the team in 2021 as Oxfordshire's court and crime reporter.  

To get in touch with him email: Tom.Seaward@newsquest.co.uk

Follow him on Twitter: @t_seaward