Former Warwickshire PCSO told he “would have been dismissed” for gross misconduct had he not resigned from force already

A misconduct hearing held on Tuesday (5 May) heard the PCSO made inappropriate contact via social media with a burglary victim after he had been round to her house to provide crime prevention advice.

The incident came to light after the victim reported the conduct to the force’s professional standards department.

The matter was referred to the Independent Office of Police Complaints (IOPC) who carried out an independent investigation.

The hearing heard the PCSO also had unwanted and inappropriate physical and social media contact with a colleague.

This incident was investigated by the force’s Professional Standard’s Department.

The misconduct hearing was held at Warwickshire Police Headquarters in Leek Wootton and was chaired by Superintendent Mike Smith.

The PCSO’s conduct was assessed as gross misconduct and the hearing determined that if he had not resigned from the force in October 2019 he would have been dismissed.

The PCSO was also placed on the College of Policing barred list.

The outcome is subject to the usual appeals process.

Superintendent Warren Little, head of the Professional Standards Department, said: “For the public to have confidence in the force it is important our officers and staff maintain the highest standards at all times.

“In this case I am pleased the member of the public had the confidence to make a report to the Professional Standards Department.

This allowed a thorough investigation into his conduct to be carried out which resulted in this outcome and has ensured that the former-PCSO won’t work for the police or other law enforcement agency again.”

Warwickshire Police have said that, unlike with police officers who would be named in cases of gross misconduct, PCSOs count as being police staff and in line with the force's policy are not named.

A Warwickshire Police spokesman said: "A staff member subject to disciplinary proceedings has a legitimate expectation of privacy under Article 8 of the ECHR. It is for this reason that, unlike criminal proceedings, such hearings are held in private.

"The public interest in being assured that the force has taken appropriate steps to uphold the requisite standards of behaviour, is satisfied by the information released, and does not require the individual to be named.”