Former PC Harry Elsey outcome report

Accelerated Misconduct Hearing (AMH) - 20th August 2024 Former Police Constable 42081049 Harry Elsey

I have read all the papers presented to me and heard the case put forward by the
Appropriate Authority.

In particular, the certificate issued by DCC Prophet as Appropriate Authority (AA) that the special conditions for an accelerated misconduct hearing are met under S49 Police Conduct Regulations (PCR) 2020. I fully concur with this decision.

I have considered the written submissions prepared by Ms Emily Campbell on behalf of the Appropriate Authority and adopted and referred to by Ms Campbell during the hearing.

I have also read the documentation pack provided in support of the hearing.

I have also read and reminded myself of Home Office Guidance 2020), the College of Policing (COP) Code of Ethics relevant at the time, the Standards of Professional Behaviour as set out in Schedule 2 of the Police (Conduct) Regulations 26l26l and the COP guidance on outcomes in police misconduct proceedings as updated in August 2022.

In this and all my determinations on decisions, I am considering the information and evidence I am provided with and assessing this against the test of 'balance of probability'.

Decision to hear the case in PC Elsey's absence

PC Elsey has resigned ahead of the hearing so is a former officer. He has chosen not to attend today, and his Federation representative has attended on his behalf to provide character evidence. There have been no applications for the proceedings to be delayed. The AA submit that the hearing should proceed in the officer's absence in line with Regulation 57, and in the public interest. There is no issue of a lack of fairness by proceeding.

As a result, I have decided to continue in former PC Elsey's absence.

Decision as to whether the conduct took place

The Appropriate Authority have set out clearly in the opening note and in the allegation of the breaches of the Standards of Professional Behaviour against former PC Harry Elsey and the former officer's conduct

The AA sets out the behaviour of former PC Elsey as the following:

• On the 13th September 2023, PC Elsey asked PS [REDACTED] via text message if he could change night shifts on the 24th and 25th September 26l23 to two late shifts as he had a flight to catch on the morning of the 26th September 26l23; this was his first rest day.
• PS [REDACTED] advised PC Elsey to speak to the staff supervisor in charge of the duty sheet,PSE [REDACTED]
• On the 22nd September 2023 PC Elsey asked PS [REDACTED] again if he could change the relevant shifts so that he could take a flight on the morning of the 26th September 2023. On this date, he was given the same advice to speak to the staff supervisor.
• On the 25th September 2023, PC Elsey called in sick reporting that he was suffering from a migraine and did not attend work on this date. He informed PS [REDACTED] via text message that he was sick.
• PC Elsey travelled to Romania on the morning of the 26th September 2023.
• PC Elsey did not attend work on the 3tyth September 2('y23, and sent PS [REDACTED] a text message telling her that he was sick.
• On the 1st October 2023, PS [REDACTED] held a meeting with PC Elsey on his return to work. He told her that he had been sick with two separate migraines, one on the 25th September 2023 and another on the 30th September 2023. He stated that he had still gone on holiday to Romania on the 26th September 2023.
• On the 17th April 2024, PC Elsey was interviewed in relation to the conduct allegations.

He accepted that he had provided a false excuse regarding his sickness to allow him to board a flight to Romania on the 26th September 2023.

I have considered the allegations as set out in the Regulation 51 notice against the standard of a balance of probability with evidence provided. I have been clear to consider the evidence set out by the AA in the bundle and the specific points that Ms Campbell has drawn me to. I have had throughout in my mind the point that is the job of the AA to prove the case and that even in the absence of former PC Harry Elsey this remains the case.

The facts of the matter have been admitted by former PC Elsey in his prepared statement, he makes it clear that he admitted calling in sick and tying. The Regulation 54 notice also shows that he accepts the facts in this case. There are clear text exchanges which show his admission, and evidence put forward that he was not at work when he should have been.

PC Elsey was advised to seek proper leave and didn't seek for it to be granted. Therefore, I find the facts of the matter proven on the balance of probability and as admitted by PC Elsey that he failed to attend work when he was reasonably required to be on duty and that he lied on two occasions about being sick in order to not come into work and take a flight.

Standards of Professional Behaviour Engaged

The AA proposed that the following standard is engaged as set out in the conduct above:

• Honesty and Integrity
• Duties and Responsibilities

I agree with the case from the AA that both of these standards are engaged.

I find that the standard of Honesty and Integrity is engaged as former PC Elsey lied about being sick so that he didn't have to attend work and instead flew to Romania.

I also find that the standard of Duties and Responsibilties is engaged as PC Elsey was rostered to work two days and didn't attend his shift without the appropriate permission or without a reasonable excuse.

Gross Misconduct

In considering whether the behaviour is misconduct or gross misconduct, I have consulted and considered Home Office guidance for Conduct Efficiency and Effectiveness 2020 as well as the College of Policing (COP) Guidance on Outcomes in Police Conduct Proceedings 2023. I have also considered the submission made by DCC Prophet that this matter meets the special conditions to be referred to an accelerated misconduct hearing.

Former PC Elsey was not at work when he should have been and lied about this twice to conceal the truth. He finally admitted this once he was faced with the consequences of his actions. PC Elsey has not sought to be here today to give his case or explain this.

Considering all of this I do find this at Gross Misconduct.

Considering the conduct and the definition of Gross Misconduct in the Home Office Guidance I do consider this as Gross Misconduct.

Decision as to outcome

Seriousness

I do find the conduct proven to be serious. I have assessed that it is Gross Misconduct in that the nature and circumstances of it are such that dismissal would be justified. DCC Prophet in his decision to refer this to an accelerated misconduct hearing evidenced that the relevant special conditions are met. Specifically, that it is in the public interest for the officer concerned to cease to be a member of the police force due to the seriousness of the impact on public trust and confidence in the behaviours shown as his conduct involves being absent for duty without authority for no good cause.

Even though the conduct in this case does not relate to operational dishonesty the Home Office Guidance Paragraph 4.3<Y states that any matter of dishonesty should be taken seriously as below:

"There may be cases where an officer has behaved dishonestly but the dishonesty is unconnected to a police operation or investigation and could be regarded as minor or trivial in nature. Examine the circumstances of the case with care by reference to the four categories for assessing seriousness outlined above. Cases involving any form of dishonesty on duty will always be serious because of the importance of maintaining public trust and confidence in the police service."

Culpability

Former PC Elsey is fully culpable for his actions. He booked the flights and arranged the trip, and by his own admission chose not to apply for leave which is shown in the statement from his Sergeant.

PC Elsey reported in sick himself and chose not to turn up for his shifts, showing that his actions were planned and deliberate; he also sounded out his Inspector about whether leave would be approved. This shows he knew he needed to formally apply for the leave.

Harm PC Elsey has caused harm to Essex Police as his absence would have caused a gap in resourcing that would have been required to be filled, and therefore also caused harm to his colleagues that would have had to do his work during his absence.

Former PC Elsey has also caused harm to the reputation of Essex Police as the public expect police officers to perform their duties as required.

Aggravatfog factors

I have made sure not to double count the deliberate nature included in culpability as an aggravating factor.

Former PC Elsey did not admit the matter when first challenged but was instead evasive and dishonest about his sickness. He clearly has had a poor attitude to working in FCR by his own admission in his prepared statement, and there has been behaviour highlighted in the statement given by his Sergeant as follows:

"I believe that on numerous occasions he has not adhered to his duties and responsibilities of being a Police officer,. He has made many flippant remarks showing a complete lack of respect and on occasions clearly setting out his intentions with regards to leaving the Country regardless of the fact that he was due to be working".

None have been put forward by former PC Elsey or on his behalf.

Personal Mitigation

I have read details of PC Elsey's service record, and this adds no personal mitigation. It is unremarkable.

Statements have been provided as character evidence from former PC Elsey's colleagues on LPT, but these are simply what I would expect from a professional officer, and no more; they add little weight. There is also a noticeable absence from FCR colleagues providing statements in support.

I note the points raised by PC Elsey as to his personal circumstances, but these do not in any way mitigate his Gross Misconduct in my assessment; he could have asked for help but
chose not to.

Purpose of Police Conduct Procedures

The college of policing guidance clearly sets out the purpose of police misconduct proceedings. These are threefold.

• Protect the public.
• Maintain public confidence in and representation of the police service.
• Uphold the highest standards in policing.

It is essential that through any outcome I prevent harm to the public, officers, and staff and to the trust and confidence in policing. I must protect the public from any further risk that might be caused if former PC Elsey is allowed to continue to be part of the police service, and from the risk posed by officers not turning up for their duty.

The proven allegations against PC Elsey need to be dealt with seriously to demonstrate to the public and other officers that this conduct is intolerable and will not be allowed. The public need to be assured in any outcome I decide that police officers can be trusted to do what they are paid for and not lie and abuse sickness provisions that are there for those that need them.

I must demonstrate to officers that they must obey orders and instructions and that not doing so without good cause is a serious matter and will be dealt with appropriately.

Outcome

In considering the purpose of Police Conduct procedures and the information I have read and heard in this case I have looked at the outcomes available to me.

I have considered taking no action as PC Elsey has already resigned. This does not meet the objectives of police conduct, as I need to make a clear statement to the public that someone behaving this way will be dealt with and to other officers that this behaviour will not be tolerated.

In considering all the circumstances and facts I find that the only outcome that is appropriate is dismissal without notice had PC Harry Elsey still been a serving officer.

College Barred List & publicity

The findings and the outcome of the hearing should be made public internally and externally in the interests of public trust and confidence and to reenforce the standards expected by the public, policing and Essex Police.

Former PC Elsey will be added to the College of Policing barred list.

BJ Harrington QPM
Chief Constable of Essex Police
20th August 2024