Should This Policewoman Be Fired Over This?

[youngmafbog]

She shares an explicit image of a fellow officer sent to her(unsolicited). Surely if you are sent an image like that then the sender should be responsible too?

I particularly like the line : "Goole Magistrates' Court heard she had been told in a ten-minute conversation by her boss that she should not 'blow it out of proportion' "

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5831101/Female-police-officer-faces-sack-showing-pictures-policemans-penis-colleagues.html

[dannyk13]

Yes, she was ordered not to show it, but went ahead anyway,

[dannyk13]

Plus, she made a false statement regarding non inflicted injuries.

[youngmafbog]

Actually, what he told the Court was this:

He replied: 'It wasn't as if I said 'I'm ordering you', but I told her do not to show it to anyone else.

[youngmafbog]

Yes I get the false statement Danny and if that is enough why bring this in?

[dannyk13]

I think probably because it gives an insight into her lack of discipline.

[jackthehat]

There are a whole raft of disciplinary issues laid against her........the photograph is just one amongst them. It is the most headline-grabbing of them, granted.

If she is found guilty of those charges laid against her then, yes, she should be fired.

[youngmafbog]

Not sure I see it that way. As I pointed out earlier she was not "ordered" so what discipline?

[dannyk13]

//She is also alleged to breach standards by not attending work after the assault because she stated she was sick to injuries which had allegedly not occurred.//

[EDDIE51]

It is not a sacking matter. She has been disciplined that is the correct procedure.

[jackthehat]

There are 'official' (operational orders) and 'unofficial' (pertaining to good order) orders. When they are given by a senior rank, there is an unspoken acknowledgement that they stand.
She made it very difficult for the DS to deal with the incident and as dannyk says it gives additional insight to her lack of doscipline.

[dannyk13]

Eddie , this PW has shown a complete lack of discipline and appropriate behaviour.Sacking is the correct thing to do.

[Davemano]

When, not if, the allegations are proved she should be dismissed as her conduct is not that which is expected of a police officer. The main offence I believe is the 'false allegation' incident. It is simply malingering, and a matter likely to bring the force into disrepute.

[Smowball]

Have to agree with Danny...

[jno]

I don't know, jth, a statement like "I'm not ordering you, but don't do it" in turn makes it hard for anyone to know what to do. I don't know how an unofficial order can stand when it's specifically prefaced by "this is not an order". That seems some way short of gross misconduct.

Fortunately for them they have other grounds for penalising her if they so choose. I wonder what happened to the possessor of the organ?

[jackthehat]

jno - Perhaps it might seem ambiguous for you or me, but it won't be the first time she'll have run-up against an 'informal' order....and she should have known what was expected of her, having received it.
I don't know how the DS was going to handle this issue of the photograph but she made it more difficult by sharing it around when requested (formally/informally) not to.

[Jackdaw33]

As in the armed forces, bringing the service into disrepute is a very serious matter and dismissal seems the only option.

[dannyk13]

What is not shown is whether she has any prior instances of lack of unbecoming conduct.

[jno]

an informal order is one thing, but an order that's explicitly disavowed before it's even given seems to me dodgy ground. He should have omitted the disclaimer and just told her what (not) to do. Why would he not have done so?

[jackthehat]

Perhaps he thought she would listen to him and not do it?
It may well be the sort of thing which fell outside his remit to 'order' and he knew it which is why he inserted the caveat.....but at the same time, as a senior rank he expected her to do as he asked if only so that he could deal with the situation properly.

[jno]

I guess that must be the case. It might be tricky to explain to any sort of employment tribunal, though. I imagine, as you say, this is not necessarily the most important charge, just the most Mailish.