Misconduct hearings (101A/22)
Please can you answer the following questions for each of these time periods: 2018 (calendar year); 2019 (calendar year); 2020 (calendar year) and 2021 (calendar year):1) How many disciplinary hearings relating to an officer being accused of abusing their power for purposes of sexual exploitation were held by your force over the requested period?
Please break down this information in terms of the rank of the officer accused of such an offence (for example, but not limited to: police constable, police sergeant, senior officer); a brief description of the offence (for example, but not limited to: attempting to form an inappropriate relationship with a vulnerable woman on the course of duty); if this was a complaint from a member of the public or an internal referral; the outcome in each case (for example, but not limited to: dismissal from force without notice) with rank included; the gender of the accused officer.
I understand if some details have to be withheld but others should be allowed under the act to be disclosed. Please would you be so kind as to act in a spirit of transparency.
2) For each of the time periods, please tell me how many of the accused officers were granted anonymity at the misconduct hearing (telling me- for each case they were granted anonymity- the details of the offence they were charged with; the outcome of the hearing; the gender of the officer; the reason the presiding panel chair person gave for granting anonymity at the misconduct hearing (along with the name of the presiding officer).
3) Please could you also provide information on the misconduct panel chair (i.e. their name and gender) for all the misconduct hearings where anonymity was not granted to the accused officer(s).
We can confirm that some relevant information is held by West Midlands Police. However, we are withholding that information since it is exempt by virtue of the following exemptions
Section 40 – Personal Data
These exemptions and explanatory notes are shown here:
Section 40 (2) allows for personal data to be withheld where release would breach the third party’s data protection rights. It would be unfair to release this information where any person could be identified from the data and in this case the right to privacy outweighs any public interest in release.