A police sergeant who was caught rifling through confidential systems blamed 'stress' he was under for his 'serious breach', a disciplinary hearing was told.
PS Cooper insisted his 'irrational and impulsive' behaviour in searching for information 'when he had no policing purpose to do so' was 'out of character'. He said he suffered an 'isolated lapse due to ill health' and was experiencing 'stress' at the time - but provided no medical evidence to back up his claims.
Cooper was found to have breached policing standards of professional behaviour, with a panel finding that his actions amounted to gross misconduct. He 'deliberately and intentionally' accessed information 'for a personal purpose', the panel said.
The former officer would have been dismissed had he still been working for West Midlands Police, an accelerated misconduct hearing found in May.
A report from panel chair Julia Debenham read: 'He used police systems to conduct searches that were not for a policing purpose and accessed information which he had no lawful authority to view. His behaviour amounts to gross misconduct as it seriously undermines public trust and confidence in policing.'
The report added: 'The officer's role as a sergeant is an aggravating factor as he should have been setting standards to others and in fact he abused his position. He clearly would have known that his actions were wrong as he had received relevant training and the warnings on force systems are very clear.'
The panel heard how Cooper viewed a log relating to a report of a domestic incident on November 4, 2022. He also carried out a 'person search', using two different dates of birth, on December 10.
Cooper 'unreservedly accepted that his conduct amounts to gross misconduct' and 'submitted an unreserved apology' for his actions. He accepted his conduct in November but did not admit to the further search in December, the panel heard.
The report read: 'The former officer has provided an explanation relating to the stress that he was experiencing at the time of the events that led to behaviour that he says was irrational and impulsive and out of character. There is no medical evidence or other corroborative evidence, such as occupational health reports, to support the former officer's account. He has spoken of an isolated lapse due to ill health.'
But Ms Debenham said she did not believe it was an isolated lapse as the 'evidence presented clearly shows that the officer accessed the system on two separate occasions'. Cooper did not 'supply a reason for accessing the system', with the report adding: 'The officer has offered no explanation for why he would access that information but it is clear that he had a personal interest in doing so.'
Cooper - who did not attend the hearing - was found to have breached the standards of professional behaviour relating to confidentiality and discreditable conduct. He resigned on April 22.
The report read: 'In terms of harm, I find that this is high. Whilst there is no direct harm caused to the public or others, the potential impact on public confidence is significant. The public expect police officers to maintain the confidentiality of sensitive personal data that is within the policing environment. They do not expect the police to use that information for personal interests. The damage to public confidence is significant if they believe officers misuse information in this way.'
