A former West Midlands Police officer attempted to reset his mobile phone to obstruct an investigation into alleged criminal offences, a misconduct hearing was told. PC Field, whose first name was not disclosed, would have been dismissed if he were still serving, the panel ruled in June.
Arrest at Newtown Police Station
Field was arrested at Newtown Police Station in Birmingham on December 16, 2024. Body-worn video footage captured the arrest and showed Field using his personal mobile phone. He claimed he was texting a family member. However, analysis revealed the phone had been reset to factory settings at 5.58pm that day, just before the arrest was recorded at 6.01pm.
The panel chair, Debra Tedds, stated: 'I find that the former officer's conduct was deliberate, targeted and somewhat planned. His actions in resetting his mobile phone in order to frustrate any future investigation and prevent evidence being retrieved in itself is dishonest and lacks integrity which is a fundamental requirement for any police officer.'
Second Arrest and Concealed Phone
On March 26, 2025, police attended Field's home to arrest him again. When asked for his mobile phone, he claimed he had lost it, saying 'I don't have one anymore. I had one for a bit and then lost it.' Despite officers noting that his number was ringing, he insisted he had lost it. A later search of his home found the phone concealed under bedding in a bedroom.
The panel found that Field 'deliberately lied to attending officers stating that he was texting and stated that he had lost his mobile phone having sought to hide it under the bedsheets preventing its recovery and seeking to deliberately mislead the investigation.'
Breach of Bail Conditions
Following his initial arrest, Field was released on bail with conditions prohibiting contact with his former partner, effective until March 17, 2025, later extended to September 16, 2025. Examination of his seized phone showed he had sent messages to her on January 1, 2, 5, and 7, 2025, and March 20, 2025, as well as a picture on March 2, 2025.
The report noted: 'Bail conditions were put in place in order to protect a potentially vulnerable victim which the former officer has ignored and continued to communicate with her. Matters involving vulnerable persons is of significant concern to the public and undermines the police’s ability to protect the public.'
Misconduct Findings
Field was found to have breached standards of professional behaviour regarding honesty and integrity, and discreditable conduct. He submitted statements denying resetting the phone but did not engage with the hearing process, sending an email via his police federation representative stating he did not intend to participate.
The panel concluded that his actions amounted to gross misconduct, and had he still been serving, he would have been dismissed without notice.
