Complaint investigated by Devon & Cornwall Police

​​Request 733186991

FOI response 8023 dated 4 December 2024 states that a complaint investigated by Devon & Cornwall Police had incurred costs of £83,549 referencing the need to ensure impartiality and thoroughness to maintain public trust and confidence. 

1. In what year was the complaint lodged and has the complaint now concluded?

2. What is the total cost now incurred investigating this complaint split between Devon & Cornwall and any other legal advice or representation that was required?

3. How many individual allegations did Devon & Cornwall identify and how many individual officers were subject of these allegations?

4. Were all identified allegations investigated? If not, please sate how many and the reason why (e.g., officer resignation, lack of evidence etc) why not?

5. How many investigated allegations were upheld and how many officers were found to be at fault for those upheld?

6. Of those upheld, how many (broken down by allegations and number of officers) were assessed as being:

a. Service not acceptable and dealt with by reflective practice

b. Misconduct

c. Gross misconduct

7. Were any of the upheld allegations assessed as “service not acceptable,” misconduct, or gross misconduct, but could not be acted upon because the officer(s) were no longer serving at the time? If so, how many?

8. Given the stated importance of maintaining public trust and confidence, have the findings of the investigation been (or will they be) published in full or in summary form? If not, will the public be informed of:

a. The nature of the findings

b. The actions taken

c. Any learning or policy changes implemented as a result

Response

In response to questions 1 to 8, States of Jersey Police can confirm the following.

1. The complaint was lodged in 2021. The complaint hearing concluded on 13/08/2025, subsequently an appeal process has commenced by two officers.

2. Final costs are still pending receipt of final invoices from Devon & Cornwall and local advocates providing advice. Article 3 of the Freedom of Information (Jersey) Law 2011 applies.

3. 12 officers in total (Excluding Chief Officers complaint) were identified that could be placed under investigation, 8 officers were still in service and formally placed under investigation.

4. Yes.

5. 61 allegations upheld, across 12 officers, 10 officers service level not acceptable, 8 placed under formal investigation. 2 officers taken to disciplinary hearing, 4 received reflective feedback and learning and 2 retired/resigned whilst under investigation.

6. Of those upheld, how many (broken down by allegations and number of officers) were assessed as being:

a. 19 allegations upheld over 5 officers, 1 officer did not receive it as resigned before given. 13 in total over 4 officers.

b. 4 for Misconduct (2 x 2 officers who went to hearings).

c. 0 for Gross misconduct

7. Yes. 4 relating to 1 officer. 

8. Complaints are dealt with in private and are not for public record. Therefore, a closing letter is sent directly to the complainant which will contain a summary of the findings.

Article Applied

Article 3 - Meaning of “information held by a public authority”

​For the purposes of this Law, information is held by a public authority if –

(a)     it is held by the authority, otherwise than on behalf of another person; or

(b)     it is held by another person on behalf of the authority.​​​