9 South Yorkshire cops guilty of gross misconduct after claims of racism, having sex on duty and skiving
and on Freeview 262 or Freely 565
Gross misconduct has been proven for each of the officers, at the conclusion of misconduct hearings held by South Yorkshire Police during the course of 2024.
Advertisement
Hide AdAdvertisement
Hide AdDetailing the ‘purpose’ of public misconduct hearings, South Yorkshire Police’s website states that it is to ‘show’ that their ‘disciplinary system is open and transparent’ and to demonstrate that the force does ‘hold officers who breach the standards of professional behaviour, or those where misconduct is found proven, accountable for their actions’.
Hearings should be heard by a panel of three people that should be chaired by an independent legally qualified person chosen from a pool held by the local policing body, further guidance states.
Of the nine officers found to have committed gross misconduct, four were dismissed without notice, while the remaining five left prior to their misconduct hearing taking place.
Advertisement
Hide AdAdvertisement
Hide AdSix of the accused officers had hearings held in public, and the other three were held in private and their names were not disclosed by South Yorkshire Police.
The force did not provide a reason for the hearings relating to the three officers being held in private. A spokesperson also confirmed there is ‘no mechanism’ in place to challenge the decision to prevent the press and public from attending such hearings.
1, Jade Bergan: Sacked by force
Serving Police Constable Jade Bergan was found to have committed gross misconduct, following allegations that she ‘carried out a number of police system checks without a legitimate policing purpose, with untruthful or misleading reason codes’ between 2022 and 2023.
Advertisement
Hide AdAdvertisement
Hide AdMs Bergan’s gross misconduct was found to have been proven during the course of an accelerated misconduct hearing held on September 27, 2024, at the conclusion of which she was dismissed without notice.
Documents detailing the findings provided by panel chairperson Chief Constable Lauren Poultney, which have been published by the force, state: “The officer’s actions in respect of her access to the computer system were intentional, deliberate and repetitive. There were five occasions when the systems were accessed, spanning the period from February 2022 to March 2023.”
Explaining the decision to dismiss Ms Bergan without notice, Chf Con Poultney added: “In my judgment the only appropriate outcome is a dismissal without notice. No lesser alternative adequately protects public confidence in the police service, upholds standards in policing and protects the public.
Advertisement
Hide AdAdvertisement
Hide Ad“I therefore conclude that PC Bergan is dismissed without notice and, as a result of my decision, I direct that PC Bergan’s details should also now be placed on the Barred List.”
2, Emily Leeming: Would have been sacked had she not resigned prior to misconduct hearing
Emily Leeming was a serving police constable with South Yorkshire Police when she sent racist WhatsApp messages betweeen 2021 and 2023, but has subsequently left the force.
Ms Leeming did not attend a hearing on Monday, September 2, 2024, where gross misconduct was proven.
Advertisement
Hide AdAdvertisement
Hide Ad“The panel found that the officer breached the Standards of Professional Behaviour in respect of the above allegation, and that the breach amounted to gross misconduct. The outcome of the hearing was that the former officer would have been dismissed without notice, had she not already resigned,” documents published by South Yorkshire Police (SYP) state.
The documents concerning the panel’s findings, which have been written by South Yorkshire Police’s Chief Constable, and misconduct hearing panel member, Lauren Poultney, reveal that Ms Leeming used ‘racist words’ in messages to her associates.
“This is grossly offensive and it is entirely unacceptable that a serving police officer has used them. It is used in a derogatory way. It matters little that it was not used directly to a person likely to be offended,” Chf Con Poultney said.
Advertisement
Hide AdAdvertisement
Hide Ad3 & 4, Male and female officers whose identity has been kept private: Sacked by force
Gross misconduct was proven at the conclusion of a hearing held in private on Monday, August 19, 2024, after the panel considering the misconduct case found that the officers’ alleged actions breached expected standards.
The officers were consequently ‘dismissed without notice,’ documents published by South Yorkshire Police state.
They were accused of ‘engaging in sexual activity with each other whilst on duty’ in January 2024; and in doing so, breaching police Standards of Professional Behaviour, relating to ‘discreditable conduct’.
Advertisement
Hide AdAdvertisement
Hide Ad“The panel found that the officers breached the Standards of Professional Behaviour in respect of the above allegation, and that the breach amounted to gross misconduct,” the documents state.
Announcing the hearing, South Yorkshire Police stated that the hearing would be held in private, and ‘therefore no members of the public will be allowed to attend’ - but did not provide a reason for the decision.
A SYP spokesperson confirmed there is ‘no mechanism’ to challenge the decision to hold misconduct hearings in private.
Advertisement
Hide AdAdvertisement
Hide Ad5, Male officer whose identity has been kept private: Would have been sacked had he not resigned prior to misconduct hearing
The officer, who has not been named, was accused of sending inappropriate text messages to a female he met in the course of his duties whilst investigating a missing person in November 2023.
Documents published by South Yorkshire Police state that the panel found that the officer’s conduct breached the police’s expected Standards of Professional Behaviour, relating to descreditable conduct and honesty and integrity.
His conduct therefore amounted to gross misconduct, the documents add.
Advertisement
Hide AdAdvertisement
Hide Ad“The outcome of the hearing was that the officer would have been dismissed without notice had he not already resigned,” the report states.
Announcing the hearing, South Yorkshire Police stated that the hearing would be held in private, and ‘therefore no members of the public will be allowed to attend’ - but did not provide a reason for the decision.
6, Natalie Nield: Sacked by force
Police Constable Natalie Nieldwas dismissed from South Yorkshire Police without notice, at the conclusion of a misconduct hearing which was held on July 25 and 26, 2024.
Advertisement
Hide AdAdvertisement
Hide AdDocuments detailing the misconduct panel’s findings reveal that after attending a domestic incident in January 2023, Ms Nield was found to have made a decision to ‘de-arrest’ the alleged perpetrator despite allegations of violence towards his partner - the woman who had reported the incident - and her son.
Ms Nield’s record on the incident only referred to violence reportedly carried out by the alleged perpetrator’s father, who has dementia, the panel found.
The documents state: “This entry was false and misleading. It only made reference to one of the alleged assaults, disregarded the allegations made against the caller’s partner, and failed to include details of the accounts of the caller’s mother and son.”
Advertisement
Hide AdAdvertisement
Hide AdThe second allegation against Ms Nield relate to January 2023 when a force-wide communication was sent out by ‘Events and Football’ explaining that annual leave was cancelled for Saturday, January 14, 2023, unless officers submitted an appeal.
On the date in question, Ms Nield travelled to Leeds for a ‘police social event’ and remained in the city between 12.30pm and 8pm.
“PC Nield has maintained throughout the last 18 months that her mother, mid morning on January 14, 2023, offered to care for her children until her husband returned. She declared this in interview and in her regulation 31 response. She even submitted a statement from her mother stating this to be the case,” the documents state.
Advertisement
Hide AdAdvertisement
Hide AdEvidence submitted to the panel, however, revealed that Ms Nield made arrangements on the day before the social event - January 13, 2023 - for her mother to look after her children once she knew she was exempt from duty.
“She confirmed this in a WhatsApp message sent on January 13, 2023 at 14.43. She then proceeded to make arrangements to get a lift to the station the next day to travel to Leeds for the social event,” the document state.
Gross misconduct was proven, and Ms Nield was dismissed without notice.
Advertisement
Hide AdAdvertisement
Hide AdThe panel’s findings read: “This was very serious misconduct. PC Nield told lies. The public could not have confidence in the South Yorkshire Police's approach to upholding high standards and deterring misconduct if we appeared not to take this kind of misconduct seriously.”
7, Bradley Cross: Would have been sacked had he not resigned prior to misconduct hearing
An accelerated misconduct hearing was held for former South Yorkshire Police constable Bradley Cross on May 30, 2024, after he was accused of retaining ‘images and messages on his personal mobile phone which are racist, derogatory, and discriminatory’.
The conduct was alleged to have taken place between September 2023 and January 2024, when Mr Cross was a serving officer with the force. He subsequently resigned from his position, prior to the misconduct hearing taking place.
Advertisement
Hide AdAdvertisement
Hide AdGross misconduct was proven at the conclusion of Mr Cross’ hearing, after the panel found that he had breached expected standards of professional behaviour.
Documents concerning the panel’s findings, which have been published by South Yorkshire Police state: “The panel found that the officer breached the standards of professional behaviour in respect of the above allegations, and that the breaches amounted to gross misconduct.
8, Jack Grange: Would have been sacked had he not resigned prior to misconduct hearing
Three separate allegations were brought against former police constable Jack Grange, who is understood to have been a serving officer with the force at the time of the alleged conduct.
Advertisement
Hide AdAdvertisement
Hide AdMr Grange was accused of laughing at a racist slur made by another man in a Snapchat video, and of being in possession of two South Yorkshire Police body worn videos, one of which reportedly captured a man laughing after a male detainee hit their head.
The other was said to show a police officer with his hand around the throat of a member of the public whilst also using offensive language.
Mr Grange’s conduct was found to have amounted to gross misconduct at the conclusion of an accelerated misconduct hearing held on May 14, 2024, and the panel ruled that Mr Grange would have been dismissed from the force had he not resigned.
Advertisement
Hide AdAdvertisement
Hide AdSpeaking after the panel returned its findings, Chief Constable Lauren Poultney, who chaired the accelerated misconduct hearing,said: “Former PC Jack Grange’s actions fell woefully short of the standards expected of a police officer.
“I take a zero-tolerance approach to such behaviours in my force and, in light of my findings, I would not have hesitated to dismiss this former officer from South Yorkshire Police had he not already resigned.”
9, Holly Lee: Would have been sacked had she not resigned prior to misconduct hearing
A South Yorkshire Police officeraccused of attempting to use her warrant card to access a Sheffield nightclub in the hours after going home sick from her night shift would have been sacked had she not resigned.
Advertisement
Hide AdAdvertisement
Hide AdThat was the conclusion reached by the panel at the accelerated misconduct hearing of former police constable Holly Lee, after determining that her actions amounted to gross misconduct.
A document, detailing the panel's findings, states: "The panel found that the officer breached the Standards of Professional Behaviour...and that the breaches amounted to gross misconduct.
"The outcome of the hearing was that the officer would have been dismissed without notice had she not previously resigned."
Advertisement
Hide AdAdvertisement
Hide AdThe allegation that went before the panel on January 23, 2024 claimed that in August 2022, Ms Lee advised her sergeant that she was unwell and not fit for duty on a night shift.
In the early hours of the following morning, she subsequently used her warrant card to try to gain entry to a nightclub in Sheffield.