A WEST Mercia Police officer was barred from working for the police again after he resigned over 'racist' comments in a pub.

The departure was exposed in a probe into police transparency, but West Mercia Police says it has been open about its disciplinary process.

It comes as other forces have been criticised for not making public the names of officers who had been kicked off their respective forces.

The revelations follow an investigation published earlier this month by our sister paper, the Brighton Argus, into Sussex Police which show that officers were secretly dismissed at the direction of the force's then Chief Constable.

Their breaches range from sexting using police phones on duty, drink-driving on their way to work, attempting to sell a warrant cardholder on eBay, and accessing police systems for "close associates".

Although Sussex Police made their names secret, the disciplinary process meant they went on to the public College of Policing Barred List.

All barred officers should be placed on a public list, except in cases that would cause serious harm, government regulations state. However, West Mercia say their decisions over professional standards were open to the public.

There is only one record on the College of Policing Barred List for West Mercia Police, that of PC Jack Slattery.

The record shows that on October 9, 2019 'former PC Slattery made a racist comment in a public house in the presence of other colleagues'.

The entry went on to say he 'displayed a lack of respect and courtesy as well as showing no diversity or equality towards his colleagues and any or all BME persons'.

It added: "He has further displayed lack of honesty and integrity after having signed for accommodation in the name of another former officer having forged his signature.

"He had stayed in police accommodation without permission or authority. His conduct was found to be discreditable to himself and West Mercia Police.

"At a special case hearing the allegations were proven as Gross Misconduct and had he not resigned prior to the hearing he would have been dismissed."

A spokesperson for West Mercia Police said: "Former PC Jack Slattery was subject of a special case hearing following a finding that he had breached the professional standards of behaviour, specifically in relation to honesty and integrity.

At the hearing, held on 18 March 2020, the allegations were proven as gross misconduct and he would have been dismissed had he not previously resigned. He has been added to the College of Policing barred list preventing future employment.

"The special case hearing was advertised on the West Mercia Police website prior to it taking place and members of the press were able to apply to attend. No members of the press elected to attend the hearing however the hearing itself and its findings were made public."

The story featured originally as an exclusive in New Statesman in collaboration with the Brighton Argus, a sister paper of the Worcester News, following an investigation which revealed that the public has been kept in the dark about hundreds of barred police officers in England and Wales.

The article was written by Michael Goodier and Jody Doherty-Cove.

A Sussex Police spokesperson said: "Sussex Police expects the highest personal and professional standards of its officers and any allegations of behaviour that do not meet those standards are rigorously investigated in accordance with the relevant Police Conduct Regulations. 

"Police misconduct procedures are set nationally and Sussex Police publishes information in line with these.

"Only the most serious cases are considered for a misconduct hearing and every hearing has an appointed Legally Qualified Chair (LQC) who is independent of Sussex Police. It is the responsibility of the LQC alone to determine whether or not a hearing is partially or wholly held in public or in private and the police force must abide by it. Any officer attending a hearing has the right to make representations for it to be held in private.

"The chair will base their decision on a range of different factors and on a case by case basis. One example in police regulations is where the naming of an officer, or notice of the subject matter of an investigation, could risk the identification of a vulnerable victim or complainant against their wishes and the LQC will always consider the public interest.   

"The vast majority of misconduct hearings in Sussex are held in public with public access to this information. Where an LQC directs that a hearing is to be held in private, we are unable to confirm details relating to the proceedings without their explicit direction. This is the national position.

"A national police Barred List is held by the College of Policing to prevent those dismissed from policing from re-entering the service. In accordance with regulations, Sussex Police provides information to the College of Policing for consideration of inclusion on the Barred List.
 
Sussex Police has a policy of openness and transparency including in publishing information about police misconduct proceedings in line with relevant national guidance.

As with any public organisation that holds personal data, our duty to publish information must be carefully considered against the rights of those individuals whose information we hold. This includes the very basic right to privacy and family life that we all enjoy.

We conform to national police regulations and statutory guidance, proactively publishing information for all public misconduct hearings at the time they are held, hearings to which members of the news media and the public have the opportunity to attend. We also fulfil our obligation to ensure all officers discharged from service are prevented from being re-employed through notification to the College of Policing who oversee arrangements for the national police Barred List. 

Police misconduct is an employment matter relating to unacceptable behaviour in the workplace and, no matter the circumstances of their departure, former police officers and their families have a right to privacy.

A spokesman for Sussex Police said: “Representatives from Sussex Police and the Office of the Sussex Police and Crime Commissioner has met with local media representatives twice on this issue to discuss and develop a new protocol that provides even greater clarity and confidence in the transparency of this process within the confines of the laws which apply.”