Cops ‘acted like minicab drivers’ after woman strangled in alley

Two police officers failed to investigate the robbery and strangulation of a vulnerable woman in a Bristol alley and then tried to cover up their mistakes, a misconduct hearing was told.

PC James Stone and PC Daniel Sweet neglected their police duties and acted more like ‘minicab drivers’ by returning the victim from the scene of the attack in St Pauls to the BRI where she was treated as an inpatient, but without asking anything. questions about it or recording a crime, it was assumed.

It then took months for them to issue statements about what happened, despite repeated requests from senior officers, because they were embarrassed by how poorly they had handled the incident, the commission heard. The pair deny breaching standards of professional conduct amounting to serious misconduct.

Read on

Giving evidence on the first day of the Avon and Somerset Police misconduct hearing at the force’s Portishead headquarters, PC Sweet admitted that, on reflection, he had made mistakes but that he believed at the time he had acted correctly because his welfare was his priority victim in addition to the robbery investigation.

Officers were called to Drummond Road at 4.30am on November 11, 2022, following a 999 call about a woman screaming. Solicitor Alan Jenkins, representing the police, told the panel that the woman, who cannot be named for legal reasons, was a heroin and cocaine user who had been staying in a nursing ward at Bristol Royal Infirmary and had gone out to have a cigarette

He said she got into a car with a man she knew who had a reputation for violence and he drove her down an alleyway and attacked her, stealing £280 and her mobile phone . PCs Stone and Sweet arrived to find her under the influence of drugs wearing only pajamas and a dressing gown on a cold night, Mr Jenkins said.

He said they took the woman back to the BRI and that she told the police car that she had been strangled by a man who tried to kill her. Mr Jenkins said: “Both officers failed to protect this lady. She was vulnerable, but the officers did not ask questions or pursue any inquiries.

“Both officers knew this was a violent man but took no action to apprehend him. They failed to protect the public. They made no effort to start or keep a record.

“They are acting like minicab drivers taking her back to the hospital, they are not acting like police officers. What investigation was undertaken by these officers? It would appear that none.”

He said PC Sweet did not mark his body-worn video as containing evidence and as a result it was automatically deleted a few weeks later. PC Stone said in his statement that he was unaware of a crime as he did not hear the woman in the car as he was focused on driving, but Mr Jenkins said this was not true.

PC Sweet, 31, a qualified hostage negotiator, told the hearing on Wednesday, May 8: “Well-being was very much at the forefront of my decision-making. She was slurring her words and mumbling. I was concerned for her well-being.

“The protection he needed there and then was to go back to the hospital. It was outside in the cold. I had my thick jacket on and was cold. It must be freezing. On reflection, I was so focused on well-being that I almost saw it. felony charges as secondary.”

He admitted that he should have taken notes on her account, but that her well-being came first. PC Sweet said it would not have been appropriate to question her because she could not give a coherent report and that would have to happen later.

He said he put the mechanism in place for the case to be investigated by asking the female nurse to include the assault in her medical notes so police could interview her when she was fit and well. “With all my concerns put together, it felt absolutely right,” PC Sweet said.

But he said he trusted the nurse too much and should have recorded the crime and taken notes. PC Sweet said: “We did it a bit clumsily but the intentions were good.”

Mr Jenkins told him: “You are effectively subcontracting or outsourcing the policing role that you should have been doing to medical staff.” PC Sweet said he did not mark the body-worn video as evidence because a crime report had not been made and he did not realize how quickly the footage would be deleted.

“I thought I had more time, I didn’t know it was going to run out,” the officer said. PC Sweet admitted the three-month delay in the statement was unacceptable.

Mr Jenkins told him: “You were late making a statement because you had no notes, so writing this statement will be an embarrassment.” The agent replied, “No, there was absolutely no intention of the delay. There was no embarrassment.”

Mr Jenkins said that following a third reminder email from the investigating officer for PC Sweet to provide a statement, he replied that he did not remember the woman accusing him of murder. The lawyer said: “This is evidence of a comprehensive failure of your actions on the night.”

The officer said: “I accepted from the start that I should have done things differently.”

The hearing continues Thursday.