POLICE officials have been ordered to apologise to a member of the public after a botched investigation into the actions of the chief constable and his former deputy.
Chief Constable Phil Gormley, who is currently being probed for alleged gross misconduct, and former number two, Neil Richardson, both faced claims of negligence after a complaint from the man in 2015.
The complainant wrote to Mr Richardson raising concerns about officers in the Professional Standards Department (PSD).
It was passed to a superintendent in charge of the department at the centre of the claims. When the complainant found out, he further complained to Mr Gormley.
However, an inspector in the chief constable’s secretariat wrote back saying the complaint had been passed to Mr Richardson, despite his involvement in the original matter.
Yet it was still dismissed by force oversight body, the Scottish Police Authority (SPA), in 2016.
The Police Investigations & Review Commissioner (Pirc) has now ruled the claims were not handled reasonably, ordered the SPA to do a review and send a letter of apology.
Pirc’s review found the SPA did not adhere to protocol when handling the complaint about Mr Richardson and did not give a reason why it decided the allegation would not, if proved, amount to misconduct.
It failed to explain what inquiries were carried out, what facts were established, or how they led to the complaint not being upheld.
Pirc said it was unacceptable for a letter of complaint about an officer to be passed to that same individual.
Andrew Barker, general secretary of the Scottish Chief Police Officers Staff Association, said it had raised “concerns with the SPA on a number of occasions” about the way complaints were handled.
The SPA said it would learn from the incident. Mr Richardson, involved in a row over police spying on journalists’ sources, retired last year.
It emerged last month Mr Gormley was being probed by Pirc over claims he shouted at a senior colleague.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel