THE police watchdog was shut out over a decision to hold a gross misconduct hearing in private - against Home Office guidelines.

The Independent Office for Police Conduct (IOPC) was not consulted by the chair of the panel investigating the conduct of Basingstoke policeman Terry Cooke, the Gazette can report.

As previously reported, the officer was dismissed after a secret hearing in April 2021 heard how he systematically abused his position at Hampshire Constabulary to pursue relationships with vulnerable women.

The IOPC said the “procedural irregularity” of being excluded could have the effect of undermining public confidence.

READ MORE: Sacked police officer ‘acted improperly’ to stop details being public

In England, police misconduct hearings are held independently of their police forces and are chaired by a Legally Qualified Chair (LQC) who is appointed by the local office for the police and crime commissioner.

They act as the judge and spokesperson on behalf of the hearing. In this case, William Hansen QC was appointed by the Police and Crime Commissioner for Hampshire. PC Cooke’s barrister Alexandra Felix QC, acting on behalf of the officer and the Police Federation for England and Wales, requested that the hearing be heard in private due to health and safety concerns.

In a “procedural irregularity”, the police watchdog was not invited by the LQC to make a submission to counter this request on behalf of the public interest against Home Office guidance.

Mr Hansen went ahead and ruled the hearing should be held in private without consulting the IOPC.

In a statement, the IOPC said: “Despite having engaged in regular correspondence with the Appropriate Authority [William Hansen and the Police and Crime Commissioner for Hampshire] concerning the hearing, the IOPC was not made aware of Mr Cooke’s application concerning a private hearing and the public of a notice and was therefore unable to make representations on the matter, contrary to Home Office guidance.

SEE ALSO: Terry Cooke ‘abused his position’ to target young women

“Consequently, it was unable to participate in decision making process, to represent the wider public interest in police misconduct hearings taking place in public and assist the chair in balancing the particular concerns of the accused officer against the public interest and the general presumption in favour of police misconduct cases being open to the public.

The IOPC believes that there was a “procedural irregularity which could have had the effect of undermining public confidence in the decisions reached by the misconduct panel”.

Mr Hansen declined to comment.

Donna Jones, Police and Crime Commissioner for Hampshire, said: “It is disappointing when the conclusion of hearings protect the anonymity of public servants, when they have clearly been found to have done wrong.

“I support Hampshire Constabulary’s presumption that hearings be held in public, and I respect the decision of the independently appointed Legally Qualified Chair to determine how the hearing should be heard.

“The public has a right to know about the conduct of officers and the media play an important role in reporting trials involving officers. I support the changes to the complaints process in 2020, which outlines that the media should be consulted if reporting restrictions be proposed. This is designed to help ensure openness and transparency to the public.

“As police and crime commissioner, The conduct of officers is something I take seriously. In this case once the officer was found guilty of gross misconduct, he was dismissed from Hampshire Constabulary. By challenging Hampshire Constabulary to uphold standards, and in supporting the force as it proactively tackles serious misconduct, I ensure there is a police force fit for purpose across all our communities.”

A spokesman for the Police Federation of England & Wales (PFEW) said: “Our particular interest concerned the wider legal issue of how the Courts would interpret the question of whether the directions and rulings of the Legally Qualified Chairs - who preside over police misconduct hearings - are legally binding.

“There was no legal precedent in this area at the time, and the implications of this issue and related issues around privacy and anonymity were of potential relevance to the organisation’s wider membership.

“Regrettably, given the turn of events in the case, those important questions were not ultimately addressed or determined by the Court.

“PFEW was not aware until after the Judicial Review proceedings had commenced that there had been no LQC anonymity ruling.

“We are currently conducting enquiries in order to review and consider the case outcomes. Therefore, we are unable to comment further at this time.”

PC Cooke can now be named for the first time and details surrounding the misconduct hearing have been made public following a successful high court challenge by The Gazette’s publisher Newsquest.

Message from the editor

Thank you for reading this story. We really appreciate your support.

Please help us to continue bringing you all the trusted news from your area by sharing this story or by following our Facebook page.