A Greater Manchester Police officer who lied about his actions that he hadn't realised were caught on camera would have been sacked had he not already resigned.
A judgement into the actions of former PC Samuel Smith has now been published after a misconduct hearing. Mr Smith didn't attend the misconduct hearing on July 15, but was made aware of it. It went ahead in his absence. There were no previous findings against the former officer, who was found proven of gross misconduct.
Crash in Salford caught on Ring doorbell
The hearing heard the ex-officer had crashed a liveried police van into a parked car then lied about it. The Transit van being driven by him hit a parked Seat in Salford in September 2023, causing damage to the car and the van. The hearing was told he was on his way to an emergency call but had plenty of time to report the accident in the aftermath.
The hearing was told the van left the scene without stopping. The owner of the Seat reported the collision to GMP and it was captured on Ring doorbell footage. Former PC Smith confirmed he was driving at the time, but denied being aware of the crash.
Panel finds officer aware of collision
The published ruling states: "The panel were able to watch the Ring doorbell footage and have seen evidence of damage to the police van and the Seat. Given the damage to both vehicles and the footage of the van colliding with the Seat causing it to move backwards and forwards, the panel find that the former officer was aware of the collision at the time it occurred."
The GMP van was said to have moved to allow it to be reversed. The panel found he failed to stop after the collision, didn't make any attempt to locate the Seat owner and didn't report the collision.
Gross misconduct proven
"The former officer had numerous opportunities to do this from the moment it happened until the end of his shift and failed to do so," says the ruling. "Whilst there may have been good operational reason for the delay in notifying supervision of the collision, the former officer could have reported it informally over the radio on route to the grade one incident."
The panel also found an allegation that he failed to complete the vehicle logbook to be proven.
"Whilst the collision may have been accidental, the former officer made a conscious decision to lie about it to his supervisors," says the published judgement. "He had a responsibility as a police officer to act in line with the relevant standards, policies and guidance and training available to them."
"There is a risk of reputational harm as the public would see this behaviour as unprofessional and unacceptable and it could undermine public confidence in the police service."
"There is a risk of harm within the police service itself due to the impact this matter could have upon trust between colleagues. There was concealment of wrongdoing by the former officer, deviation from instructions and a failure to seek advice from a colleague or senior officer in relation to the collision. There are multiple proven allegations and breaches of the standards."
Gross misconduct was found to have been proven.
"The police are in a privileged position of trust, and the public expect them to conduct themselves in the correct manner," added the judgement. "We therefore have concluded that the most appropriate outcome is a finding that the officer would have been dismissed had they still been a member of the police force and that this sanction does fulfil the purpose of the misconduct regime."
No further details were revealed.
