Leave this site
We use some essential cookies to make our website work. We’d like to set additional cookies so we can remember your preferences and understand how you use our site.
You can manage your preferences and cookie settings at any time by clicking on “Customise Cookies” below. For more information on how we use cookies, please see our Cookies notice.
Your cookie preferences have been saved. You can update your cookie settings at any time on the cookies page.
Your cookie preferences have been saved. You can update your cookie settings at any time on the cookies page.
Sorry, there was a technical problem. Please try again.
This site is a beta, which means it's a work in progress and we'll be adding more to it over the next few weeks. Your feedback helps us make things better, so please let us know what you think.
On 22 June 2026 PC 14853 Barrett appeared at an accelerated misconduct hearing relating to failure to meet standards under the Police (Conduct) Regulations 2020. The allegation arose from their accessing of policing information without a legitimate purpose and sharing some of this material with third parties. They had also failed to challenge the behaviour of a fellow officer.
The officer accepted that the conduct alleged amounted to gross misconduct.
Having considered the case put forward by the officer, the Assistant Chief Officer found find the allegation proven to be gross misconduct.
It was considered that the officer’s conduct had breached the standards of professional behaviour relating to honesty and integrity (integrity only), duties and responsibilities, discreditable conduct, orders and instructions, confidentiality, challenging and reporting improper conduct.
In considering the disciplinary outcome, the Assistant Chief Officer took into account mitigation presented by the officer and their personal record.
The officer received a final written warning which will remain live for 3 years from the date the warning was given.