AddThis SmartLayers

Reporter hits out after police officer given anonymity during hearing

Josh MellorPolice chiefs have been accused of misleading journalists after an officer found to have abused two colleagues was given anonymity during a misconduct hearing.

Although the officer in question has now been named as Paul Storey, reporters were told they would not be allowed to identify him during the course of the two-week hearing.

The hearing’s panel told journalists they had made the decision for “health reasons” at its outset but declined to expand on this reasoning or the legality of the order.

Now local democracy reporter Josh Mellor, pictured, has criticised the Metropolitan Police over its handling of the case.

Despite repeated enquiries by Josh, who covers Waltham Forest, Redbridge and Havering in his role, the Met has declined to explain the order’s legal status beyond issuing a note to the media after the hearing’s conclusion stating Mr Storey was now “allowed to be named”.

The force had previously cited regulation 27A of the Police Regulations 2012, which sets out that the chair of such hearings has the power to impose conditions on each case.

Mr Storey was found to have committed acts of violence and coercive control towards two female colleagues between 2013 and 2017, although the Crown Prosecution Service subsequently made a decision not to charge him.

Legally qualified chair Eileen Herlihy told the hearing the accounts of both women were “remarkably similar” and “among the most serious this panel has collectively heard”.

The panel found the allegations to be true, “on the balance of probabilities,” after seeing photographic evidence of injuries and hearing from both women, fellow officers they confided in at the time and his neighbours.

Josh, who works for London-based publisher Social Spider under the BBC-funded scheme, told HTFP: “I feel like either the chair, press officers or both misled me and other journalists there into understanding there was a legal order we were required to comply with.

“I made a lot of effort to find out from the police what the terms of that order were and they’ve never been clear on that.

“In principle, I’m not against anonymity orders if they’re put in for a good reason under rules that exist, but the police should be clear about what law, rule or regulation it’s made under and the terms should be made clear from the outset.”

HTFP reported last month how the Basingstoke Gazette and its publisher Newsquest had won a 10-month battle to name sacked PC Terry Cooke in the High Court.

Mr Cooke and his lawyers threatened the Gazette with legal action after it sought to report his name when he was sacked from the force following a secret tribunal in April 2021.

But, after Gazette publisher Newsquest began a bid to challenge the restrictions, it emerged tribunal chair William Hansen had not placed an anonymity order on the case, as Mr Cooke had claimed.

Hampshire police and crime commissioner Donna Jones later launched a review into Hampshire Constabulary’s handling of disciplinary hearings following the conclusion of that case and a similar incident involving Portsmouth daily The News.

The News named Portsmouth officer Simon Bailey, who was found in October to have pursued a relationship with a domestic abuse victim.

At the time of his sacking, Mr Bailey’s identity was kept secret despite submissions at the time from The News and other media.

However, the Portsmouth daily has since successfully identified him after his name was published on the College of Policing’s barred list.

HTFP has approached the Metropolitan Police for a comment.