British emergency call handler ignored 140 calls including rape and child abuse reports

He was eventually fired but will not be prosecuted

A police officer who ignored dozens of 999 calls including reports of rape, child abuse and a break-in by a gunman as non–emergencies has been sacked.

The 58-year-old Metropolitan Police officer, who worked for one of Britain’s biggest 999 call centres, failed to send police to a number of life-threatening emergencies.

The ‘appalling and callous’ operator bungled more than 140 calls leaving victims in danger, including one woman who threatened to commit suicide and was merely told to go to her local police station if she wanted help.

In one instance, a terrified householder who reported that a brick had been thrown through his window by a gunman who was sitting outside his house in a car brandishing the weapon was told that the ‘non-urgent’ matter did not require a police response. The caller hung up in frustration and re-dialled 999 to speak to another handler who immediately sent an emergency response.

In another case, a young boy who called 999 begging for help, saying his father had hit him and locked him in the house, was told that he shouldn’t be calling 999, wasting police time. When the boy raised his voice in protest, the officer reprimanded him and ordered him to put his father on the line.

The officer failed to take the boy’s address, so police were never able to trace the boy who never phoned back.

Another girl who dialled 999 to report that her friend had been raped was just told to take her to a local police station, even though police should have been immediately dispatched. Fortunately the alleged victim attended a police station 90 minutes later.

In some cases the officer even doctored the log, changing the last digit of the caller’s telephone number to cover his tracks, making it impossible for supervisors to call the victim back.

But he was caught out when a woman who called to report a domestic assault on July 26, 2009, mentioned him to a family friend who also worked at Bow Central Command Centre in east London as a supervisor.

The woman complained that she had called to report a domestic assault, but the PC told her he was unable to understand her accent. After spelling her surname seven times to no avail, the woman hung up in frustration.

The officer closed the call log noting only an ‘irate woman had ended a call’ and he failed to respond to the alleged assault.

An inquiry was launched by the Independent Police Complaints Commission in August 2009 which found that out of around 3,000 phone calls handled by the PC in a three-month period from May 2009 when he started handling calls, 141 calls had ‘significant performance issues’ and 19 amounted to gross misconduct.

The officer, who has not been named, failed to respond properly to reports of domestic abuse, rape, potential armed break-ins, a suicide threat and a road traffic collision.

The report found that out of the 19 cases of gross misconduct, nine callers had phoned back or visited a police station, six were offered assistance by the inquiry team, and four callers could not be contacted or traced.

In seven cases he had altered the caller’s telephone number and he put the phone down on other callers, investigators found.

He ‘deliberately obstructed callers’ attempts to get help’ including a number of domestic assaults reported by women and men, which left them in ‘continued danger’.

The PC was placed on restricted duties on July 26, 2009 and was sacked on October 11 this year following a misconduct hearing.

But he will not face prosecution as the Crown Prosecution Service concluded there was insufficient evidence to bring a criminal case.

Yesterday IPCC Commissioner for London Deborah Glass said: ‘When the public call 999 for help from the police they should receive an immediate, professional and sympathetic response.

‘This officer not only did not provide that response, in some cases he deliberately obstructed their attempts to get help and left some callers in continued danger. ‘It is a matter of luck - and the persistence of those seeking help - that his actions do not appear to have resulted in serious harm to a member of the public. ‘It beggars belief that a police officer whose job was to help people in distress should have behaved in such an appalling and callous way. He has rightly been dismissed.’

Commander Peter Spindler, who is in charge of the Met’s Directorate of Professional Standards said: ‘It was a fellow call handler who reported him, showing how shocked the vast majority of the hard working and professional call handlers were when they found that this one officer was not treating victims and witnesses with the appropriate concern, seriousness and high standards required.

‘We want to ensure that Londoners feel that we are here for them, that their calls are taken seriously and that the police response meets the high professional standards the public and the Met demand. ‘Therefore we take any allegations of wrong doing extremely seriously - as the dismissal of this officer demonstrates.’

Original report here




(And don't forget your ration of Wicked Thoughts for today. Now hosted on Wordpress. If you cannot access it, go to the MIRROR SITE, where posts appear as well as on the primary site. I have reposted the archives (past posts) for Wicked Thoughts HERE or HERE or here