Officer Leslie Jones, based at Windsor Police Station, was in charge of supervising convicted sex offenders but ‘cut-and-pasted’ reports, lied about visiting one offender, and neglected to check the smartphone of another for three years.
PC Leslie Jones cited a ‘unmanageable’ caseload, with the Thames Valley Police officer responsible for up to 90 registered sex offenders.
The Home Office proposes a caseload of 55 offenders per public protection officer.
However, a three-member panel deemed him culpable of serious misconduct and dismissed him from the force.
Chairman of the commission Harry Ireland stated, “We determined that PC Jones was unquestionably struggling with his workload.”
“We also discovered a pattern of taking “shortcuts” and failing to manage sexual offenders as expected.”
The lawyer added, “Where lesser effort was available, he would take it.”
Last year, HM Inspectorate of Constabulary raised concerns that the force’s management of sex and violent offenders (MOSOVO) team lacked the resources to “manage demand in a timely manner.”
Inspectors noted in their evaluation of Thames Valley Police that the unit had a “visit backlog.”
These visits help determine whether a sexual offender is reoffending or whether the danger they pose has changed.
At the misconduct inquiry for PC Jones, it was stated that the MOSOVO team’s heavy caseload had been exacerbated by the departure and replacement of officers with less experienced staff.
It was stated that concerns had been expressed with “senior members of the police force.”
The officer’s supervisor, who concurred that PC Jones’ caseload was “unmanageable,” reviewed the work of the other employees she was responsible for.
“No one else had taken’shortcuts’ as PC Jones was alleged to have done, and despite the fact that others were struggling, everyone had completed their work as expected,” the panel stated.
He admitted to having “taken shortcuts” in his interactions with two other registered sexual offenders.
Between May 2021 and July 2022, on four separate occasions, one employee did “little more than copy and paste” from previous reports.
He neglected to check a second sex offender’s phone to ensure monitoring software was installed or to inspect his bedroom.
Given that PC Jones himself characterised the individual as a “compulsive liar” and “difficult to manage,” the tribunal deemed this “inexplicable.”
And he lied about visiting a second sex offender, penning fictitious reports stating that the man was purportedly in “good spirits for a change.”
The panel deemed PC Jones’ claim that he had made an error to be unconvincing.
The panel determined that PC Jones, violated professional conduct standards and was guilty of gross misconduct.
He was dismissed without notice.