top of page

Police officers reprimanded after seized phone captures degrading comments

  • Writer: Tanya Fowles (Local Democracy Reporter)
    Tanya Fowles (Local Democracy Reporter)
  • Oct 27
  • 3 min read
PSNI logo on green background

Three police officers have been issued with advice to improve their conduct and handling of property after a mobile phone seized during a man’s arrest recorded degrading and inappropriate comments made about him and his partner while he was in police custody.


A fourth officer was subject to performance improvement measures following a Police Ombudsman investigation into the incident, which occurred after the man was arrested at his home in December 2022.



After listening to the recording, the man submitted a seven-hour excerpt to the Police Ombudsman’s Office, in which officers referred to a suspected victim of domestic violence as “mental”, possibly suffering from “post-natal depression”, and in need of hospitalisation.


The Police Ombudsman recommended that the PSNI should hold misconduct meetings with all four officers. However, this was not accepted by the PSNI’s Professional Standards Department, which instead decided to hold a misconduct meeting with one officer and issue advice to the others.


The officers had been unaware that the man’s phone had been recording audio from before his arrest and throughout his time in police custody.



The recording contained a number of concerning comments and revealed issues with how officers had handled the phone after it was seized.


Hugh Hume, Chief Executive of the Office of the Police Ombudsman, said:


“While these comments were made by police officers outside of a public setting, they nonetheless reflect attitudes and behaviours that are entirely unacceptable.


“It is particularly concerning that such degrading remarks were directed towards a woman reporting to be a victim of domestic abuse. This serves as a reminder that police officers should always act with compassion, professionalism and integrity.”



Investigators found that the seized phone had not been packaged, labelled, or stored in line with PSNI policy. It had also been taken out of the police station while the complainant was in custody, and there was no clear record of its movements while in police possession.


Mr Hume added:


This is another case in which we identified that police officers failed to deal appropriately with an electronic device. The protection of personal data and the preservation of potential digital evidence is of critical importance, yet we have a number of cases involving concerns that police procedures governing this area are not being followed.”


Investigators also examined an allegation that an officer had encouraged a colleague to destroy the mobile phone out of fear it might be recording.



Another officer was heard responding, “What a way to get sacked.”


The officer who made the initial comment about damaging the phone was interviewed under criminal caution on suspicion of attempting, or encouraging someone else, to destroy the device. A file was submitted to the Public Prosecution Service (PPS), which directed that the officer would not be prosecuted.


The Police Ombudsman found no misconduct in relation to the complainant’s other allegations, which included claims that he had been unlawfully arrested, that officers had falsified statements and incident logs, and that a laptop had been damaged while he was in custody.


Detective Superintendent Julie Mullan, from the PSNI’s Professional Standards Department, said:


“We have received the report from the Ombudsman and acknowledge its findings.



“The PSNI and the public expect police officers to investigate incidents fully, fairly and professionally. Where it is perceived that conduct falls short of these high standards, it is right that officers should face an impartial, thorough inquiry by the Police Ombudsman’s Office.


“As a result of the investigation, three police officers have been issued with advice to improve their conduct, while a fourth officer was subject to measures designed to improve performance.


While in this instance the conduct of the officers fell short of the standards that we have set, it is not representative of the excellent work police officers carry out across Northern Ireland daily as we strive to keep people safe.”

bottom of page