Get all your news in one place.
100’s of premium titles.
One app.
Start reading
Manchester Evening News
Manchester Evening News
National
Thomas George

Lying coppers given final warning after getting embroiled in parking row with their neighbour

Two lying police officers have been given a final warning after they became embroiled in a bitter parking row with a neighbour. PS Samantha Hague and PC Christopher Bowker were 'forced to the end of their tether' during the long-running dispute over a parking space outside their home, an investigation found.

A GMP disciplinary panel ruled the officers, who were in a relationship and lived together, lied in an attempt to have the neighbour's car towed away by colleagues.

READ MORE: Yobs throw a LOG in front an oncoming train - starting a fire and bringing down power lines

The hearing held last month reached a finding of gross misconduct against both PS Hague and PC Bowker. The officers had returned home from a night out shortly after midnight on January 18, 2020, when they discovered the neighbour's Volkswagen Golf 'intentionally obstructing' a bay allocated to PS Hague.

While she manoeuvred her Mini into the parking space 'with great difficulty', PC Bowker phoned the police. He told the operator that he and his partner needed to get out shortly to go to work, and asked for assistance in removing the car, belonging to a man named as Mr Greenwood. When asked if he knew who owned the Golf, he lied and he said he did not.

Hours later, PS Hague made a non-emergency call to report that the Golf was still blocking her car in. She said she had not been able to get to work, so had to get a lift instead. Following the report, the neighbour's car was towed away. In evidence, PS Hague said she made the call before leaving home, at a time when she intended to get a lift. She said she then changed her mind and took PC Bowker’s car to work.

But a police disciplinary panel found she had lied 'in order to exaggerate the difficulty' caused by the neighbour's obstruction. The panel said she had done so 'out of frustration', but had 'shown a lack of integrity' by failing to tell the operator that PC Bowker’s car was available to use and by withholding information about the owner of the Golf.

The investigation found PC Bowker had also lied when he told the operator he did not know who owned the Golf. However, the panel ruled that the neighbour's 'provocative' behaviour towards PS Hague and PC Bowker 'would have caused annoyance to any reasonable person and would have tested anyone’s patience'. The officers' response had been 'unplanned and emotionally driven response' following the long-running dispute over, the report said.

It added: "PS Hague’s and PC Bowker’s actions were deliberate and intentional in that they took the decision to report the obstruction to the police and they did so with the intention of persuading the police to take some action in regard to Mr Greenwood’s vehicle. However, the panel did not place substantial weight on this sub-factor, recognising that PS Hague and PC Bowker were perfectly within their rights to call the police and entitled to expect some action to be taken.

"Where they went wrong was in withholding information about the owner’s identity; information that would have led the attending police officer or PSCOs to Mr Greenwood’s door and caused him to move his car instead of it being towed away."

The report concluded that both officers had been 'forced to the end of their tether' by the neighbour and displayed 'a momentary lapse of judgement'.

Issuing a final written warning to the officers, the report said: "The panel was satisfied that neither PS Hague nor PC Bowker pose a threat to the public they serve. They each told a lie, in emotional circumstances, of a kind which did not lead the panel to conclude either officer has a propensity to be dishonest or untruthful.

"Whilst both officers breached the SPB, the panel did not find that PS Hague or PC Bowker were dishonest officers or officers who lacked integrity. Failing to disclose what they knew about the vehicle and its owner was dishonest but dishonesty of a lower order which arose of a mitigating circumstances. The panel was satisfied both officers have learned from this experience and will not repeat their mistakes."

READ MORE: Manchester United exploring plans to redevelop Old Trafford

READ MORE: Man arrested after spike of violent robberies targeting women in Manchester city centre

Sign up to read this article
Read news from 100’s of titles, curated specifically for you.
Already a member? Sign in here
Related Stories
Top stories on inkl right now
One subscription that gives you access to news from hundreds of sites
Already a member? Sign in here
Our Picks
Fourteen days free
Download the app
One app. One membership.
100+ trusted global sources.