Kent Police detective demoted - but avoids sack - after making racist remarks

An independent panel ruled 49-year-old James Weale used "racist, discriminatory, and highly inappropriate language" during the exchange in July 2022

Author: Daniel Esson, Local Democracy Reporting ServicePublished 27th Nov 2023
Last updated 27th Nov 2023

A Kent police detective's been demoted - but avoided being sacked - after being found to have made racist remarks during an exchange with a colleague last year.

Detective Sergeant Jamie Weale, who lives in Canterbury, was found guilty of gross misconduct following a two-day hearing into comments whilst supervising the use of police vehicles at Margate station on 16 July 2022.

An independent panel ruled the 49-year-old used "racist, discriminatory and highly inappropriate language."

This includes describing foreign gangs as ā€œblack b*dsā€, and telling his colleague he ā€œhad never met an honest Albanianā€.

Mr Weale, who'd served in the force for 20-years, denied the allegations throughout.

And the 49-year-old detective sergeant's been spared dismissal and instead demoted to the rank of constable due to his previous record, and good character references.

"Ill-considered rant" - but threshold for dismissal not met

On that day, a PC Crush, whose first name was not disclosed during the hearing, requested keys for an unmarked car so he could drive an Albanian woman to a womenā€™s refuge in Sevenoaks.

Mr Wealeā€™s lawyer, Guy Ladenburg, told the panel the woman had been ā€œdumped unceremoniously by her brotherā€ at the police station after fleeing alleged domestic abuse from her husband in Norfolk.

PC Crush said that upon requesting the keys, Mr Weale asked for more information about the woman, and began talking about his experience of organised crime from working in Special Branchā€™s counter-terrorism unit at the Coquelles Channel Tunnel terminal in France.

In the course of explaining this, Mr Weale told PC Crush he had ā€œnever met an honest Albanianā€ ā€“ a remark he conceded he had made.

In a statement, Mr Weale wrote: ā€œI absolutely admit that in my experience every single Albanian Iā€™ve come into contact with as a police officer has lied about who they are and what they do.ā€.

Mr Ladenburg told the hearing: ā€œWhilst it is depressing, it is not unusual that a police officer in Kent has only come into contact with Albanians through those who are involved in organised crime.ā€

PC Crush also told members of the panel that, when enquiring about the Albanian womanā€™s brother, who had left her at the station and driven off without entering, Mr Weale stated ā€œheā€™s a thief mateā€. Mr Weale denied making this comment.

He also denied using the words ā€œblack b*dsā€ in a lowered voice when telling PC Crush of his knowledge of Algerian and Somali gangs in the Paris Metro.

ā€œI think Iā€™ve been very clear that I did not use the word black and I definitely did not use the term black b*ds,ā€ Mr Weale said.

But his junior colleague told the panel: ā€œI remember that phrase very specifically.ā€

Questioning PC Crush, Mr Ladenburg asked: ā€œMr Weale wasnā€™t just off on a casual racist tirade for his own amusement in this conversation was he?ā€

PC Crush responded, describing that part of the conversation as ā€œan unusual tangent which I found uncomfortable, and then I got the car keys and wentā€.

He told his superiors of the incident and then filed a report via email on the same shift in the early hours of July 17, and confirmed its accuracy when asked the next day.

Presenting the case against Mr Weale, barrister Aaron Rathmell pressed him: ā€œCan I suggest to you that the reason youā€™re denying using the phrase black b*ds is because you understand that there are serious consequences and you canā€™t reconcile that you used it on that night?ā€

Mr Weale continued to deny the allegation.

Earlier in the hearing Mr Weale told the panel he helped manage a hate crime team in 2018, ā€œand the reason they chose me to do that is because from 2006 until 2007 and 2008 I had already created a hate crime team for the first timeā€.Ā 

In 2016, after a man was convicted of racially abusing a family on Whitstable beach, Mr Weale, who was then a PC, said in a release circulated to media outlets: ā€œKent Police takes all matters of racial prejudice extremely seriously and will always employ zero tolerance towards anyone demonstrating this sort of behaviour.ā€

At this weekā€™s hearing he said: ā€œIā€™ve dedicated my whole career to Kent Police, my whole 20 years to them, the longest job Iā€™ve ever had.Ā 

ā€œI find it a real kick that Iā€™m now being accused of being a racist, because I am not.ā€

Mr Weale added that since the accusation he had ā€œgone through every single emotion you could imagine in the past 17 monthsā€.

The panel was told he was in his first year as a detective sergeant at the time he made the remarks, having been promoted from detective constable.

As such he had the rank of T/DS ā€“ temporary detective sergeant ā€“ and would have retained this throughout a 12-month probationary period.

At the end of the first day of proceedings, Mr Weale got up to leave just before the end, telling the chair of the panel, William Hansen, he was going to be sick.

On the second day at Kent Police North in Northfleet, following deliberations, the panel ruled Mr Weale had used all the phrases alleged.Ā 

ā€œWe find PC Crush to be an entirely truthful witness trying to help the panel,ā€ explained Mr Hansen, who also sits as a high court judge.

ā€œWe are satisfied that PC Crushā€™s recollection was reliable.ā€

On Mr Weale, who has not been serving in a public-facing role since the allegations were made, Mr Hansen said ā€œthe officerā€™s memory has obviously been clouded by the stress and emotionā€ of the ordeal.

The panel found Mr Weale ā€œprone to going off point and not engaging fully with the questions he was askedā€.

ā€œUltimately we found his denials unpersuasive when set against PC Crushā€™s evidence,ā€ Mr Hansen continued.

Discussing his history with the force, however, Mr Hansen added: ā€œWe cannot find any evidence to support the suggestion that the officer is racist, which makes his comments harder to understand.ā€

The panel noted that dismissal without notice would be a justified outcome.

Mr Rathmell argued for Mr Weale to be sacked, stating: ā€œHe as well as anyone knows how hard the police have to work to earn the trust of diverse communities in this police area, and how easily that trust is lost.Ā 

ā€œItā€™s not a matter of political correctness, itā€™s a matter of proper thought process and proper language.

ā€œThereā€™s still public concern that police donā€™t get it and that there are prejudicial mindsets and language within the police.Ā 

ā€œSadly in this case the conduct you have found shows that.

ā€œWhat public confidence would it serve the purposes of this proceedings for this officer to be retained even as a police constable?ā€

Mitigating, Mr Ladenburg argued: ā€œAs you in your judgement said, sir, this was not a gratuitous or racist tirade, it was in the context of this officer attempting to share his concerns and experience with a junior officer.

ā€œThis is someone who has very profound and passionate feelings about his policing, in particular with reference to organised crime groups.

ā€œYou have recognised in your careful judgement that what happened in that conversation was not illustrative of this officerā€™s character.

ā€œIt is obvious given his evidence throughout these proceedings and in his earlier account that he finds it very difficult to acknowledge that he used these words.

ā€œPublic confidence would recognise the value of his contribution such as it outweighs the very regrettable language that was used,ā€ Mr Ladenburg added, and said a reduction in rank would be a suitable sanction.

In the panelā€™s judgement, Mr Hansen said Mr Weale had used ā€œphraseology that was racist, discriminatory, perpetuates racist prejudice, and on the face of it at least demonstrates prejudice against Albanians and other ethnicitiesā€.

ā€œHis language was racist, discriminatory and highly inappropriate,ā€ he added.

However, the judgement also described Mr Weale as an officer ā€œwho has worked assiduously in the field of hate crime and made a positive contribution to equality and diversityā€, with ā€œno previous pattern of similar behaviourā€.

ā€œIt was an ill-considered rant,ā€ Mr Hansen added.

ā€œWe have concluded that reduction in rank is the appropriate and proportionate response.ā€

Mr Hansen described the decision as ā€œnot a softer optionā€ and said the panel ā€œcame to the considered conclusion that the threshold for a dismissal had not been metā€.

Detective Chief Superintendent Jon Armory, the head of professional standards at Kent Police, said: ā€œTemporary detective sergeant Jamie Weale was proven to have made discriminatory comments to a colleague and the decision to reduce his rank from sergeant to police constable was made by a panel led by a legally qualified chair who is independent of Kent Police.

ā€œThe panel had a number of sanctions available to them after finding T/DS Weale responsible for gross misconduct, including dismissal or a final written warning, and determined that a reduction in rank was appropriate and proportionate bearing in mind his previous record and character references.

ā€œKent Policeā€™s stance on discriminatory language and behaviour is very clear ā€“ it is unacceptable and there is no place for it.Ā 

ā€œWe are committed to building and maintaining lasting relationships with the many diverse communities we serve and the vast majority of our officers do so with pride and integrity at all times.Ā 

ā€œThey are also well aware of the importance of standing up to inappropriate conduct, which is what happened in the case of T/DS Weale when his behaviour was challenged and reported by a colleague to our Professional Standards Department.ā€