A Suffolk police sergeant has been found guilty of misconduct after it was alleged that he repeatedly promoted the business interests of a legal service to victims and families.

Former police sergeant Neil Clarke was the subject of a misconduct hearing at Ipswich Town FC from January 22 to 25, in which it was alleged that he promoted the business interests of 'Person A' while working in the Roads and Armed Policing Team in Bury St Edmunds. 

Mr Clarke joined Suffolk police in 2004 before resigning in 2005 and getting a job at 'Firm A', where he worked with the personal injury and clinical negligence teams and where he met Person A, a personal injury solicitor.

He re-joined the police in 2008, first serving in Essex Police before transferring to Suffolk in 2014.

The panel, made up of Neil Dalton, legally qualified chair, alongside Matt Carney, a superintendent in Suffolk police, and Peter Gratton, an independent panel member, heard the alleged incidents took place from 2019 to 2022.

Allegations which were identified as breaches included that, on April 21, 2021, body-worn video footage showed Mr Clarke promoting Person A's legal services to a doctor in respect of her own earlier road traffic accident at the scene of an unconnected fatal road traffic accident. 

Another incident took place after a crash on September 25, 2019, when the following day Mr Clarke was alleged to have emailed a victim's father suggesting a list of four solicitor firms.

It was heard that Firm A came first in the list, was the only one Mr Clarke provided a telephone number for, and that he said Firm A came 'highly recommended' by other families. 

In oral evidence, Mr Clarke said that his purpose was ‘signposting’, which was 'common practice' between the police and local firms.

He added that this was driven by his desire to assist victims and families.

During the hearing, evidence came from police officers, Mr Clarke himself, as well as body worn footage, email exchanges and police logs. 

The panel found evidence of misconduct, but said his behaviour was not serious enough that he would have been dismissed if he had not already resigned from the force in July 2023.

The published panel report reads: "While in the application of his judgement Mr Clarke had got his approach repeatedly wrong in relation to facts which give rise to the breaches, thereby compromising his position; the panel considered, on balance, that he had been seeking to act in good faith in his actions.

"Accordingly, having regard to the nuance of this case and context of Mr Clarke’s actions, the panel determined that his behaviour was not so serious that he would have been dismissed if he had not ceased to be a member of a police force or a special constable.

"Therefore, there will now simply be a formal finding of Misconduct."