Serving officer demoted after lying about dentist appointment

Detective Sergeant William Pearce admitted all the allegations against him but argued they did not amount to gross misconduct.

A misconduct hearing at force headquarters in Winfrith on Tuesday found two allegations against him amounted to gross misconduct, while a further allegation concerning his working hours was found to amount to misconduct.

However, Assistant Chief Constable Mark Callaghan, who chaired the hearing, ruled that demotion from the rank of sergeant was the most appropriate outcome.

The hearing was told that DS Pearce, who has 18 years’ policing experience, emailed a highly sensitive and confidential document to his personal email address.

Although the hearing accepted that he had done so for a policing purpose, ACC Callaghan found that doing so was “wholly inappropriate” and amounted to a breach of confidentiality and gross misconduct.

The officer was also found to have lied to his supervisor in April 2025 when he took time off claiming he was attending a dentist appointment which he never attended.

A separate allegation concerned repeated unauthorised absences from work between March and October 2025, including commuting and carrying out the school run during working hours.

The hearing found that DS Pearce had breached standards relating to duties and responsibilities and integrity, but not honesty, in relation to those absences.

The chair said there had been a blurring of work and home life because of the unique role performed by DS Pearce, including expectations that he would take calls and provide advice outside working hours despite not being formally rostered as an on-call officer.

DS Pearce told the hearing he took pride in his work and had not realised how far the boundaries between his professional and home life had become blurred. He also acknowledged that he had developed a “bad habit” of failing to keep proper records of the hours he worked.

The hearing heard that colleagues and a criminal barrister had provided character statements describing DS Pearce as an exceptionally dedicated and committed officer who regularly went “beyond the call of duty”.

ACC Callaghan said the force had “let him down” in the role he was performing and that organisational lessons needed to be learned.

But he said that, as a supervisor, DS Pearce held a position of responsibility and was expected to uphold and model the highest standards.

The chair said the breaches were not an indication of operational dishonesty or corruption, while noting that DS Pearce had continued to perform in his role and remained respected and trusted. He concluded that demotion was the most suitable outcome.

Dorset Police Deputy Chief Constable Steve Lyne said the officer’s actions were “not operationally dishonest or corrupt” but that he had knowingly sent confidential and sensitive information and lied to his supervisor about his absence. He said: “These are serious breaches of standards that risked sensitive information as part of an investigation.”

DCC Lyne added that the circumstances surrounding the role and the “untenable position” in which DS Pearce had been placed were matters for the organisation to take responsibility for and that the force would reflect on them.

A further allegation that DS Pearce had accessed case files and carried out unauthorised computer checks to assist a colleague was not found proven.