Leicestershire Police officer would have faced the sack for being ‘dishonest’ and ‘persistently trying’ to call sex workers

The officer, who has not been identified due to an anonymity order, was accused of contacting sex workers and being dishonest after a two-day gross misconduct hearing at Leicestershire Police headquarters in Enderby earlier today (November 5).

It was heard that the officer told investigators that they lent their phone to someone they didn’t know on a night out, which is why calls were made to escorts.

The panel heard calls were made on December 8, 2024, to three sex worker contacts after 12am.

Later, further calls were made just after 2am to three other numbers that weren’t saved on the officer’s phone but were associated with sex workers.

The hearing also heard that the officer, who had been in the police since 2004, also had six previous traces of numbers associated with sex workers on their phone, including WhatsApp chats on their phone between 2019 and 2025.

Many of these contacts were associated with well-known sites where sex workers advertise their services.

In summing up their decision and findings, chair of the panel Julia Debenham said the officer’s response to the calls made to sex workers on December 8 was “implausible and untrue” and that it was “more likely than not” that the officer tried to contact sex workers.

The panel also found that they were “persistently trying to procure sexual services” before determining that the officer had committed gross misconduct.

This would make the third officer in less than two months who would have been dismissed for contacting sex workers – all of which were made anonymous.

Earlier this year, PC Noel Chambers was also found to have committed gross misconduct after he confessed to paying for sex on two occasions in September 2024 and June 2025.

In determining what punishment should be imposed, Liz Briggs, representing the force, said that as a result of the officer’s “sexual impropriety”, harm was “high” in what was called “repeated and sustained behaviour”.

She said: “They would have been aware of the risks of their behaviour. Sexual impropriety is serious … Any evidence that a police officer is dishonest is serious”.

She also said that the “experienced” officer’s previous dealings with “sensitive” cases such as child abuse and trauma contributed to the high degree of seriousness of the misconduct.

Police Federation’s Andy Spence said that the officer’s former colleagues described him as “well-respected” and “sensitive”, and that he would “always be there” for them.

The previous hearing also heard how the officer argued that even though WhatsApp conversations were opened with escorts, no messages were sent to them and were instead used by the officer for sexual gratification.

The officer did not appear at either hearing to answer questions, issue a statement, or defend themselves against the allegations.

As a result of the findings, the panel found that the officer tried to contact sex workers and make a false representation during the investigation that they would have been dismissed without notice.

The chair also said that the officer would be placed on the police’s barred list.