Two police officers have been hauled before a panel and may have have their badges ripped away from them after colleagues caught them having sex in a service lift.
Jessica Martin was seen performing a sex act on Pierce Lynch at Bethnal Green Police Station in east London.
The pair, who were both trainee detectives at the time, were off-duty and had been drinking in a local pub for three hours that night, a Metropolitan Police misconduct panel was told.
They started kissing in the bar then went back to the police station and began undressing in the lift.
In his statement read to the hearing Lynch, now a police constable, said: ‘Jess undid my zip and I undid my top button.’
The statement added: ‘To the best of (his) recollection Martin then performed the sex act ‘for about 5-10 seconds.’
Two colleagues stumbled upon the pair and immediately reported them to their superiors.
Lynch and Martin admitted that they engaged in a sex act while drunk but denied they were in a location where they could have been seen by colleagues or a member of the public.
They also deny that their behaviour amounted to gross misconduct.
The panel found although the service lift was unlikely to be used by members of the public they should have known it was a possibility.
Deputy Assistant Commissioner Alexis Boon told the pair: ‘The officers accepted those admissions on 16 November 2022, at around 9:40pm, they engaged in a sex act that required the removal of clothing.
‘The panel accepts that at the time of the incident that both officers were off duty having returned to the station and after several hours of drinking in a nearby public house returned to collect their bags.
‘The panel finds that on the balance of probabilities the service lift is used by service staff.
‘The panel finds that neither TDC Martin or TDC Lynch knew their sexual act could be witnessed by members of the public.
‘However, the panel finds the two should’ve been aware that the service lift could be used by contractors.
‘Consequently, the panel finds that both officers should have known that the sexual activity could have been witnessed by members of the public.’
The pair accepted that their actions did not meet the standards required as to discreditable conduct but both continue to deny that it amounted to gross misconduct.
Lynch is now a police constable while Martin is a detective constable.
Defending Martin, Rina-Marie Hill, said: ‘DC Martin has taken full responsibility for her conduct, although she cannot now recall the precise details of the incident itself, she has not sought in anyway to challenge the officers who witnessed it.
‘Her conduct on 16 November 2022 is as a direct result of her consuming alcohol to excess and thereafter exercising extremely poor judgement.
‘Culpability lies with DC Martin alone.
‘Whilst it might not necessarily have been her intent to drink to excess, that was a result of her actions.
‘In terms of putting her actions into context, it is right to observe that PC Lynch has equal responsibility in my submissions.
‘The conduct was intended to be private and it was not envisaged that anybody else would be privy to it, the conduct was spontaneous and unplanned.
‘DC Martin was a relatively new police officer and was not in a position of any particular trust or responsibility, her conduct therefore is limited to one brief incident.
‘She has expressed significant remorse, when asked by ADI Knott to provide details of the person she was with, she did so immediately, she did not deny that sexual activity had taken place.
’It was clear that DC Martin was very upset and when he asked whether there were any welfare issues, she replied, ‘No, I just don’t want to lose my job.’
‘DC Martin continues to find the whole process embarrassing and extremely upsetting and that is of course compounded by the fact that her recollection isn’t crystal clear.
‘She noted she got to a stage where she was trying to block the incident out of her mind.
‘In the present case, whilst it could be described as deliberate and intentional, in the sense of it requiring a positive action, it was in my submission, neither planned or targeted and further in my submission, any harm caused was not deliberate.
‘The conduct was off duty and did not encompass any element of bad faith or not properly exercising police powers.
‘DC Martin’s conduct on this one occasion has no bearing whatsoever on the ability to carry out her duties.
‘DC Martin’s conduct has the potential to discredit the police service but not to genuinely undermine public confidence in policing.
‘There is currently a scale of national concern regarding police behaviour, in particular violence towards women and girls and predatory sexual misconduct.
‘This case simply isn’t one of those.
‘It is submitted that aggravating factors are absent in this matter.
‘It was unplanned sexual activity and it was inappropriate but it took place between two consenting adults and it represents no more than a single, albeit serious lapse of judgement.
‘Had the officers been on duty when the activity took place, that would no doubt have led to an aggravating factor.
‘DC Martin has at all times in my submission been transparent and has cooperated fully with this investigation.
‘There is evidence in abundance of her genuine remorse and acceptance of her actions.’
Defending PC Lynch, DC Robbie Clarke said: ‘This matter is to decide whether or not the conduct was gross misconduct so serious it would result in dismissal.
‘It was a fleeting, heat of the moment thing that occurred and was unplanned.
‘It was an in the moment, momentary, loss of judgement, self-control, brought about by any number of factors, not least of all, drink.
‘There is no dishonesty and there is no lack of integrity in the responses provided by PC Lynch in relation to this matter.
‘The one thing that is gross, gross means big in this instance, is the feeling of guilt and shame that has been accentuated by PC Lynch.
‘In his own words, things just got heated, and actions went overboard.
‘As he says, and as we know, it was an isolated incident.
‘It can’t go unmentioned that the impact of a 10—15 second momentary lapse of judgement has had on PC Lynch in the ensuing months, when he has turned up to work daily and faced the nudging and the whispering of colleagues and has gone about his business with professionalism to maintain the higher standards that he knows.
‘I respectfully adopt the majority of submissions made on behalf of TDC Martin.
‘It is my view that the gross element of this is in the shame, the guilt that my member continues to feel, but that in relation to the incident itself, amounts to no more than misconduct and on that basis I would invite you to make the finding that the matters amount to misconduct only.’
Elizabeth Acker, for the Met Police, said: ‘It is right to say this is not the main lift, it is the service lift so certainly the risk was mitigated because it was not opening onto the main floor.
‘Cleaners and people filling vending machines are members of the public and they expect high standards of police officers.
‘Police Stations are not 9-5 locations and those particularly working in the service stations of the building are not working 9-5.
‘It is not our case that members of public did see what happened but it is the risk that is outlined, the risk that it could happen and that the officers should have been aware of it.’
Ms Acker said the two trainee detectives had been socialising at a pub nearby with other police colleagues.
‘They have both accepted they were both drunk, it is highlighted that they were no longer on duty, but they were on police premises.’
PC Lynch and DC Martin have accepted engaging in a sex act, engaging in sexual activity which required the removal of clothing, that they were inebriated and that they were in a location where they knew their activity could be witnessed by other police colleagues.
They denied but were found to be in breach of doing so in a location where they knew or should have know their activity could be witnessed by members of the public.
They accepted their behaviour did not meet the standards required as to discreditable conduct but denied it amounted to gross misconduct.
The hearing was adjourned until Friday when a decision will be made by the panel.