Kristina O’Connor has won her Court of Appeal case, which raised an important issue of principle as to how police misconduct panels select an appropriate penalty and whether an officer using his position of authority to sexually harass a victim of crime can properly be sanctioned through the lowest available type of penalty.
In 2011 Ms O’Connor reported an assault by a group of young men at Kentish Town Police Station. James Mason, then a Detective Sergeant, made wholly inappropriate advances of a sexual nature towards Ms O’Connor. He subsequently sent inappropriate emails to her. His actions caused her extreme discomfort and distress at a time when she was a vulnerable victim of crime. The experience has caused her to lose faith in the ability of police officers to keep her, or other women, safe.
Ms O’Connor complained about Mr Mason’s conduct in October 2020. In 2021 a police misconduct panel found Mason guilty of gross misconduct (conduct which amounts to a breach of the police standards of professional behaviour which is so serious that dismissal would be justified). Despite this, Mr Mason was served with a three-year final written warning; he was allowed to remain in post and keep his rank. In October 2022 he resigned.
The Administrative Court heard Ms O’Connor’s judicial review in 2023 and held that the misconduct panel, when considering the penalty to impose, had acted lawfully and in compliance with relevant guidance.
The Court of Appeal found that the panel had not provided an adequate analysis of, or adequate reasons for, its finding in relation to the seriousness of Mr Mason’s misconduct, or for its finding in relation to his levels of culpability or the harm caused to Ms O’Connor. The Court of Appeal held that this amounted to an error of law. The court noted that Mr Mason’s actions amounted to deliberate and targeted misconduct by a police officer, involving sexual impropriety towards a vulnerable victim. The court found it difficult to identify why the panel had considered that the sanction of a final written warning was more appropriate than the more serious outcomes of reduction in rank or dismissal.
Following the Court of Appeal’s judgment, a further misconduct hearing will take place and a fresh decision on the sanction to be imposed on Mr Mason will be made.
Kristina O’Connor said:
I welcome this decision from the Court of Appeal. This process has taught me that police will go to greater lengths to protect themselves than they will to protect victims and vulnerable women. I fundamentally do not believe that police can be trusted with the safety of women and I think we need a new police service that actually protects women.
Nancy Collins of Bindmans said:
It has been an honour to represent Kristina. She has shown enormous courage in exposing the endemic culture of misogyny within the Metropolitan Police. The misconduct panel’s decision left Kristina feeling misunderstood and unheard. The Court of Appeal’s decision recognises the severity of the harm caused to women who are victims of sexual misconduct by police officers and the detrimental impact on public trust in police officers to offer them protection from harm.
Ms O’Connor is represented by Nancy Collins, partner, and Rebecca Argall, paralegal, of Bindmans and by Maya Sikand KC and Rosa Polaschek of Doughty Street Chambers. Caoilfhionn Gallagher KC and Fiona Murphy KC and Harriet Johnson of Doughty Street Chambers represented Ms O’Connor in the Administrative Court and Fiona Murphy KC assisted with the application for permission to appeal.
Ms O’Connor’s case was supported by Law for Change.
We ask that all media and press enquiries are directed to press@bindmans.com only