DC Dyer Hearing outcome summary

Gross Misconduct Hearing outcome
Officer concerned: DC 3830 Stephe Dyer ( Investigative skills trainer, Hindlip )
Date of hearing: 8th September 2026 - 9th September 2026

Summary:

It was alleged that the officer:

1. In February 2025, the Officer asked colleague, DC 3985 Tracy Ruff, to certify a copy of

[PERSON A]’s passport.

1. In response to her request, DC Ruff said she could not certify the passport as she

had “never met [PERSON A]”.

iii. In response, its alleged the Officer showed DC Ruff a photograph of [PERSON A]and said words to the effect: “there you go, you know him now.”

1. DC Ruff repeated that she was not prepared to certify the passport as she did not know

[PERSON A], an explanation which, after presenting an exaggerated shocked face and

being told again by DC Ruff that she was “sorry” and she was not prepared to certify

the copy of [PERSON A]’s passport, the Officer accepted.

1. The Officer’s behaviour in seeking to apply pressure to DC Ruff to certify a copy of [PERSON A]’s passport in circumstances where she told the Officer she did not know him and was not prepared to sign it was dishonest and lacking in integrity.

The Standards of professional behaviour alleged to have been breached were:

• Honesty and Integrity
• Discreditable Conduct.

Decision

The Panel recognised that allegations 1-4 were principally factual allegations concerning the nature and course of the interaction between the Officer and DC Ruff. Even where aspects of those allegations were proved, the Panel did not consider those factual matters, viewed in isolation, to be capable of establishing misconduct. It was principally the conduct alleged at paragraph 5, namely the application of pressure coupled with dishonesty and/or a lack of integrity, which was capable of establishing a breach of the Standards of Professional Behaviour.

The Panel concluded that:
(i) the Officer did not seek to apply undue pressure to DC Ruff; and
(ii) the Officer did not act dishonestly or without integrity.

Having found allegation 5 not proved, the Panel was not satisfied that the Appropriate Authority had discharged the burden of proving a breach of the Standards relating to Honesty and Integrity or Discreditable Conduct.

Accordingly, the Panel did not need to proceed to consider whether any proven breach was sufficiently serious to amount to misconduct or gross misconduct. The allegation of gross misconduct was therefore not proved, and that brought the proceedings to an end.