Derbyshire police officer avoids sack – despite using confidential database to track down woman on social media

PC Jack Harrison will be able to continue his “dream” job with Derbyshire police despite his actions amounting to gross misconduct. When he found out the outcome he burst into tears of relief.

But it was found that the Matlock-based police officer carried out a Police National Computer (PNC) check for a non-policing purpose which goes against policing standards. The PNC is a large database used by law enforcement organisations.

This happened in September 2021 after PC Harrison followed a woman’s car at a Co-op supermarket in Wirksworth before doing the PNC check on the car’s registration plate. It was found that just minutes after getting the details of the vehicle’s owner, he carried out a search of her name on Instagram and then followed her on the app.

The decision on PC Harrison’s future was made by an independent panel who have chaired the Derbyshire police misconduct hearing at the force’s headquarters in Ripley.

The hearing heard evidence that after the officer followed the woman at the Co-op, he sent flame and heart eyes emojis to the same woman’s Instagram.

But panel chair Jayne Salt said PC Harrison had acted with “naivety not cynicism” and – partly because of that – a final written warning was “a proportional or appropriate outcome” for his actions.

Ms Salt said the panel had placed significant weight in its final decision on the fact that PC Harrison had not followed up his Instagram ‘follow’ by messaging her directly. However, it was heard in the hearing that he had sent her another emoji to her in December 2021 before deciding to block her.

At one stage it heard how PC Harrison followed a woman’s car when she was leaving the Co-op store in Harrison Drive, Wirksworth, in September 2021. PC Harrison clamed he followed the car because he felt it was “involved with criminality” and claimed the speed it was travelling was “too fast” when exiting the store.

But the woman, who can’t be named, told the hearing the “weird” events on that day had made her feel uncomfortable and made her worried about her security.

When giving evidence she said: “At the time I was more worried if my (registration) plates had been run and what other information could have been taken. I did question how the officer got my name. It was a very weird situation to be in. It made me nervous as to what happened.”

It was suggested PC Harrison followed the woman because he found her “physically attractive”. But this was denied by the officer who said he followed her because they had numerous mutual followers.

PC Harrison denied all the allegations and any wrongdoing throughout the hearing and said he believed his actions were within policing standards.

However, the panel said it concluded that he did carry out the PNC check for a non-policing purpose and that he searched for the woman’s name on Instagram minutes later after the check. This was based on evidence seen on a screenshot of the woman’s phone.

PC Harrison was given a final written warning, which will be on record for five years.