Met and Kent law enforcement officials will face misconduct hearings over dealing with of Wayne Couzens flashing experiences after missed possibilities to cease monster cop earlier than he murdered Sarah Everard

An officer from the Met and a second from Kent Police will face misconduct hearings over their dealing with of indecent publicity experiences referring to killer firearms cop Wayne Couzens, the Unbiased Workplace for Police Conduct stated in the present day.

Couzens yesterday admitted three indecent publicity offences, however police took no motion on the time, leaving him free to proceed serving within the Met’s elite Parliamentary and Diplomatic Safety Command. 

In probably the most hanging missed alternative, the 50-year-old uncovered himself in entrance of employees at a McDonald’s restaurant simply three days earlier than he kidnapped, raped and murdered Sarah Everard in March 2021. 

The Met was supplied with the quantity plate of the automobile Couzens had pushed since 2015 and particulars from his financial institution card – however the pressured failed to research correctly and he remained in his function as an elite armed officer. 

The IOPC informed the Met to start gross misconduct proceedings in opposition to a police constable who investigated the McDonald’s case. 

Individually, Kent Police will begun misconduct hearings for a sergeant who allegedly didn’t correctly examine experiences {that a} man – later recognized as Couzens – had been seen driving with no trousers on in 2015. 

Couzens admitted to three counts of indecent exposure

Couzens admitted to 3 counts of indecent publicity 

The Met PC will face claims he didn’t correctly examine the proof figuring out Couzens as the motive force who flashed employees at McDonald’s earlier than offering a dishonest account to IOPC inspectors. 

In the meantime, the Kent Police sergeant is accused of failing to comply with all strains of inquiry earlier than closing their investigation into the report of a person driving bare. 

The IOPC stated Couzens was by no means spoken to and it had ‘discovered no proof’ that he investigators realised he was a police officer. 

IOPC Regional Director Sal Naseem stated: ‘We have now been unable to publish our findings till now because of the threat of prejudicing prison proceedings in opposition to Couzens. 

‘Now that these have concluded it will likely be for the Metropolitan and Kent police forces to organise disciplinary proceedings which is able to take into account the proof now we have gathered and decide whether or not the allegations in opposition to the officers are confirmed or not.’