Senior Met officer sacked for second time over refusing drugs test
Commander Julian Bennett was initially dismissed by a misconduct panel in October 2023 over the incident, but took his case to the Police Appeals Tribunal (PAT) in July last year and had his sacking overturned.
He was found to have committed gross misconduct by failing to provide a urine sample for a drugs test on July 21 2020, which led to his suspension shortly afterwards.
A panel found he had breached professional standards when he refused to provide the sample after being called in to do so in the presence of an assistant commissioner, instead offering to resign on the spot and asking for a meeting with then-commissioner Dame Cressida Dick.
Following the PAT's decision to revoke the dismissal, the Met considered a legal challenge by way of a Judicial Review but decided that Mr Bennett should face a fresh misconduct hearing last September.
The allegation proven against Mr Bennett was again found at the level of gross misconduct at the latest hearing.
The officer, who served in the force from 1976, had remained suspended throughout the process and will now be added to the College of Policing's barred list.
Assistant Commissioner Matt Twist said: 'I am enormously concerned that almost five years since this incident happened we have only now been able to dismiss Commander Bennett.
'This should have been a simple matter. Commander Bennett has never disputed he refused a lawful order to take a drugs test.
'As a senior officer who had chaired misconduct hearings, Commander Bennett was highly experienced and knew full well what was required of him, yet he made a choice not to co-operate.
'He has been suspended on full pay for an extraordinary length of time. I am sure Londoners will be as outraged as we are at the utter waste of public funds spent paying a senior officer to sit at home suspended and not work.'
Mr Twist said that 'while the Met is not responsible for all the delays in Commander Bennett's matter, we are also working hard to expedite cases and cut bureaucracy', adding: 'I am confident a situation like Commander Bennett's prolonged case would not happen again.'
Mr Bennett wrote the Met's drugs strategy for 2017-21 as a commander for territorial policing.
The document, called Dealing With The Impact Of Drugs On Communities, set up plans to raise 'awareness of the impact of drug misuse'.
He chaired misconduct panels over several years and freedom of information requests showed he presided over 74 misconduct hearings involving 90 officers between June 2010 and February 2012, leading to 56 officers being dismissed.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Review Geek
a few seconds ago
- The Review Geek
Stalking Samantha: 13 Years of Terror Review – One woman's thirteen-year nightmare
Season 1 Episode Guide Episode 1 Episode 2 Episode 3 Nearly a third of women and one-sixth of men will experience stalking at some point in their lives. This means millions of people across the world carry the uncomfortable trauma of being watched, followed and harassed. To make matters worse, only 1.4% of reported case (at least in the UK) end in conviction. Stalking and harassment is a growing and ever-present (for lack of a better word) societal problem. This troubling backdrop forms the crux of Hulu's latest docu-series, Stalking Samantha: 13 Years of Terror. As the title may allude, this documentary centers on a young woman called Samantha, who winds up terrified, harassed and eventually kidnapped by an unhinged guy called Christopher. Initially presenting himself as a socially awkward recluse at school, Christopher went out of his way to stalk and harass Samantha over the years, growing ever-bolder and more uncomfortable as time goes on. All of this eventually leads to the worst possible outcome. For Samantha, she manages to get closure for her story, but for many others that's not the case. The three episodes here document Samantha's harrowing ordeal, with the first giving a background into Samantha and Christopher's past, how they crossed paths and the beginning of the stalking. It starts as a bit of a joke between Samantha and her friends as Christopher persistently messages. Unfortunately, there's nothing funny about his behaviour, as it slowly gets worse. The second episode is where Samantha's kidnapping comes into view, and she goes into shocking detail about how she was grabbed in the middle of the night, bundled in her own car and taken to a secluded bunker. Eventually, this story culminates into the third and final chapter, where we see the mounting evidence against Christopher come to the foreground, as well as a couple of surprise inclusions. One of those includes the surprise of another woman who was stalked and harassed by Christopher, called Kelli. Her inclusion is necessary for this story but it's also oddly edited into the story. She only has a few words to say and she shows up midway through episode 3, almost like an afterthought despite how important she is to the backstory and mindset of Christopher's actions. We also don't really see anything of Christopher's family outside of a few recorded phone calls with his mother. However, this is very much a documentary designed to give Samantha a voice to tell her story, and in that respect, the show succeeds. On that same note though, I can't help but feel the docuseries missed a trick by not expanding out to the widespread problem of stalking in society, how damaging that can be to someone's life, and the ongoing struggles that this legally presents to different courts. Even just some legal understanding over how restraining orders aren't always dished out or how hard it is to prove stalking would have helped give this documentary a bit more weight. Stalking Samantha is nicely paced though and at only 3 episodes, there's enough here to prevent this one from dragging its heels. The story itself features a ton of evidence and a lot of archival footage, blending in with re-enactment scenes blurred and done tastefully so it never feels exploitative. There are also videos from police interviews, CCTVs outside the bunker and police cams from raiding Christopher's house. All of this works well to flesh out more of the story, and the reveals hit that much harder as a result. Ultimately, Stalking Samantha plays out as a cautionary tale, retelling one woman's awful ordeal and how, despite justice being served, she may never heal from the scars Christopher has left.
The Independent
a minute ago
- The Independent
‘Owning a £500k home does not make you rich': Readers challenge Reeves' property tax plan
Independent readers are divided over proposals being considered by Chancellor Rachel Reeves for a new tax on homes worth more than £500,000, with many questioning whether the threshold would unfairly affect ordinary homeowners rather than the truly wealthy. Several argued that in high-priced areas, £500,000 is not a marker of wealth, with smaller homes often costing more than that. 'In London and parts of the South East, owning a £500k home… does not make you rich,' noted one reader, while others suggested a higher threshold or regional variations to avoid penalising middle-class families. Some readers welcomed the idea of targeting unearned property wealth, arguing that decades of house price rises have created inequalities that younger generations cannot overcome. 'Taxing property, targeting unearned income, is what the government needs to do,' one wrote. Others warned the tax could have unintended consequences, including discouraging downsizing, reducing housing market mobility, and forcing homeowners to raise asking prices to offset the levy. There were also concerns that pensioners or couples on modest incomes could be hit unfairly. Across the board, readers emphasised the need for a fair approach that distinguishes genuine wealth from ordinary homeowners. Here's what you had to say: Regional house price disparities I have recently moved from Berkshire to Yorkshire. The semi-detached house I've bought was £200,000 in Yorkshire, but the equivalent and possibly terraced house in Berkshire would have been £500,000. So this tax would certainly be a detriment to workers in the South East. The salary weighting is far from compensating for the house price difference. Over a £1,000,000 might be a more appropriate national figure, but possibly there would need to be some regional differences. This could also be reflected in IHT rates for inherited property. The problem that really needs to be addressed is ensuring that richer people actually pay tax on all their income and/or property, and that they are not able to legally "evade" tax using loopholes. DavidWR Property wealth tax concerns A tax on the unearned wealth of property due to the housing market of the last 40 years is a sensible tax. However, £500,000 is too low. It will bring many people who are just making ends meet into paying a tax they can't afford. In many parts of the country, especially the South East, £500k will barely get you a two-bed terrace house. If a couple has scrimped and saved to buy one in the last few years and can just afford the mortgage, they may end up being stuck in a property they can't afford to sell. That will impact both job mobility and the housing market. Maybe raise it to £750k to ensure it's only the genuinely wealthy that pay it. Tabbers Redistribution of unearned property wealth A lot of people are missing the point… too much of the nation's wealth has been tied up in property, with huge increases in prices over the last 20–30 years, all to be passed on to siblings. Younger generations without rich parents don't stand a chance. The government has no choice but to try and extract this unearned income and attempt to redistribute it to give other people a future. Taxing property, targeting unearned income, is what the government needs to do (and ignore the naysayers). ChrisMatthews Regional variation needed £500K is far too low… no way is this a wealth tax, more just about managing tax. The average cost of a home around here is about £450K, and that is a two-bed terrace. Surely the price should not be a blanket one but reflect different areas? mindful Impact on downsizing All that is going to do is make it far more likely that people in larger houses won't downsize, leading to increases in the value of those houses as the market dries up. The cost of moving house is already stopping many pensioners from downsizing. The level should be far higher or adjusted for regional differences at the very least. KrakenUK Inefficient housing stock In the south of England, developers only want to build large homes as that's where they can make the most profit. They justify the need for large homes by stating there is a terrible shortfall. In reality, there are millions of large homes in the UK with single elderly people rattling about in them, when a smaller, more efficient, quality home would make far more sense. Older people balk at the thought of selling up and paying loads in Stamp Duty for their new home. A new 'selling' tax will just cement this inglorious cycle. Hardly Surprised Council tax outdated This Council Tax was a last-minute replacement for the Poll Tax. It has become as unpopular because it is based on property prices nearly 35 years ago. Things have moved on since then, and so should this tax system. jadfg Illusion of wealth through property The illusion that you create wealth while sitting on your backside checking Zoopla to see how much your house has gone up has to be broken. Work creates wealth. Property prices just redistribute it unfairly. The worst result of house price booms is the emergence of millions of little property empires of buy-to-let investors who retire at 45 and contribute nothing thereafter. Ironically, they end up renting to each other's kids, but their imagination doesn't stretch that far. Carolan Middle-class southern households Labour seem determined to lose all support everywhere. In London and parts of the South East, owning a £500k home, which is often smaller than a £300k home up north, does not make you rich. This is partially about trying to win over people who call middle-class southerners 'the London elite'. Has Starmer not realised that no amount of red meat can satisfy the rabid? They just grow bigger and stronger on it. Starmer and co are reluctant to penalise the super-rich who can get rich after their term in office or use their media clout to hound them out. BrotherChe Economic warning More adjusting of the net curtains while the house crumbles… Prof Richard Wolff and Analyst Sean Foo on China dumping increasingly worthless US bonds, but after Japan and China, the UK, the third largest holder of worthless bonds, is buying more – collapse is on the horizon, especially as Trump blunders with little understanding of the impact: Meanwhile, here in the UK, our chancellor is buying US Treasury Bonds like there's no tomorrow! At the same time, we are told we are so skint we'll have to cut back on help for the disabled. This will wreck our economy – all to try and crawl to Trump, who hates them! Dolphins Impact on pensioners A property tax doesn't take account of residents' incomes. Four wage-earners in a £499k property would not pay, but a couple of pensioners in a £501k property would have to starve – and freeze – to death. Lucy Lastic Property as investment People look to accumulate profit in house ownership to compensate for low wages. If their gaff is going up by 5 per cent year on year, they're quids in and can retire in style. Lots of people own houses as a business – what percentage of homeowners actually live in that home? Stop anyone owning more than one house, especially foreign buyers. We are rife with investors dispossessing us here. covergo Want to share your views
BBC News
a minute ago
- BBC News
Barnsley family caused flea-ridden pets 'prolonged suffering'
Three members of a family who failed to treat their pets for severe fleas have been handed suspended prison sentences and banned from keeping Booker, her daughter, Emma, and brother, Darren Ambleton, each pleaded guilty to causing unnecessary suffering and failing to take reasonable steps to protect their pets from dog, Blade, and cats, Charlie and Benny, had endured "prolonged, serious and excessive suffering", Barnsley Magistrates' Court heard.A vet who treated the animals said the fleas would have been "painfully obvious to any passer-by, let alone any kind of owner". RSPCA inspector Vanessa Reid said when she attended the family's home in Standhill Crescent, Barnsley, in October, Blade had tried to greet her while "simultaneously nibbling and scratching as his skin"."In my seven-year career, I have never seen a dog so agitated and annoyed by fleas," she said."I asked [Janina] Booker and Ambleton if they were aware of fleas being present. He said yes, whilst she said no at exactly the same moment."Booker then conceded that she did know, and they had been bathing him in some flea shampoo to get rid of them." Booker later told Ms Reid she had put a medical cone on the dog in March 2023, more than a year and a half earlier, to prevent him from scratching his cats had also suffered "obvious fur loss" across their bodies, and Charlie, the lighter of the two, was "heavily stained with urine" according to the the animals' skin worsened over a number of months, it would have been "plainly obvious" to the owner that vet care was needed, she added. The animals were signed over to RSPCA care and have made a good recovery, the charity and Charlie have been rehomed while Benny is waiting to be Booker, 53, Emma Booker, 31, and Ambleton, 51, were each given a two-month jail sentence suspended for one were also each ordered to pay costs of £400 plus a £154 victim surcharge following a hearing at at Barnsley Magistrates' Court. Listen to highlights from South Yorkshire on BBC Sounds, catch up with the latest episode of Look North
