Amy Reid, a former Northumbria Police officer, has resigned after being found guilty of gross misconduct for lying about her health to obtain unauthorized leave during the Covid pandemic.
A former Northumbria Police officer, Amy Reid, has encountered serious consequences following a police misconduct hearing that examined her dishonest conduct regarding Covid-related absences. The misconduct hearing took place at the Houghton-le-Spring police station in May 2023, where Reid faced allegations of lying about her health status to secure unauthorised leave.
The hearing revealed that on May 5, 2023, Reid sent a text message to her supervisor claiming she had tested positive for Covid-19 and included a photograph of a positive test result. However, the test result she provided actually dated back to June 2022. At the time, officers at Northumbria Police were under an embargo that prohibited the taking of leave, a fact Reid was fully aware of.
Following her initial claim, Reid further misled her supervisor by stating on May 10 that she was still unwell and would be unable to return to work until May 19. On May 12, she went as far as to contact her doctor, falsely claiming that she was still testing positive for Covid. Consequently, her doctor issued a medical fit note that inaccurately stated she had an “acute Covid infection,” which Reid subsequently submitted to her sergeant.
The misconduct panel, led by Ian Mullarkey, concluded that Reid’s actions constituted gross misconduct as they breached the standards of professional behaviour related to honesty and integrity. Mullarkey stated that Reid “lied on various occasions” and clarified that she “did not have Covid at any stage.” He characterised her actions as “intentional, deliberate and sustained,” indicating a clear understanding of the gravity of her misconduct.
Reid’s misconduct hearing was marked by her decision to resign just one day prior to the proceedings; she admitted all of the allegations against her. Following her resignation, the panel accepted it immediately, given the severity of her actions. Mullarkey noted that, had she remained a serving officer, the appropriate consequence would have been dismissal without notice.
Representing Reid, PC Karen Harden indicated that Reid acknowledged her breaches, attributing her behaviour to a multitude of personal factors at the time, asserting that it did not reflect her overall service with Northumbria Police. She stated that Reid had shown “genuine remorse and insight” into her actions.
The panel ultimately deemed the allegations proven, characterising Reid’s conduct as “pre-meditated and planned,” with her persistent dishonesty leading to her name being added to a police barred list. Assistant Chief Constable Alastair Simpson, chairing the panel, reiterated the severity and persistence of her dishonesty throughout the period in question.
Source: Noah Wire Services
- https://www.policeconduct.gov.uk/ – This website provides information on police misconduct hearings and procedures, which can support the context of Amy Reid’s misconduct hearing.
- https://www.northumbria.police.uk/ – The Northumbria Police website may contain information or press releases related to internal policies and procedures, which could corroborate the context of Reid’s misconduct.
- https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/coronavirus-covid-19-guidance-for-employers-and-businesses – This government guidance on COVID-19 policies for employers could provide context on the restrictions and policies in place during the time of Reid’s actions.
- https://www.policeprofessional.com/ – This website often reports on police misconduct cases and could provide additional insights into similar cases or procedures.
- https://www.northumbria.police.uk/about-us/our-policies/ – This link could provide specific policies related to Northumbria Police’s standards of professional behavior, which Reid allegedly breached.
Noah Fact Check Pro
The draft above was created using the information available at the time the story first
emerged. We’ve since applied our fact-checking process to the final narrative, based on the criteria listed
below. The results are intended to help you assess the credibility of the piece and highlight any areas that may
warrant further investigation.
Freshness check
Score:
8
Notes:
The narrative is relatively recent, referencing events in May 2023. However, it does not contain any information that would suggest it is a press release, which typically warrants a high freshness rating.
Quotes check
Score:
6
Notes:
Direct quotes are present, but no specific online sources were found to verify them as original. The quotes appear to be from a recent misconduct hearing, which may not have been widely reported online yet.
Source reliability
Score:
9
Notes:
The narrative originates from Chronicle Live, a reputable local news outlet in the North East of England. This suggests a high level of reliability.
Plausability check
Score:
9
Notes:
The claims are plausible and consistent with typical misconduct hearing outcomes. The narrative provides specific details about dates and actions, which supports its plausibility.
Overall assessment
Verdict (FAIL, OPEN, PASS): PASS
Confidence (LOW, MEDIUM, HIGH): HIGH
Summary:
The narrative appears to be recent and based on a real event, with quotes that could be original due to the nature of the misconduct hearing. The source is reliable, and the claims are plausible, leading to a high confidence in the overall assessment.
