A Northamptonshire Police constable faces accusations he crashed a force vehicle while speeding to an incident despite not having clearance to do more than ‘basic’ driving.
PC Jordan Logue is alleged to have exceeded his driving authority by using blue lights and sirens and exceeding the speed limit on his way to a job he had not been sent to without telling the force control room.
Details of the case published by Northamptonshire Police ahead of a disciplinary hearing on Tuesday (July 20) claim that PC Logue later denied using ‘blues ‘n twos’ when quizzed by a senior officer.
Most Popular
-
1
Stargazer's amazing photo of Jupiter taken from village back garden between Northampton and Daventry
-
2
Who’s been in court from Northampton, Daventry, Upton, Great Billing and charged with possession of weapons and drugs, threatening behaviour and drink-driving
-
3
Councils and charities mobilise to aid West Northamptonshire homeless, elderly and vulnerable during heatwave
-
4
Motorist repeatedly kicked during shocking road rage incident in Daventry
-
5
Northamptonshire Police crew saddles up for charity bike ride to raise funds for families of fallen colleagues
The incident involved a police car colliding with another vehicle on February 16, 2021.
It is claimed PC Logue: "Breached the standards of professional behaviour in respect of his use of a marked police vehicle and his dealings with colleagues and supervisors.
“At all material times he was aware that his authority to drive a marked police vehicle on duty was limited to that which applied to the ‘basic operational’ driving authority.
“The officer self-deployed to an incident and did not notify the Force Control Room. On driving to the incident, he exceeded his driving authority by using blue lights and sirens, and exceeded the speed limit.
“On the journey he collided with a member of public’s vehicle, causing damage.
“When spoken to by an inspector the officer denied using blue lights and sirens.”
The hearing at Northampton Police HQ at Wootton Hall Park will be told the conduct if proved amounts to gross misconduct because it was fundamentally dishonest.