Hertfordshire Police officer used force's database to contact neighbour for an affair

A police officer in Hertfordshire who asked a neighbour to have an affair with him cannot serve in the police ever again.

Former PC Gary Pugsley told his neighbour, known as “Ms B” in the misconduct process, that he was “not a weirdo” because he worked at Hertfordshire Constabulary.

Ms B was one of two people who received notes from the former officer.

Former PC Pugsley told the other – “Ms A” – he could be her “forever someone” before he accused her of antisocial behaviour in a complaint to his own force.

The Appropriate Authority, which presented evidence against the former officer, described this as a “bogus complaint”, something which a Police Federation representative on behalf of former PC Pugsley denied.

A misconduct panel, which met on Friday (19 April) found the former constable had committed an “abuse of position for sexual purposes”.

Barrister Alan Jenkins, representing the Appropriate Authority, said the then-officer had messaged Ms B online in October 2022.

The former constable later dropped a note through his neighbour’s door, which she captured on her Ring doorbell camera.

Mr Jenkins said the note read: “I live across the road from you and find you really attractive.

“I would love to get to know you better.

“If you want to get to know me better, here is my phone number.”

Mr Jenkins added the former constable received a reply which read: “Hello Gary.

“I have just received your note.

“Just thought I would be courteous and let you know I am in a relationship.”

The former officer replied: “OK, honey.

“Thanks for letting me know.”

He added in further text: “Just a final note to say I am not a weirdo stalker.”

He said that should she “feel the need for a bit of fun”, she could message him back.

After he revealed he was a police officer, Ms B replied: “Your behaviour is massively out of line. I am reporting you.”

Former PC Pugsley used a police system to search for Ms B.

When officers use the system they must give a reason for their search.

“He had given a spurious reason for the search,” Mr Jenkins said.

“PC Pugsley said drug use at the address was the reason he was undertaking the search.”

The former officer claimed Ms A was “guilty of antisocial behaviour” and he “wanted her prosecuted”, according to the Appropriate Authority’s case.

He contacted a police community support officer (PCSO), urging them to review his complaint.

He used a police system to search for the police officers who spoke to him about the complaint.

“He had no right to access that information [as a complainant],” the misconduct panel found because he was not investigating the case in his capacity as a police officer.

The force dropped the investigation into Ms A.

Panel chair Akbar Khan said: “The officer’s conduct clearly undermined confidence in policing and discredited the force.”

Mr Khan added the former officer had used police systems “for his own personal gain” out of “his own choice”.

He said: “This is a serious breach of public trust.”

He said the former officer had “deployed the fact that he was a police officer to provide [Ms A and Ms B] with assurances he was someone who could be trusted”.

Mr Khan said “the presence of informal admissions” related to computer searches and “the fact that he has apologised for his behaviour” are mitigating factors in former PC Pugsley’s case.

He said the former officer was “of previous good character”.

The panel found he had breached the standards of professional behaviour headlined “honesty and integrity”, “authority, respect and courtesy” and “discreditable conduct”.

Panel members ruled that “only disciplinary action is appropriate in this case” and that his name should be added to the College of Policing’s “barred” list.