Metropolitan Police officer sacked for sexual activity with underage runaway child | UK News | Sky News

7 comments

1. I guess frustratingly it’s much easier on the burden of probability to show he didn’t inform them that she was no longer missing than beyond reasonable doubt that anything sexual happened.

   Good riddance and I hope he enjoys explaining that gap on his resume.

2. I’d like to know on what grounds the cps decided it wasn’t worth prosecuting. So many child abuse cases are the child’s word against the abuser with very little if any physical evidence and they still make it to court.

3. Why is his name being withheld, surely as the public we have a right to know the name of someone we are PAYING to abuse children?

4. An appalling abuse of position and public trust.

   Hopefully the former officer will never have a job that pays above minimum wage or involves any opportunities to have contact with under 18s.

5. Found the kid, and abused the kid. I’m surprised he even took her to a police station and not just kept her at home for himself.

   How anyone trusts the met I do not know.

6. *rape of a child. There, fixed that headline for you..

7. How is that not a criminal case? Considering they were in a clear position of authority surely makes it more serious?