Cleveland Police officer who was caught with dog porn video on phone is barred from force

Pc Phillip Taylor, who served with Cleveland Police for 18 years and worked for its vulnerability unit until he stepped down, was barred from serving as an officer again following a 90-minute disciplinary hearing.

He was sent a video, involving a person performing a sex act with a dog, on a WhatsApp group for football fans which included 43 people, the hearing in Stockton was told.

He accepted a caution for possessing an extreme pornographic video in July and resigned from the force that month.

Detective Constable Susan Moore, the investigating officer, said the former officer should have deleted and reported the video.

But he did nothing with it for more than a year until it was found on his phone.

She described it, under the legislation, as "grossly offensive, disgusting or of an otherwise obscene character".

Chief Constable Mark Webster, who led the hearing, said the evidence was irrefutable and Mr Taylor had previously accepted, prior to his resignation, that he would be dismissed for the offence.

Mr Webster said: "I am conscious of the wider scrutiny that police conduct is under at the moment and for the need to reassure the public that standards are being upheld."

He said Taylor would have been dismissed if he had not already stood down, and said he will be barred from working for the police again.

The Chief Constable clarified that the WhatsApp group was not for police officers and was based around football.

After the hearing, he told reporters: "His behaviour was disgusting, I am not having that in this force."

Peter Littlewood, the vice chair of Cleveland Police Federation, which represented Mr Taylor, told the hearing: "He sincerely apologises not only for the work he has created for our service, but also for any harm his behaviour may have caused."

The former officer was aware of the hearing but did not attend.

The Chief Constable also said Taylor had asked for the hearing to be held in private or for him to be granted anonymity.

But he refused the application, explaining that he wanted the public to know that the process was transparent.