A former police officer caused a collision between two police vehicles during what was described as a “practical joke gone wrong,” a misconduct hearing revealed. The incident occurred when Joshua Thompson, a former constable with Thames Valley Police, encountered a group of officers assembled in Bedfordshire for an arrest. In an ill-conceived attempt to startle his female colleague, Thompson drove his vehicle slowly towards her, aiming to provoke a reaction. However, his plan backfired when he mistakenly collided with a stationary police car instead.
The misconduct hearing determined that Thompson had violated several professional standards, constituting gross misconduct. The hearing, which Thompson did not attend, disclosed that the incident took place on January 27 in the village of Wootton, as officers were preparing for a “high-risk arrest.” Moving at a speed of one to two miles per hour, Thompson approached his colleague, Pc Freya Kent, while stating to a male colleague in the passenger seat that he intended to “tap” her. When questioned by his colleague about his intentions, Thompson confirmed that he was attempting to hit the officer, resulting in the unintended collision with the parked police car.
Both vehicles sustained minor exterior paint damage during the collision, which was witnessed by two members of the public. Thompson initially failed to report the incident promptly. When he eventually did report it, he falsely claimed that it was a result of a “misjudged parking manoeuvre.” The panel adjudged that Thompson’s actions were not driven by malice, and he had not intended to cause harm to Pc Kent, attributing the incident to a misguided attempt at humor.
The panel acknowledged that the episode seemed to align with the jovial and light-hearted rapport that Pc Kent and Thompson had maintained. However, they concluded that Thompson’s actions were highly inappropriate and ill-timed, given the imminent arrest operation. The panel criticized Thompson for misleadingly characterizing the collision as an innocent prank and failing to exhibit the expected self-control befitting an officer.
During the hearing, it was revealed that Thompson had previously received a final written warning for mishandling the repair of a broken Taser. The panel emphasized that had Thompson not resigned prior to the decision, he would have faced dismissal from the police force. Thompson retains the right to appeal the decision before a police tribunal.
In conclusion, the incident involving Thompson’s ill-fated prank highlighted the importance of upholding professional standards and exercising sound judgment at all times, particularly in high-pressure situations within law enforcement.
