A misconduct hearing has detailed multiple failures of a Thames Valley Police Officer in his duty to investigate a historic sexual assault allegation.

The hearing, held between June 12 and 14 2024, focused on allegations made against Police Constable Daniel Burford, who is based in Newbury.

The hearing explored a series of missteps by PC Burford during the investigation of a complaint made by a woman, referred to as Ms S, in February 2022.

This included a failure to pursue further enquiries surrounding another alleged 15 year old victim, whose details were given by the accuser in her original account and subsequent telephone call.

The officer was also shown to have failed to take a statement or closely investigate potential sources of evidence, such as third-party material or mobile devices.

Distressingly, the officer failed to keep necessary notes or to securely store relevant information such as the interview disks featuring the suspect.

This lack of diligence was noted by the panel, as was the officer’s failure to contact the school where the suspect planned to teach.

In recording that there were 'no further lines of enquiry and that all enquiries have been completed', PC Burford was found to have shown a lack of diligence in his duties and responsibilities, undermining public confidence in policing.

Despite these glaring oversights, the most serious allegation made against PC Burford was not proven.

This allegation claimed he had been dishonest in reporting that Ms S was not entirely forthcoming with information.

The panel found no robust evidence supporting that accusation.

PC Burford admitted to a series of major failures, including not reading the Occurrence Log which contained vital information for his investigation as well as key lines of enquiry.

He also admitted that he had failed to properly secure evidence or seek further evidence in the case.

The panel concluded that PC Burford’s approach to the investigation reflected a decision that it would not result in any action.

In doing so, his conduct fell drastically below that expected of a police officer, further traumatising the victim.

The panel remarked that the officer was "either idle or incompetent" adding unnecessarily to the trauma of the victim, Ms S.

Her ordeal had worsened due to the negligent work by the officer who, in their words, had let her down very badly.

As laid out in the hearing, PC Burford has breached the Standards of Professional Behaviour in relation to Duties and Responsibilities and Discreditable Conduct.

The Police Misconduct Panel issued him a final written warning for three years.

Furthermore, the accused parties, identified only as S, L, and G, have been granted anonymity following the hearing.