A Met Police officer could lose his career after claims he pinched a weight-conscious female colleague's waist to "fat test" her in the work gym.
PC Mark Neale ended up before a police disciplinary panel after a female colleague accused him of having "pinched her hips" after she made a comment about "feeling fat" in a Met gym.
He went on to suggest he bring his "fat callipers" the next time, adding in a WhatsApp message that he gained "sexual gratitude" from the act.
She complained, and also accused Neale of pinching her bottom and making her "skin crawl" with a message about having woken up from a "proper sex dream" about her.
Last year, Neale faced a misconduct hearing and was cleared of gross misconduct before his evidence was heard.
Metropolitan Police Commissioner Sir Mark Rowley has now mounted a High Court bid to revive the disciplinary hearing and take it to a full conclusion.
The court heard Neale has been a PC with the Met Police since 2012.
He found himself facing gross misconduct allegations after a female colleague accused him of pinching her bottom in a police gym in 2021.
She also claimed that, after she made comment to putting on weight while training the following year, Neale had pinched her waist with his fingers, as though "fat testing" her with callipers.
Although she said she had not considered it sexually motivated at first, she said he had followed it up with WhatsApp messages which changed her mind.
Cecily White, representing the Met, told Mr Justice Fordham: "Her evidence in relation to this allegation was that while she was training in the gym and chatting to PC Neale about her fitness programme, after she made a comment about feeling fat, PC Neale came over and 'pinched [her] side like a trainer would do when they’re testing fat with callipers…I remember him pinching my side almost as if to simulate fat callipers.'
“She explained that this act of pinching was ‘followed up by a WhatsApp message he sent me, asking if I was ready for his fat callipers.....And then he commented that the fact that he gets sexual gratification from it is beside the point'."
Neale denied any unwanted touching, but accepted he sent the messages in the course of a lengthy exchange of flirtatious messaging between colleagues.
Ms White argued the misconduct panel had been wrong to dismiss the misconduct allegations, which she said were supported by the slew of sexually suggestive messages.
One in August 2021 informed her that “he had just woken from a ‘proper sex dream’ about her and ‘wanted to make sure’ he told her about it,” she said.
“This was the comment which she said made her 'skin crawl the most'," she said.
The woman’s formal complaint labeled PC Neale’s attentions “unsolicited or requested” and highlighted the series of messages, which focused on her personal appearance and were peppered with “sexualised remarks about her body”.
Although he accepted sending the messages, PC Neale denied touching the woman, claiming the pair of them had enjoyed an ongoing “dialogue” which was “flirtatious” at times.
His colleague had also invited him to an evening of “Netflix and Chill” even after receiving the “sex dream” message which she claimed outraged her, he said.
The case against him was dismissed "in its entirety" by the panel in February last year after it found he had no case to answer.
But Ms White argued the decision was wrong and that the allegations must be decided again by the panel.
"Sexual misconduct on the part of a police officer, if found proven, is to be regarded as especially culpable because of the impact that sexual misconduct can have on public trust in the policing profession," she said.
She said WhatsApp messages, including the "sex dream" mention, were "logically capable" of supporting the allegation of "non-consensual and sexually motivated" touching in 2021.
And it had been "irrational" for the panel to dismiss the waist pinching allegations on the basis that, if it did happen, there was no evidence it had been sexually motivated.
"Her evidence that she had not regarded the pinching as ‘sexual’ at the time, but only when she received the WhatsApp message afterwards to this effect, did not dispel the inference that the pinching had in fact been sexually motivated," said the barrister.
"It merely suggested that she only belatedly realised this.”
Neale denies touching or pinching his colleague’s bottom, as well as denying that he “pinched her waist as alleged or at all,” the court heard.
He says he "simulated giving a reading of her weight from a fat caliper whilst jokingly referring to her weight in response to her comment."
His barrister, Amina Graham, denied that the "sex dream" message was linked to the bottom pinching allegation.
"It was the officer’s case was that they had a flirtatious relationship and that he considered it possible that a relationship might develop between them," she said.
“The panel found that her evidence in respect of the WhatsApp messages was inconsistent, contradictory, lacked credibility, and inherently weak."
She added that the claim around pinching her waist was “bound to fail” as there was “no, or insufficient, evidence that the physical act - if committed - was a sexual one”.
She said the Met Commissioner had sought to "retrospectively import some form of ‘sexual gratification’ to what was, on any view, a non-sexual act, on the basis of a WhatsApp message sent after the alleged act, which was open to interpretation in any event."
She said the High Court challenge to the panel's decision "amounts to an attempt to go behind the comprehensive and sound factual determinations that were reached by the panel, who heard the evidence and were best placed to reach conclusions on it."
The judge has now reserved his decision in the case.
