Police have covered up details of alleged crimes committed by a serving officer from Harold Hill.
PC Ryan Gadsden remained employed by the Metropolitan Police Service despite being accused in 2020 of stalking an ex-partner, only to then be arrested in 2023 for allegedly grooming police recruits.
But City of London Police has used thick, black redaction to cover up all details of PC Gadsden’s alleged offences in an official report before making it public.
It even covered up sections which had previously been shown and discussed in open court proceedings.
Among the reasons it gave for the redactions was that disclosing the details might upset PC Gadsden’s friends and family.
The cover-up drew criticism from one women’s rights group, who said it was the latest example of police trying to avoid transparency over sex pest officers.
“Time and again, excuses are made that prevent the Met from being accountable for the danger they put women in,” said Jamie Klingler, co-founder of Reclaim These Streets.
The group, set up in the wake of Sarah Everard’s murder by serving Met Police PC Wayne Couzens, has previously won a High Court case against the Met over its treatment of women who protested Sarah’s murder.
Ms Klingler added that the lack of transparency “continues the charade that the Met is there to protect and serve the women of London without fear or favour.”
Criminal allegations
PC Gadsden, 23, of Hailsham Road in Harold Hill, Romford, was arrested in May 2023 on suspicion of misconduct in a public office.
The Daily Mirror later revealed his arrest had been over allegations that he had groomed young cadets.
He was suspended from duty, then told in August 2023 that further allegations had been received.
He took his own life in September 2023, ending the criminal investigation.
A probe remains underway by police misconduct watchdog the Independent Office for Police Conduct (IOPC).
But an inquest into PC Gadsden’s death, in May 2024, heard the case had also been reviewed by City of London Police.
Its focus was on whether the Met had properly safeguarded PC Gadsden’s welfare, but the resulting report – presented as evidence at the inquest – contained details of the criminal allegations.
It was a portion of that report, projected onto a large screen in open court, which publicly revealed Gadsden had been the subject of a prior stalking complaint in 2020.
Fight for the truth
This newspaper demanded a copy of the report under the Freedom of Information Act.
We wanted to know what the police knew, and when they knew it, about PC Gadsden’s alleged pattern of inappropriate behaviour towards women – as well as whether there were any more allegations between 2020 and 2023.
City of London Police breached its legal duty to answer within 20 working days, instead taking three months to respond, and then blacked out vast swathes of the report. This included all details of PC Gadsden’s alleged crimes.
Almost all of the unredacted portions referred to police policies rather than details of the case.
The force claimed that because only a handful of newspapers had reported on PC Gadsden’s case, that meant the public interest in transparency was “limited”.
It also claimed it would be unfair on PC Gadsden’s accusers if details of the allegations became public – even though they had supported a criminal prosecution which would have seen his alleged offences aired in open court.
The force added that disclosing details could damage the mental health of PC Gadsden’s loved ones, arguing that preventing that hypothetical upset outweighed the public interest in transparency.
We have already submitted an appeal.
Read more:
- Wall of silence to questions over police officer's death amid criminal probe
- Romford police officer death probe 'hampered' by watchdog
Reaction
City of London Police said: “It was not the designated role of City of London Police to review the alleged crimes against PC Gadsden.
“The investigative role was handled solely by the IOPC.”
Its Freedom of Information team said it would aim to rule on our appeal by September 12.
The IOPC was approached for comment but said its report on PC Gadsden’s case was not yet finalised.
The Met Police previously refused to answer questions about PC Gadsden's alleged offences, or why it had referred him to the IOPC, after his inquest.
The force also refused to answer how its refusal to comment on PC Gadsden's case was compatible with its New Met for London plan, which promised greater transparency and accountability to restore public trust after the murder of Sarah Everard.
Our Freedom of Information request followed this refusal to comment on the case.
The force would only say that its thoughts were with PC Gadsden's loved ones and it had allocated him a welfare officer, who had remained in frequent contact with him in the lead-up to his death.
Andrea Simon, executive director of the End Violence Against Women Coalition (EVAW), said: “For too long the issue of police officers perpetuating male violence against women has not been taken seriously when victims or whistleblowers come forward and officers have not faced any meaningful consequences.”
She added: “The police have a particular position of power and authority over the public and must be held to the very highest standards of conduct.
“Any abuse of this power needs to be dealt with swiftly, given the massive impact this has on public trust and confidence in policing.
“This means making sure there are no missed opportunities to identify officers whose behaviour is abusive or exploitative, that no red flags are ignored, and that the culture of policing shifts away from ‘protecting our own’ towards one of transparency, accountability and trust.”
When life is difficult, the Samaritans is available 365 days, 24/7. Call for free on 116 123, email jo@samaritans.org, or visit www.samaritans.org.
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules here