Police chief's team claim misconduct panel is unfair

Nick Adderley denies gross misconduct after he was accused of exaggerating his military service

A disciplinary panel should recuse itself as the chairman had a "concluded view", representatives for a chief constable accused of gross misconduct have claimed.

Nick Adderley is accused of exaggerating his rank, length of service and naval achievements, the hearing has been told.

That includes claiming to be Falklands veteran, even though he was only 15 years old when the war started.

He has denied misconduct and will not give evidence to the panel on the advice of his defence team.

Mr Adderley's representatives invited the whole panel to recuse itself but made clear its issue was with chairman Callum Cowx.

Matthew Holdcroft, representing Mr Adderley, said as Mr Cowx had served in the navy, army and police he had an "unlikely resume" to be chosen for this case.

He said by using phrases like "claimed service" he has given the impression he has a "concluded view".

"Uniquely in my career members of the public have approached me to express their view you are not conducting these proceedings fairly," he said.

'Derail proceedings'

He accused the chairman of having a "closed mind" and his comments showed Mr Adderley's team did not have a "steep hill" to climb to convince them of their case but a "entire bare rock face".

John Beggs KC, representing the Office of the Police, Fire and Crime Commissioner said, Mr Cowx had "particular expertise and experience of the Royal Navy can only be a good thing".

He said this was an attempt to stop the panel "ever getting to a conclusion".

Mr Beggs added it was a well-known legal tactic to "attack" members of the tribunal to either "derail proceedings" or "undermine or cow" a panel member.

Mr Cowx said he would have "no hesitation" to recuse himself if it was required and the panel would consider the matter "very carefully".

He said the panel would now return to proceedings on 20 June.

Mr Adderley denies misconduct and that he acted without integrity, but admits he breached standards in terms of duties and responsibilities.