A Thanet-based police constable has been handed a final written warning after accessing more than 60 records he was not supposed to.

Frank Roscoe accessed the data nine times in 10 years from January 8, 2005 to January 29, 2015, each incident of misconduct amounting to gross misconduct.

The data accessed was in relation to information about himself and his home address in 2005, a former occupant of his home address in 2007 and a robbery at a Loomis cash depot in Swanley in 2012.

Information about the robbery was again accessed on three more occasions in 2014 then data about himself and another victim of crime in the same year, the final count against him in 2015 was in relation to records accessed about a named individual.

All of the incidents were deemed not to have a proper policing purpose.

Presenting counsel Matthew Holdcroft said: “It is fair to say the police service has changed its attitude to data it holds in the last 15 to 20 years.

“They might have said 20 years ago accessing the information on your patch was good policing, but that has been educated out of police officers.

“How seriously the police service takes the preservation of information it holds has a simple reason, it is the expectation of members of the public that information about them would not be disclosed.

"Information must be treated in confidence, general curiosity and desire to check is unacceptable and it is an abuse of the privileged position an officer finds themselves in..." Presenting counsel Matthew Holdcroft

“Information must be treated in confidence, general curiosity and desire to check is unacceptable and it is an abuse of the privileged position an officer finds themselves in.

“An officer accessing information not available to the general public must have a specific reason to do so.”

Defending counsel Richard Atchley said: “Generally accessing these systems can be potentially lethal, police officers around the country have sold information to the press among others.

“Rules are there for good reasons as there is a wide spectrum for misuse but it is a very sad day when an officer of PC Roscoe’s record comes in front of a board like yourselves after 25 years of impeccable conduct and solid dedicated police work.

“All I can ask is you put this in to context and perspective and think why he has accessed the information and how little effect him accessing this has had on any other party.

“In all of these cases, none of the information is used by him in relation to any matter for any other person - it was not passed on, sold or used for any improper purpose.

“He thought in the most part he was doing it for the right reasons and justified it as being proper to improve his insight and knowledge.

“He had persuaded himself he was doing nothing wrong but he accepts differently now, it is a hard lesson learned."

PC Roscoe was injured during an arrest in February 2014 and he was restricted to computer duties thereafter.

Mr Atchley said: “An officer always on the streets, suddenly finds himself in front of a computer has a temptation to find out what is going on, on the streets.”

“He had persuaded himself he was doing nothing wrong but he accepts differently now, it is a hard lesson learned..." Defending counsel Richard Atchley

The officer who has served with the police force for more than 25 years admitted he was embarrassed and ashamed of where his transgressions had left him.

Mr Roscoe accepted that eight out of the nine counts against him were true but denied gross misconduct.

The one count he denied was in relation to him accessing information in April 2012 about a high profile robbery he attended in order to complete a witness statement about the case.

Hearing chairman William Hansen said: “Our finding is each of the nine accounts has been proven on the balance of probability and each of the alleged incidents amount to gross misconduct. The outcome we have decided upon is a final written warning.”