A senior officer with the Met Police faces the sack after he was accused of racism for using the phrase ‘whiter than white’.
The detective in Scotland Yard’s anti-corruption squad is facing an investigation by the police watchdog after he is said to have used the phrase during a briefing to colleagues.
According to Cambridge Dictionary, the term means ‘never doing anything wrong’, and the detective reportedly used it to mean officers’ actions should be beyond reproach.
A detective with the Met Police’s anti-corruption unit faces an investigation after he allegedly used the apparently innocuous phrase ‘whiter than white’
But a complaint was made over apparent racial connotations of the phrase and investigation has now been launched.
Colleagues are reportedly upset that the man’s career has been hit and he faces a probe lasting up to a year for uttering a phrase which is widely used around the country without controversy.
Another Met officer told The Evening Standard: ‘It may have been a poor use of language but this is not what the misconduct process is for. This is not corruption, this is not serious wrongdoing.’
The paper reported that other officers are being investigating over the use of seemingly innocuous phrases including ‘pale, stale and male’ and ‘a good egg’.
It is understood the detective in the Met Police case has been put on restricted duties after being served misconduct notice in June.
He will be interviewed by the Independent Office for Police Conduct (IOPC) at a later date.
A spokesman for the Independent Office for Police Conduct said: ‘I can confirm that as part of Operation Embley into allegations of serious corruption and malpractice within the Directorate of Professional Standards a notice of investigation has been served on an officer informing them we are investigating the alleged use of language deliberately intended to offend and that had racist undertones.
‘A notice is issued to inform an officer at the earliest opportunity following an allegation and to safeguard their interests. It in no way indicates that misconduct proceedings will take place.’