A former Avon and Somerset Police officer has been barred from policing after a misconduct panel found gross misconduct in her handling of a suspected drink-driving incident in Weston-super-Mare.
Panel finds procedural failures and record-keeping problems
The panel heard that Police Constable Degree Apprentice Rebecca Greville would have been dismissed had she not already resigned from the force. The allegations relate to an incident on 9 September 2025 in Weston-super-Mare, when a detainee was taken to a police station for a breath test.
According to the misconduct hearing, PC Greville did not follow the required procedure for administering the breath test. She failed to ask mandatory questions about whether the person had recently consumed food or drink and did not provide the correctly worded warning that must be given if a person refuses to complete the test.
Most seriously, the panel concluded that the officer failed to complete the record of the procedure contemporaneously. The form was not completed for several days and was later backdated to make it appear the test had been conducted correctly. That document reportedly included responses the detainee had not given and was submitted as part of the case file.
- Incident date: 9 September 2025
- Hearing date: 10 September (panel at Portishead)
- Outcome: Gross misconduct proven; officer barred from policing
| Issue | Finding |
|---|---|
| Mandatory questions about food/drink | Not asked |
| Correct warning provided | Not given |
| Record completion | Delayed and backdated |
| Impact on prosecution | Case withdrawn; prosecution halted |
Supervision and discovery
The irregularities were detected when a supervisor reviewed evidence submitted as part of PC Greville's competency portfolio. Body-worn video of the incident did not match the information on the submitted form, prompting the supervisor to raise concerns with the force's Professional Standards Department. As a result, the prosecution linked to the breath test was withdrawn.
When first asked about her actions, the officer insisted she had carried out the procedure correctly. She later accepted making mistakes but denied acting dishonestly or intending to mislead anyone, telling the panel that she lacked experience in breath-test procedures and had been reluctant to approach supervisors for guidance after about two years of service.
"She had completed the procedure correctly," the officer initially told investigators.
The hearing, which took place at Police and Fire Headquarters in Portishead, found the allegations amounted to gross misconduct. The panel concluded that, had she remained in post, PC Greville would have been dismissed.
Local consequences and public trust
The case is likely to concern residents of Weston-super-Mare who rely on the police to carry out investigations and prosecutions with accuracy and transparency. Procedural safeguards exist to ensure that evidence—especially from breath tests, which can lead to court cases and the loss of driving licences—is reliable and properly recorded. When forms are backdated or documentation does not reflect what is on body-worn footage, it can undermine prosecutions and public confidence.
While the immediate legal outcome for the individual in the cancelled prosecution was to have the case halted, the disciplinary finding is administrative and aimed at upholding policing standards. The Professional Standards Department's intervention in this instance demonstrates a layer of oversight within the force, but it also highlights the consequences that can follow from mistakes made in routine custody procedures.
Residents with concerns about police conduct can contact Avon and Somerset Police or the Independent Office for Police Conduct for further information on complaint and oversight processes.
