Police and child sexual offences 747/2026

FOI Reference: 747/2026

Request

My Research is focused on child sex offenders. The term "child sexual offence" would include any sexual offence involving or perpetrated against a child (under 18), including contact and non-contact offences (such as Indecent Images of Children). It would also include any offence committed to facilitate a child sexual offence, such as kidnapping.

Please can you provide me with the following information:

1. Since 2016, how many police officers and police staff (including PCSOs and Special Constables) have been convicted of a child sexual offence? Please can you provide both lists.
2. Since 2016, how many police officers and police staff (including PCSOs and Special Constables) have been under investigation as a suspect for a child sexual offence, and what were the finalisation codes (i.e. how many were closed due to evidential difficulties/victim withdrew support/charged/other)?
3. Since 2016, how many police officers and police staff (including PCSOs and Special Constables) were convicted of a child sexual offence across each month and year?
4. Since 2016, how many police officers and police staff (including PCSOs and Special Constables) were investigated for any criminal offence, had no further action taken, but were later convicted of a child sexual offence
5. Please can you provide me the basic details (name) of any serving or retired police officers and police staff members (including PCSOs and Special Constables) who have been convicted of a child sexual offence since 2016?
6. For any specific cases since 2016, is it possible to obtain the body worn video footage of the arrest of any serving or retired police officers and police staff (including PCSOs and Special Constables) who were convicted of a child sexual offence?

Response

Section 1 of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 places two duties on public authorities. Unless exemptions apply, the first duty at Section 1(1) (a) is to confirm or deny whether the information specified in a request is held. The second duty at Section 1(1) (b) is to disclose information that has been confirmed as being held.

Where exemptions are relied upon Section 17 of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 requires Dyfed Powys Police, when refusing to provide such information (because the information is exempt) to provide you the applicant with a notice which:   (a) states that fact, (b) specifies the exemption in question and (c) states (if that would not otherwise be apparent) why the exemption applies.

I can confirm that Dyfed-Powys Police does hold the information you have requested. However, we are withholding the whole of the requested information since we consider that the Section 12(1) exemption the Cost of Compliance exceeds the Appropriate Limit applies to it.

Section 12 (1) – The cost of compliance exceeds the Appropriate Limit

Section 12(1) states: “…Section 1 (1) does not oblige a public authority to comply with a request for information if the authority estimates that the cost of complying with the request would exceed the appropriate limit.”

The cost of providing you with the information requested in respect of your request is above the amount to which we are legally required to respond i.e. the cost of locating and retrieving the information exceeds the “appropriate level” as stated in the Freedom of Information (Fees and Appropriate Limit) Regulations 2004. It is estimated that it would exceed 18 hours (i.e. minimum of 50 hours) to comply with this part of your request. The regulations can be located @ https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2004/3244

The Freedom of Information department has been advised that the information in respect question 4 of your request is not held in an easily retrievable format. In light of this and in order to accurately obtain the information relative to your request for the time frame stipulated would involve Dyfed Powys Police accessing and manually reviewing thousands of records between 2016 & 2026, of which some records contain multiple allegations and multiple officers. Following this, we would need to go into each of the named officer’s records to clarify if they had been investigated or subject of any misconduct findings for the related sexual offences. We would then to need to calculate the total number of officers between 2016 & 2026 who had been subject of a criminal allegation and subsequently misconduct investigation/proceedings.

It has also been established that it would take a minimum of 10 minutes to review and obtain the information for a single record in respect of your request. 

Time estimate to complete task = Minimum of 50 hours

In accordance therefore with the Freedom of Information Act 2000, this letter acts as a Refusal Notice for the Whole of this request under Section 17(5) A public authority which, in relation to any request for information, is relying on a claim that section 12 or section 14 applies must, within the time for complying with section 1(1), give the applicant a notice stating that fact.

You may wish to refine and resubmit your request so that it reduces the time shown above to fall within the 18 hours, should you require any further advice in relation to this matter please don’t hesitate to contact the Freedom of Information Unit. Please also be advised that should the request be refined, it does not remove the public authorities right to cite exemptions if relevant.

(This is a response under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 and disclosed on 28/08/2026)