Jump to content
Gentleman's Military Interest Club

Recommended Posts

Hi,

 

just a guess, but I would think that on occasion someone who is close to being "cashiered" or dishonorably discharged may as a lesser punishment be "permitted to resign" ? Especially if the resignation means the affair is quietly swept under the table?

i.e. if Captain Jarofwasps is banging the wife of Colonel Blimp.... he could be cashiered for conduct unbecoming.... or quietly be offered the choice of resigning ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The "scandal" aspect has been known to play a part, but it may also be that the case against Captain Jarofwasps is not air-tight. The service wants him gone and he sees the benefit of departing without making ripples, so he may be permitted resign to save time, money and uncertainty. The service wins by not having to prosecute a weak case and he wins by not having a court-martial conviction to explain.  All claim victory and carry on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks guys. I had a suspicion that this might be the case. I'd be curious to know of any examples that research has uncovered with regards to police officers being allowed to resign. I would have thought that most cases would be pretty straight forward like being drunk on duty for instance.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In fact, the service scores a double win because the details of the criminal congresss between Captain Bigjarofwasps and Mrs. Colonel Blimp doesn't get aired in the yellow press just when we're trying to sell Parliament and the oh-so-patriotic but tight fisted British tax payer on bigger defence appropriations! ;)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know what the current police regs. say. However, in my time there were a number of "punishments" available one of which was "required to resign". That said, I can recall a number of occasions when a serving member of a police force who was under investigation was allowed/permitted by the Chief Constable to resign ahead of disciplinary proceedings. This obviously saved the cost of preparing for and holding a disciplinary hearing. I take it that your question is in the police context as opposed to the military one, which may differ somewhat.

Dave.

  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Allowed to resign is basically a guilty verdict but the important point is you are allowed to keep your pension up to the date of resignation. You don't get it at what would have been your 30 years of service but you get it at pensionable age. Most discipline now is a straight sacking so they don't have to pay the pension even if you've been paying in for 29 years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

O tempore, o mores!  That sounds all too likely, Caig.  And that explanation makes perfect sense.  The civil service equivalent of the famous Scottish criminal verdict of 'Not proven.'  'We know you did it, you know you did it, so leave quietly and we'll look away.'

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I remember back in the 80s an officer not long out of his probation had been up to no good pretending he was on the flying squad and chatting up ladies working in banks. He got caught as one of the security managers at a certain bank was ex police, he was suspicious and asked to see his warrant card. He made a note of his name and reported it to the local police. Needless to say he was identified and called in to see his Divisional Chief Superintendent who gave him the option of resigning or facing a discipline investigation. He was gone the same day leaving half his stuff behind in the Section house. It was clearly an option to save embarrassment to both the job and the individual where it was clearly not a criminal matter but a discipline matter. Wouldn't happen today you can't resign even if you wanted to if facing gross misconduct discipline. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Within Colonial Police circles - Colonial Police Forces were established and operated under a Police Force Ordinance,part of the Laws of the relevant Territory/Colony/Protectorate.Under this Ordinance were the Police Discipline Regulations.Within these Regulations were the powers of senior officers to impose awards following conviction for a disciplinary offence, one of these awards was that of ' required to resign'.If the miscreant did this he could always say,in later life,that he ' resigned',blagging that he did not find the work to his liking or something similar.If a potential employer were to later  check he would only find a record of ' resignation ',the circumstances would not be revealed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The terms Permitted to Resign / Resignation Permitted were used up until October 1920.  From then on the wording was changed to Required to Resign which is probably a better definition of what really happened. It you look at the Discharge Register MEPO 4/346 it shows exactly when the wording was changed.  Certificates of Conduct were not given to officers who were Resignation Permitted / Required to Resign.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


×