Police chief has been punished enough for lapse

ROBERT, Earl of Grantham, is one of the fascinating characters in the second series of the wonderful Downton Abbey, which takes place during and after the First World War. He is a thoroughly decent man of his generation, dependable and emphatic, who Carson, the quintessential butler, can respect and serve. A new servant is a war widow with a bright son whom she hopes will get a place at grammar school. His Lordship offers to put a word in for him at the school, for which his maid is duly grateful.

Recently another man in authority, with characteristics perhaps not unlike the fictional earl, helped a relative to make an application for a job in the police force. Grahame Maxwell advised him how to avoid the jam on the forces switchboard which was due to 200,000 callers chasing 60 jobs.

Had the outgoing chief constable of North Yorkshire secured a job for this relative, he would indeed have been guilty of “gross misconduct” and nepotism.

However, his misdemeanour was of a much less serious nature. He had a lapse of judgment, when his heart overruled his head. In similar circumstances, many of us may well have done the same.

Normally, we are angry at the leniency of the sentences meted out to wrongdoers. It is rare to complain about the harshness with which someone has been treated. To have reached his exalted position, Mr Maxwell must have had an exemplary career with a previously unblemished record.

Leaving aside the question of the amount of money involved, as discussed in your article (Yorkshire Post, October 31), he has been prevented from completing his 30 years of service.

According to the existing rules, he should receive compensation. Mr Maxwell has been disgraced, humiliated and he has lost his job. Isn’t that enough?