Senior police commander who drew up Met anti-drugs strategy ‘used LSD and cannabis’
Julian Bennett also stands accused of failing to give a sample for a drugs’ test, tribunal heard
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.A senior police officer who drew up an anti-drugs strategy for the Met was pictured with cannabis on his table, a tribunal heard.
Commander Julian Bennett, 63, is also accused of using LSD and magic mushrooms as well as failing to give a sample for a drugs’ test.
The officer, who served in the force since 1976, was nicknamed ‘sacker’ for taking a tough approach to rogue officers when he presided over disciplinary hearings but could now be kicked off the force himself.
He is also accused of failing to provide a drug sample after suspicions arose he had used cannabis on 21 July 2020 and lied about why he failed to provide one.
Cmdr Bennett claimed he had taken cannabidiol, a form of medical cannabis, to treat facial palsy, which an earlier hearing was told he “knew to be untrue.”
Mark Ley-Morgan, representing the Metropolitan Police, told a police disciplinary hearing on Friday: “She [the key witness in the case] took a photograph of Commander Bennett with cannabis on his table.”
His lawyer John Beggs QC wants the case thrown out because Sheila Gomes, the key witness in the case, said to have the evidence he took the drugs, did not turn up for the hearing.
He said the tribunal case had become “abusive” and will be unfair if she cannot be cross-examined.
He also told the tribunal in Brompton, west London, that the proceedings should end claiming decisions which led to the appointment of the tribunal’s chair were inappropriately influenced by the force.
Mr Ley-Morgan said these arguments were “preposterous” and added that, even if the application to dismiss Ms Gomes’ evidence was successful, Cmdr Bennett still has a case to answer over alleged failure to provide a drug sample.
He told the court: “He [Bennett] refused to provide a drug test and he did so knowing he was refusing to obey a lawful order.
“He did that knowing that the Metropolitan Police consider refusing to provide a drug sample to be as serious as providing a positive sample.
“He asked someone to go to the Commissioner and asked her if she would let him resign.
“This is a curious approach for a man who claims to be a man of integrity. He then provided an explanation for why the sample could have been positive.
“Why would you provide that explanation and then refuse to give a sample? It makes no sense.
“It may not result in a positive sample and if it did, he could have said ‘I have got all these products, come to my house and you will find them’.
“What would make sense as an explanation for refusing to provide a sample is that he thought the sample would be inconsistent with the minimal amount of cannabis in CBD products.”
Commander Bennett wrote the force’s anti-drugs strategy for 2017 to 2021 called ‘Dealing with the Impact of drugs on communities’.
He sacked more than 200 officers during his time on disciplinary panels, the tribunal heard.
The three-person panel, chaired by Akbar Khan, will next sit at the end of this month to deliver a ruling on whether to dismiss the case and whether to admit Ms Gomes’ evidence as hearsay evidence.