In a case that has drawn fresh scrutiny to policing practices in London, two Metropolitan Police officers have received final written warnings after using their personal mobile phones to photograph a dead body and other evidence, with images shared via WhatsApp and one later shown during a training session.
The misconduct hearing, which concluded earlier this year, revealed that officers at the scene of a sudden death in Dalston, east London, in September 2021, resorted to personal devices because they believed police-issued equipment was inadequate for capturing quality images. PC Billy Manning kept a photo of the badly decomposed body of an elderly resident—who had been dead for days or weeks—on his phone. He later displayed it to colleagues at a Shoreditch training course, describing it as “a bad one,” prompting discomfort and a report from two officers.
Manning deleted the images from his iPhone library but not from WhatsApp. When warned by PC Zak Malik, who had sent the photos, Manning responded with laughing emojis. Further investigation uncovered additional evidence photos on his device, which he described as “common practice.” He was also found to have created a WhatsApp group containing sexist, homophobic, ableist, and transphobic content.
PC Frankie Jordan faced similar findings for retaining evidence images on his personal phone, claiming he had forgotten they were there and that the practice was routine. The panel noted “confused and conflicting guidelines” on personal device use, with even senior leadership interpreting them differently.
Both officers received final written warnings—Manning for two years and Jordan for three—and no criminal charges were brought. The Met apologised to those affected, describing the actions as “highly inappropriate” and below expected standards. The force has since banned personal phones for such purposes and upgraded equipment.
Wider Context of Met Police Challenges
This incident, while resulting in relatively light sanctions compared to more serious cases, fits into a broader pattern of concerns about conduct, culture, and integrity within Britain’s largest police force. The Metropolitan Police has faced repeated high-profile scandals involving misconduct, from sexual offences and domestic abuse by officers to racism, misogyny, and corruption.
Notable among these was the 2021 conviction of PC Wayne Couzens for the murder of Sarah Everard, which exposed systemic failures in vetting and handling complaints. This was followed by the case of PC David Carrick, who raped and sexually assaulted multiple women over years while serving. Such cases prompted Baroness Louise Casey’s 2023 review, which criticised the force’s culture and led to significant reforms under Commissioner Sir Mark Rowley.
Rowley has described efforts as the “biggest corruption clear-out in British policing history,” with over 1,400 officers and staff removed in recent years, dismissals trebling, and internal reporting surging. Initiatives include a dedicated Anti-Corruption Command and use of AI tools like Palantir software to flag misconduct, including shift-roster abuse and other integrity issues.
Recent examples include gross misconduct findings against multiple officers at Charing Cross police station following a BBC Panorama undercover investigation that captured racist, misogynistic, and violent comments. Several were sacked, with ongoing probes into potential case corruption.
Critics argue that while progress has been made—such as improved vetting and proactive investigations—deep-rooted cultural issues persist. Privacy breaches like the handling of images of the deceased echo past public outrage over insensitive treatment of victims and families. The force acknowledges that rebuilding public trust remains a long-term challenge, potentially spanning a decade or more.
The Met maintains that the vast majority of its officers serve with integrity, but incidents like this underscore the need for consistent standards, clear policies, and accountability to prevent erosion of confidence in policing. As one spokesperson put it, such actions cause “distress” and fall short of what Londoners deserve.