A police officer who liaised with gypsy communities was filmed by documentary makers as he allegedly forced his way into a property without a warrant and abused the occupants.

PC Sacha Azizi denied gross misconduct at a hearing yesterday following the incident in Honeysuckle Close in Walderslade, Chatham, in May 2017.

He had gone to the property with colleagues from Kent Police's Gypsy Liaison Team in search of a woman wanted for arson.

Accompanying them were a Channel 5 film crew who were making a programme about the unit's work.

Footage played to the panel at police headquarters in Sutton Road, Maidstone, shows the heavily pregnant daughter of the suspect opening the door and being asked by PC Azizi if he can come in.

She replies: "No not really, I'm in so much pain, I'm about to go to the hospital."

When asked if her mother was there the clearly emotional woman says: "I promise she is not. I have not spoken to her for ages."

'It's a shame he wasn't wanted, we could have grabbed him and dragged him out on to the street...' — PC Sacha Azizi

PC Azizi responded "Can I just come and have a look?"

He then pushes his way into the house, prompting the woman to shout for her husband.

She asks PC Azizi if he has a warrant, he replies "yeah" but doesn't respond when she repeats the question and later admits he does not have one, prompting her partner to demand officers leave.

While inside the house PCs Azizi and Daniel Baker search for the suspect but cannot locate her.

The couple repeatedly ask the officers to leave the property.

When the officers do leave they are pursued by the visibly agitated and aggressive husband who is shouting and swearing.

PC Azizi can then be heard saying they might "come back for you one day".

He also makes reference to putting the family dog down, which has bolted out of the property during the commotion, and says taking the couple's children into care would "do them a favour".

When the officers are back in their vehicle PC Azizi calls the man "one of Medway's finest".

He then says to a colleague "look at him, not being funny, what is he?"

He adds: "It's a shame he wasn't wanted, we could have grabbed him and dragged him out on to the street."

Force counsel Ian Skelt said the comments were "sarcastic", "belittling" and "wholly inappropriate".

PC Azizi does not deny making the comments but disputes it was him who said "got in though, didn't we" in response to the husband telling officers they did not have a warrant.

He also denies claiming to have a warrant, claiming he was invited in and thought he was allowed to enter to look for a suspect.

He denies his actions amounted to gross misconduct.

PC Baker also denies gross misconduct.

It is argued he was a willing participant in entering the house without a warrant and that he failed to challenge PC Azizi's behaviour.

If gross misconduct is proved both officers could lose their jobs.

An initial investigation into allegations of assault and trespass was bungled, with both PCs Azizi and Baker being interviewed and providing statements without any formal processes in place.

Kent Police admitted Regulation 5 notices, which set out allegations and inform officers of their rights, should have been served but could not say why they had not been.

The force's complaints department had decided the probe could be led by the officers' boss Inspector Dave Smith.

Having interviewed both officers and witness PC Jai Shoker he soon concluded there was no criminal or misconduct case to answer and in September 2017 the complaint was dismissed entirely.

But the following month a senior officer reviewed and reopened the case and passed it on to the Independent Office for Police Conduct.

During the proceeding investigation PC Shoker was charged with gross misconduct.

It was alleged his witness statement had been "misleading" but the panel heard it was given in circumstances akin to an "informal conversation in a corridor".

Having heard about the lack of formal processes in place during the initial investigation the panel agreed with defence counsel Edmund Gritt's suggestion that "public confidence if not upheld if this kind of investigative approach is sanctioned".

They therefore ruled statements made by PC Azizi and PC Baker during the initial investigation, which Mr Skelt had suggested were inconsistent, were inadmissible.

A visibly emotional PC Shoker was cleared on any wrongdoing, with panel chairman Nicola Talbot Hadley saying it was "very unfair" to have expected him to give an accurate account several weeks after the incident without being able to consult his note book.

A decision was due to be made later in the week.