Police Officer Charged with Misconduct and Computer Misuse
Tarjinderjit Nizzer faces eight counts of misconduct in public office, one count of attempting to pervert the course of justice, and a computer misuse charge.
2 reports on this incident · first at Sep 4, 2026, 4:47 a.m. ET
Earlier reports
Sep 4, 2026, 4:47 a.m. ETFirst report
Police Sergeant Charged with Misconduct and Computer Misuse
Tarjinderjit Nizzer, a police sergeant, has been charged with eight counts of misconduct in public office, one count of attempting to pervert the course of justice, and a charge of computer misuse, according to the Daily Mail. The matter is at the charging stage and has not been resolved; the allegations have not been tested in court, and Nizzer is presumed innocent.
The charges stem from allegations that between January 2020 and November 2024, Nizzer contacted six members of the public and two police officers to instigate a sexual or otherwise inappropriate relationship. He is also accused of attempting to pervert the course of justice over the cancelling of a traffic offence report and using police systems inappropriately to run checks on someone without a proper policing purpose, the Daily Mail reported.
The case was investigated by the Independent Office for Police Conduct and Derbyshire Constabulary's Counter Corruption Unit. The charges were announced on September 4, 2026. As the matter is at the charging stage, the allegations have not been tested in court, and Nizzer is presumed innocent.
Was this report accurate and useful?
Sources
Revision history
- Version 14 Sept 2026, 08:53current
First published.
- Version 14 Sept 2026, 08:47current
First published.
How we work
This site models an investigative reporter rather than a wire desk. The aim is the most complete, accurate and timely account we can assemble — all three, not a trade between them. Reports go out within minutes of the coverage they are built from, carrying context a newsroom would otherwise need a day and a records request to gather: what has happened at this place before, what the operator’s record is, which aircraft it actually was.
Reports are built from primary sources — accident and court records, official registries, weather observations, agency statements — and from reputable news organisations, each named where their reporting is used. Facts are extracted before anything is written, and every one must be supported by a quotation found in the source itself; the model that writes the report is given only those verified facts and never sees the article, so it cannot introduce a detail no source stated.
Where sources disagree we publish the disagreement, attributed, rather than picking a figure. Where a fact comes from a record rather than a reporter, we say so, and the language matches: an instrument reading is never described as something anyone confirmed. Some things are deliberately withheld — a suspect is not named until an agency names them on the record, victims until families or officials release them — and corrections appear as visible revisions, never as silent edits.
None of that makes a report true. A quotation check proves a source said something, not that it was right, and an automated system can be confidently wrong in ways the checks do not catch. If something here is wrong, the feedback above is how it gets found. The full methodology, including what we refuse to publish.