Norfolk, UK - The Christian policeman sacked after a row over gay rights has told how his dismissal after 15 years in the force has ‘devastated’ his family.
As The Mail on Sunday revealed in the summer, Graham Cogman objected to being ‘bombarded’ at work by emails and posters promoting events such as Gay History Month.
He responded to the ‘politically correct’ campaign by sending emails to colleagues quoting Biblical texts suggesting that homosexual sex was sinful.
But he faced accusations of homophobia and a series of disciplinary hearings, culminating 12 days ago in his sacking by Norfolk Police for misconduct.
The twice-commended officer said yesterday: ‘I am totally devastated. It was a job I loved. This is destroying me and my family.’
He admitted he had ‘stupidly’ breached a ban by using the internal communications system to post a link to an American Christian organisation, but said the force’s decision to sack him was ‘harsh and disproportionate’.
Mr Cogman, 50, accused the police service of becoming so sensitive to the rights of gays that Christians could no longer safely express their views.
Speaking at his home in Sea Palling, Norfolk, which he shares with his wife Elaine, 46, and his two children, Mr Cogman said: ‘In the service in general there is a feeling of fear. There is a definite bias against faith – any faith – if it takes a critical view of homosexual sex.
‘The easy option for me would have been to keep quiet but when there is such prejudice towards one point of view, how can that be right? That doesn’t sound like equality and diversity to me.
‘I don’t have any worries with what people do in their private lives – if they are gay, that’s fine. I haven’t gone after anyone maliciously.’
Mr Cogman, backed by the Police Federation, is appealing against his sacking and is planning to take his force to an employment tribunal next year, funded by the Christian Legal Centre.
He said he had received a huge amount of support both from within and outside the force.
Last week the Rev Martin Young, vicar of St Andrew’s church in Norwich, wrote an open letter to Norfolk Police protesting that it had ‘manifestly failed to uphold PC Cogman’s right to express his Christian faith’.
The vicar added: ‘His views are not extreme or unusual. They are consistent with the published understanding of the Church of England, of which he is a member.’ Mr Cogman said he had no problems with colleagues until gay liaison officers circulated an email to officers in early 2005 encouraging staff to wear a pink ribbon on their uniforms during Gay History Month.
He emailed colleagues suggesting they might want to read biblical texts suggesting homosexual sex was sinful. As a result, he was ordered to stop using the internal messaging system for failing to show ‘tolerance and respect’ for fellow officers.
The following year, when officers were encouraged to wear rainbow ribbons during Gay History Month, Mr Cogman said it was ‘inappropriate, thoughtless and insensitive’ as the rainbow symbolised God’s faithfulness.
He was accused of unlawfully using the internal messaging system and victimising another gay liaison officer by saying: ‘Love the sinner, hate the deed.’ He was docked 13 days’ pay.
In April this year, he was questioned again after circulating a link to a helpline for people struggling with their sexuality on a website headed by the controversial American preacher Pat Robertson.
At the misconduct hearing, overseen by the Independent Police Complaints Commission, a panel found that Mr Cogman had ignored an order banning him from using the police computer system and had failed to treat a colleague with politeness and respect.
Mr Cogman said: ‘I felt physically sick when I heard the ruling. If I hadn’t posted that link I would still have a job. That was my downfall, my stupidity, however you want to put it. But my intention was to help.’
He claimed a small group of pro-gay officers had been determined to oust him. ‘They have their own agenda and now they have my scalp.’
Norfolk Police said: ‘The issue is not about Mr Cogman’s beliefs but about his behaviour. He ignored repeated warnings about his behaviour and was dismissed for failing to obey a lawful order and required to resign for failing to show politeness and tolerance to colleagues.’