A South Yorkshire Police officer accused of being “unfit for duty” after taking a breathalyser test is set to face a misconduct hearing next month.

The allegation has been made against Police Sergeant Jonathan Sorsby, who is set to go before a misconduct hearing which will be held between October 8 and 10, 2025.

South Yorkshire Police has published details of the allegation this week.

The allegation has been made against Police Sergeant Jonathan Sorsby, who is accused of being "unfit for duty" following the results of a breathalyser test | 3rd party

placeholder image — The allegation has been made against Police Sergeant Jonathan Sorsby, who is accused of being "unfit for duty" following the results of a breathalyser test | 3rd party

The force states: “On 1st May 2024, in Wakefield, the officer was unfit for duty when attending a Police Centre and provided a reading of 23mg of alcohol per 100ml of breath when subjected to a breathalyser test.”

The legal alcohol limit in England, Wales and Northern Ireland for driving is 80 milligrams of alcohol per 100 millilitres of blood or 35 micrograms (mg) of alcohol.

According to details of the hearing published by the force, should the alleged misconduct be proven it would amount to a “breach of the standards of professional behaviour in respect of discreditable conduct and fitness for work.”

Sign up to our new court newsletter, where we seek to ensure that justice is not just done but seen to be done. Register today and receive our rundown of the key stories from the courts over the past seven days.

“The matter set out above is a breach of the standards which is so serious as to justify dismissal and therefore constitutes gross misconduct,” the document adds.

Detailing the “purpose” of public misconduct hearings, South Yorkshire Police’s website states it is to “show” that their “disciplinary system is open and transparent” and to demonstrate that the force does “hold officers who breach the standards of professional behaviour, or those where misconduct is found proven, accountable for their actions.”

Hearings should be heard by a panel of three people that should be chaired by an independent legally qualified person chosen from a pool held by the local policing body, further guidance states.