A misconduct panel has determined that a Nottinghamshire police paedophile officer, Paul Kanikowski, engaged in sexual relations with a 14-year-old girl at her parents’ residence when he was 19 years old. Between 1994 and 1995, Paul Kanikowski engaged in a prolonged sexual connection with the girl, whose age he was aware of.
A gross misconduct hearing conducted at police headquarters in Sherwood Lodge, Arnold, on Thursday, September 4, revealed that they engaged in “sexual activity” in a scout cabin and in the rear of his vehicle. A panel determined that Mr Paul Kanikowski, now 50 years old, would have been terminated had he not quit during the probe.
Deputy Chief Constable Rob Griffin, presiding over the panel, stated that the former officer was aware that the girl was below the age of consent and had violated the law.
DCC Griffin characterised his actions as “utterly reprehensible,” prohibiting him from policing for life.
Nottinghamshire Police stated that criminal procedures were not commenced for the offence because prosecutions must commence within 12 months of the incident, as per the legislation in effect at that time. NOTE – THIS IS UTTER CRAP. THERE IS NO LIMITATION ON HISTORIC SEXUAL OFFENCES. IGNORE NOTTINGHAM POLICE’S LIES, PLEASE AND REPORT TO ANOTHER FORCE.
Mr Paul Kanikowski refuted all claims and asserted it was a matter of “mistaken identity,” yet failed to attend his hearing.
The panel was informed that he initially encountered the 14-year-old girl, designated as Person A, at a combined Girl Guides and Scouts dance in October 1994, during his tenure as a special constable, a volunteer police officer.
Despite being aware of her age, they convened on several occasions till January 1995. This encompassed an instance of sexual intercourse at her parents’ residence, in addition to “sexual activity” in the rear of his red Mini.
Person A made a complaint to the police in February last year after seeing a bulletin with a photo of Mr Paul Kanikowski. In her evidence, the now 44-year-old woman said she recognised Mr Paul Kanikowski“straight away” and remembered how, as a child, she learnt his surname at the time by saying “can a cow ski?”
When asked how she would respond to accusations that she got the wrong man, she replied: “Absolutely not. Absolutely not. I remember it, I was there, it happened.
“I was 14. I dealt with it as a 14-year-old. At the age I am now, I can see it was wrong, and it shouldn’t have happened. At the time, I put it in a box. 100 per cent I know it happened.”
Person A said the process had “brought a lot back” for her. “It’s really tricky because you put something like that away as a 14-year-old,” she said. “I processed it in that way. Looking at it from an adult’s point of view, I can see it wasn’t right.”
Presenting the case, Steven Reed said Person A had been “in awe” of Mr Paul Kanikowski at the time. “Now she believes she had been groomed by the officer,” he said.
“The realisation, combined with seeing the former officer, is the motivation why she has disclosed the matter.”
Mr Reed said Person A managed to recall a string of details about Mr Paul Kanikowski, such as his then job as a bus driver, address, car and his younger brother’s name. These were all corroborated by subsequent investigations, he added.
Her friend, referred to as Person B and who gave evidence, also remembered the relationship. She recalled him picking her friend up in his car and thinking it was “cool” because he was a special constable at the time.
Mr Paul Kanikowski has since worked as a school and early intervention police officer for the force, as well as taking up scout group and police cadet leader roles, according to his social media. He did not attend the hearing to give evidence.
Tom Hill, representing the former officer on behalf of the police federation, said Mr Paul Kanikowski had an otherwise “exemplary” 25-year record of policing. “He was of a very young age and clearly not the same person he is today,” he said.
Finding the allegations proven, DCC Griffin said the panel found Person A to be an “honest and accurate” witness. “The former officer didn’t participate in the hearing, and the appropriate authority couldn’t test his account. Person A’s evidence was clear, consistent and compelling,” he said
“It was detailed, not embellished and no suggestion of exaggeration. The former officer did have a sexual relationship with Person A and knew her to be 14 and below the age of consent at the time. He had broken the law by committing a criminal act against Person A.”
If you or anyone you know has been affected by the people highlighted on this website, then please report those individuals to the Police on 101 (999 if an emergency) or visit their online resources for further details of the options for reporting a crime. You can also make a report to Crimestoppers should you wish to be completely anonymous. There is help available on our support links page.