A FORMER Special branch police officer with an 'exemplary record' who worked on anti-corruption investigations within Cleveland Police has been convicted of checking restricted police records.

Alexander Watson, 59, was accused of two charges of breaching the data protection act by searching his son’s name on the restricted police database IRIS while working as a police staff investigator at the force.

Yesterday, after being found guilty he was given a six-month conditional discharge and ordered to pay £500 in court costs and a £20 victim surcharge.

The former officer, who the court heard had served the force with distinction throughout his career, vowed to clear his name as he left Teesside Magistrates Court.

He said: "I'm very disappointed about the result and I will be appealing the conviction."

During his trial Watson, of Earle Close, Yarm, claimed he searched the system for vetting purposes after being turned down for a North Yorkshire police investigator job, on the grounds he had not disclosed criminal activity within his own family.

He discovered his son had a caution for drugs possession which he had not known about when he applied for the job, and searched the system so he would be able to accurately declare it in any future job applications or to his superiors.

The court heard he worked on some major terrorist inquiries, including the investigation into the 7/7 bombings.

But he also carried out some on “high level” police corruption inquiries within the North-East.

His solicitor Robin Patton said: “Does that make you popular?”

Watson replied: “With certain members of the police force, very unpopular, and grudges are held.”

Watson said he had checked IRIS twice for information about his sons, the first in August 2016 after his son admitted to him he had been cautioned for drug possession, and again in December to check whether there had been any further offices or intelligence.

Prosecutor Anne Mitchell said: “I am going to suggest you accessed the system twice for personal purposes. None of that fell within any work related purposes.”

But Watson said he had never received any proper training on data protection legislation, which he is accused of breaching, and believed his use of the system was above board.

Mr Patton said: “You might think the searchlight has come round to him, for whatever reason, and they have searched and said this is what we have got, he has breached the Data Protection Act.”

He said Watson, having worked in vetting for Special Branch for many years, would have been well aware of the ‘digital footprint’ he would leave when accessing the system.

Mr Watson told the court he did not believe his use of IRIS was unlawful.

Speaking after the hearing a force spokesperson said: “Police computer systems hold a lot of sensitive information and the public would rightly expect that they only be accessed or used in line with legislative boundaries." This case demonstrates that Cleveland Police takes the misuse of police systems very seriously and will continue to review and scrutinise the use of these systems.”