WHEN Sean Price became Cleveland's Chief Constable in 2003, in the wake of the hugely expensive and confidence-sapping corruption inquiry Operation Lancet, I confess that I found him to be a breath of fresh air.

He took a different approach to media relations. He was friendly, approachable and appeared to do his best to avoid his force trotting out a "no comment" response to difficult questions.

I met him reasonably often and enjoyed his company. One of his frustrations was that the Lancet years continued to tarnish the name of Cleveland Police for so long after the inquiry had come to an unsatisfactory conclusion.  He once asked me: "How long do we have to be branded as a 'crisis-hit' force by the media?"

The irony now, of course, is that it is his own actions - described as "shameful" by the Independent Police Complaints Commission IPCC - which have undermined the reputation of the force he was tasked with rebuilding.

Mr Price continues to protest his innocence and it is true that a criminal investigation, called Operation Sacristy, has indicated it is "unlikely" that he will face charges.

But the police watchdog, the IPCC, is damning in its conclusion: Sean Price is a deceitful bully who tried to get a member of his staff to lie to save his skin.

The leader of any organisation is expected to set high standards. The leader of a police force has a particular responsibility to be whiter than white and Mr Price has failed in that duty.

As the IPCC statement concludes: he has let down the officers he led and the members of the public he served.

In view of the seriousness of this sorry episode, and the conflicting statements which have emerged, it is a matter of regret that the disciplinary hearing was held in private.

The public had a right to hear the evidence, the cross-examinations, and the detail that unfolded behind closed doors, because when taxpayer-funded senior public servants are accused of deceit amounting to gross misconduct, complete transparency should be a formal requirement.

I understand the need for expedience but, as a point of principle, the doors should be open as wide as possible in matters such as these.