Volunteer Police Chief Dismissed After Palantir AI Monitoring Investigation

The head of the Metropolitan Police’s Special Constabulary has been dismissed after an investigation using Palantir’s artificial intelligence technology uncovered misconduct involving intimate images of a woman.

James Deller, a special chief officer responsible for leading the Met’s volunteer police officers, was dismissed following a misconduct hearing on Friday.

The investigation found that, in July and August 2025, Deller used his police-issued mobile phone to copy two intimate images that had been sent to his personal device. The images had been shared through WhatsApp’s “view once” feature, which is designed to make them disappear after being opened.

According to the findings, Deller photographed the images using his work phone, transferred copies back to his personal device and then deleted them from the police-issued phone.

The Metropolitan Police said his actions amounted to an abuse of trust.

Commander Pete Stevens said Deller had failed to meet the standards expected of someone serving in policing and that his dismissal was justified.

Deller will also be added to the College of Policing’s barred list, preventing him from serving in policing again.

How AI monitoring uncovered the misconduct

The case emerged during a week-long operation known as Project Galatasaray, which used lawful business monitoring and Palantir’s Foundry system to help identify corruption and professional misconduct within the Metropolitan Police.

Palantir’s technology has become part of a wider debate over the use of artificial intelligence and monitoring systems by public authorities.

Earlier this year, the Metropolitan Police Federation, which represents rank-and-file officers, advised officers to be cautious about carrying force-issued devices while off duty following an upgrade to the force’s monitoring software.

The federation’s general secretary, Matt Cane, said officers had not been informed that the upgrade included Palantir’s AI technology.

In May, Deputy Commissioner Matt Jukes told the London Assembly’s Police and Crime Committee that officers were not subject to additional workplace surveillance. He said the technology could help identify dishonest or unacceptable behaviour within the force.

Wider controversy surrounding Palantir

The Metropolitan Police’s relationship with Palantir has also attracted scrutiny over procurement and governance.

The Mayor of London’s Office for Policing and Crime (MOPAC) blocked the force from signing a proposed two-year contract with the company for AI technology used in criminal investigations, saying the Met had failed to set out its procurement strategy.

Palantir has since launched legal action against MOPAC, alleging that the decision to block the deal was unlawful. The company argues that its values and ethics were treated as an irrelevant consideration in the procurement process.

Founded by technology entrepreneur Peter Thiel, Palantir holds contracts with several UK public bodies, including the NHS and the Ministry of Defence.

The company’s government work has prompted wider political debate, with some Labour MPs and trade unions calling for government contracts with Palantir to be ended.

Former Labour deputy leader Tom Watson, who recently joined the company, has defended the importance of following the rule of law in public procurement.

Questions over technology and public trust

The case highlights the growing role of AI-assisted monitoring in identifying potential misconduct within public institutions. Supporters argue that such systems can help uncover wrongdoing, while critics have raised concerns about transparency, privacy and oversight.

For the Metropolitan Police, the dismissal also underlines the standards expected of officers entrusted with public responsibilities, particularly those in leadership positions.

The wider debate over Palantir is likely to continue as public bodies weigh the potential benefits of AI technology against questions about accountability, procurement and the appropriate limits of monitoring.

This report is based on the findings and statements described in the misconduct case and the wider public debate surrounding Palantir’s work with UK institutions.