Palantir AI probe fires Met volunteer chief

Estimated reading time: 5 minutes · Last updated: 11 October 2026

James Deller, the Metropolitan Police’s Special Constabulary lead, was dismissed after investigators using lawful business monitoring and Palantir Foundry determined he copied two intimate images from his work phone in July and August 2025. The finding emerged during a week-long internal operation called Project Galatasaray and led to Deller being added to the College of Policing barred list. The Met says the action followed a misconduct hearing; commanders described the behaviour as an abuse of trust. Palantir’s AI tools, the force’s monitoring upgrade and the blocked two-year procurement pushed the controversy into procurement and political debates over how the force uses automated monitoring.

SCO Deller failed to meet that bar. His actions were an abuse of the trust put in him and it is right that he is no longer able to serve in policing.

Cdr Pete Stevens

How Palantir Foundry and monitoring identified the case

The misconduct came to light when the Met used upgraded lawful business monitoring tools together with Palantir Foundry as part of Project Galatasaray. The operation ran for a week and focused on detecting corruption and professional misconduct within the force. Investigators traced activity on a police-issued phone and identified that two intimate images, sent to the officer by WhatsApp's view-once feature, had been copied back onto the work device in July and August 2025 and then moved to a personal handset.

Palantir Foundry is the named AI platform the Met used; the force says the system supported investigators in locating the relevant files on corporate devices. That description is the force’s account of the technology’s role: the software fed into an internal monitoring process rather than acting as an autonomous decision-maker. The Met has characterised the work as lawful business monitoring supported by AI, and Project Galatasaray is the internal label for the week-long operation that produced the evidence.

Union and leadership reactions to AI-assisted monitoring

Representatives for rank-and-file officers warned about the uses of upgraded monitoring. Matt Cane, general secretary of the Metropolitan Police Federation, advised officers to be cautious about taking Met-issued devices home after the force upgraded its monitoring software and, the federation said, began using Palantir’s AI tools without informing staff that those tools were included.

By contrast, senior command presented the tool as a means to root out wrongdoing. Deputy Commissioner Matt Jukes told the London Assembly’s Police and Crime Committee that the force was not subjecting officers to extra workplace surveillance and that it had weighed reputational risks before introducing what he described as a divisive technology. Staff concern about undisclosed capability and Jukes’s assurance that use would be targeted underpin the internal tension now spilling into public debate.

Procurement, politics and the Palantir dispute

The policing controversy overlaps with an ongoing procurement fight. The London Mayor’s Office for Policing and Crime blocked the Met from signing a proposed two-year contract with Palantir, a move that the office described as a breach of procurement procedure in its public statement. Reporting tied that procurement dispute to a £50m deal the city had been considering, and Palantir has reacted by suing Mopac, alleging the block was unlawful.

The disagreement has become political: Labour MPs and trade unions have pressed for government contracts with Palantir to be ended, and former Labour deputy leader Tom Watson, who recently joined Palantir, publicly warned against what he called 'mob rule' in procurement. The procurement stand-off now affects other public contracts where Palantir holds work, including with national bodies identified by journalists.

Legal, ethical and operational consequences for the Met

Removing a senior volunteer leader and placing him on the College of Policing barred list is the immediate personnel consequence; it also raises questions about privacy and trust for staff who use employer devices. The force says the behaviour amounted to an abuse of trust, and commanders argue AI-assisted monitoring helped expose that behaviour, but unions and some politicians say the force must be clearer about what is monitored and when.

Operationally, the Met faces a trade-off: using automated tools to detect misconduct can accelerate investigations, yet it risks deterring officers from carrying devices or from using communication channels required for their duties. The procurement dispute and Palantir’s subsequent legal action mean the broader adoption of this class of monitoring remains contested at the governance and legal levels.

How the dispute could evolve

The bottom line

This case ties a specific misconduct finding to wider questions about AI and monitoring in policing. A senior volunteer officer was removed after investigators using Palantir Foundry identified two images copied on a work phone in July and August 2025; that personnel outcome sits alongside an active procurement dispute over a proposed two-year Palantir contract. The immediate issues are procedural and reputational: clearer governance over what monitoring is in place, how AI is used to surface leads and how procurement decisions are justified will shape whether the Met can reconcile effective investigatory tools with staff confidence and public accountability.

What to watch

• Watch for the outcome of Palantir’s lawsuit against the London Mayor’s Office for Policing and Crime; no date has been set.
• Watch for any formal procurement decision or resubmission by the Met concerning Palantir tooling; no date has been set.
• Watch for College of Policing updates on barred-list procedures in cases arising from internal monitoring; no date has been set.