A police training instructor who cut out the earrings of three female recruits with a pair of wire cutters today said he did the 'astonishing' act with their consent.

PC Martin Briggs fetched the tin snips, or secateurs, along with 40cm long bolt croppers after the trainee officers were unable to remove the jewellery ahead of a fitness test.

The officer said he had the young women lay their heads on a jumper on a desk while he cut their earrings out.

He denied losing his temper but said his approach to training was 'firm but fair.'

It has now been accepted that the officer did not use the bolt croppers on the women but instead cut their earrings out with the smaller snips.

The junior officers - PC Georgia Hedditch, PC Holly Law and PC Elizabeth Christie -  were left 'distressed and embarrassed' after their ordeal on April 17 last year, it is alleged.

PC Law was left with blood coming from her ear after the drastic act, a police disciplinary hearing has heard.

They all said they complied as they thought if they didn't do the test they would fail the course and damage their career prospects with Dorset Police.

PC Briggs is now facing a disciplinary hearing amid claims his actions breached police standards of behaviour and amounted to gross misconduct.

He admits to making a 'highly regrettable error of judgement' but denies behaving 'discreditably', stating he removed the jewellery with the students' consent.

A police colleague, PC Samuel Davies, also faces allegations of gross misconduct as he witnessed the treatment but failed to stop it or report it.

PC Briggs today said his actions on the day were based on an 'overriding responsibility to keep students safe.'

He said he was expected to enforce uniform standards and there was a risk of injury from wearing jewellery during the fitness tests.

He said: "My approach is direct, firm but fair, and not bullying.

"My primary responsibility is to keep students safe.

"I believe as trainers we are encouraged and expected to challenge any breaches of standards with uniform or other.

"There are numerous potential risks of someone running the bleep test with jewellery as they run in one metre wide lanes and flailing arms could catch piercings, or there is the risk of tripping over or falling while exhausted."

He denied 'losing his temper' and telling students they would be kicked off the course if they did not complete their test.

He said he never told them he would remove their earrings with bolt croppers as he knew it would be 'impossible' due to their size.

He said: "I was not losing my temper and not swearing.

"I told the entire group, men and women, that they needed to remove their watches, jewellery and Fitbits.

"I didn't think I was allowed to let them run with jewellery on.

"I asked one of the trainers if they (the students) had been given their uniform standards and was told they had.

"I said if they couldn't remove their jewellery they wouldn't be allowed to run the fitness test and if they couldn't run their fitness test they couldn't do their PST (personal safety training).

"I did not say 'you are out' or they would be kicked off the course. It is not in my power to remove them.

"I never said I would use bolt croppers to cut out their jewellery as I knew it's physically impossible to remove earrings with them because of their nature and make up.

"Their teeth are not close enough together to bite through such a small item as an earring.

PC Briggs said he used wire cutters to remove the student officers' earrings and that one of them thanked him afterwards.

He admitted bringing the bolt croppers into the office next to the sports hall at Dorset Police HQ but said he just left them on the desk and did not use them.

He told the hearing that he did not pressure the recruits and told them he could stop at any time if they were in pain or discomfort.

PC Briggs said: "They (the recruits) were sat in a chair and I asked them to place their head on a folded up jumper so their head was steady.

"I placed the teeth of the wire cutters around the bar or ring, using my fingers to prevent any contact between them and the ear.

"I explained that I could stop at any time.

"I assessed their body language and what they were saying to me, and there was no indication they were upset about the process, or didn't want me to do it.

"Afterwards, one of the student officers thanked me and apologised that I had to do it. No one seemed upset or bothered."

PC Briggs said he cut the earrings and the recruits took them out.

He denied causing seeping from PC Holly Law's ear.

Earlier, Mark Ley-Morgan, representing Dorset Police, said the three officers had 'honestly' believed that PC Briggs had used bolt cutters on them.

However, tests carried out yesterday (Tues) showed that it would have been impossible to use them to remove small stud earrings.

Mr Ley-Morgan said: "The appropriate authority's position is that the females concerned did believe bolt cutters were used.

"However, it would be my submission to you that they were brandished in such a way it was reasonable for them to believe that it was.

"But also (a witness) saw them being held up in a way that certainly gave the impression they were being used.

"I would suggest that none of them made anything up and that was their honest belief.

"It seems that they couldn't actually physically have been used, and we accept that it could not have been the case (that the bolt cutters were used).

"I think he wanted them to think that (he was using bolt cutters) for whatever reason."

He said it was the female officers 'honestly believed they had been used on them' and that by brandishing them PC Briggs may have wanted to give the impression he was going to use them on them.

In response, Guy Ladenburg, barrister for PC Davies, said: "They (the bolt cutters) weren't used.

"It has taken a very long time for that acceptance to emerge from the appropriate authority and you know how much of this investigation and safety assessment proceeded on the basis they were used."

The hearing continues.