Now please correct me here, I thought you could only groom someone under 16 years and a child is under 18 years but this was a 19 year old, vulnerable, teenager.
But again here there are the muddy waters of the person saying there were sexual advances and the cop saying there were not.
Grooming and teenager are just headline grabbing really, let's pep it up a bit when I'm sure the police officer more than likely did like the girl but maybe the girl found it a bit much. Anyway link below .

www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.independent.c...-a8959876.html%3famp

I agree with you on the use of "grooming". It doesn't really fit if the girl was 19, though it might be said that the policewoman tried to manipulate her. I find it hard to believe that the policewoman didn't make sexual advances, given the nature of the messages quoted and her invitation to the girl to spend the night.

Makes you wonder why she went to the flat.

"Grooming". here is the "vulnerability" of the subject. That could mean many things...from mental capacity to victim of abuse. Put another way, is it fine for someone who has power rather than consent with another to fuck them?