Bruce Robertson

The appellant appealed a Hearing Officer's decision finding the respondent police officer not guilty of discreditable conduct.

The Commission previously revoked the finding and substituted a determination of guilt, finding the respondent engaged in vexatious behaviour by repeatedly contacting the appellant after their relationship ended, despite warnings from superior officers.

In this penalty decision, the Commission considered the respondent's lengthy positive work record and the seriousness of the misconduct.

The Commission ordered that the respondent be reprimanded and lose 25 hours of pay, which cannot be satisfied by accumulated credits.

The appellant appealed a hearing officer's decision finding the respondent police officer not guilty of discreditable conduct.

The Commission previously revoked that finding and substituted a determination of guilt, finding the respondent engaged in a vexatious course of conduct by repeatedly contacting the appellant after their relationship ended, despite warnings from superiors.

In this penalty decision, the Commission weighed the respondent's lengthy positive work record against the seriousness of the misconduct.

The Commission ordered that the respondent be reprimanded and lose 25 hours of pay, which cannot be satisfied by applying accumulated credits.

The appellant appealed a hearing officer's decision finding the respondent police officer not guilty of discreditable conduct.

The Commission previously revoked that finding and substituted a determination of guilt, finding the respondent engaged in a vexatious course of conduct by repeatedly contacting the appellant after their relationship ended, including while on duty and in uniform.

In this penalty decision, the Commission weighed the respondent's 28-year unblemished record against the seriousness of the misconduct.

The Commission ordered that the respondent be reprimanded and lose 25 hours of pay, which cannot be satisfied by applying accumulated credits.

The appellant appealed a Hearing Officer's decision finding the respondent police officer not guilty of discreditable conduct.

The respondent had engaged in a course of unwanted contact with the appellant following the end of their relationship, including attending her workplace and having a child deliver a note to her home while he was on duty.

The Commission found that the Hearing Officer erred by applying subjective elements to the objective test for discreditable conduct.

The Commission revoked the finding of not guilty and substituted a conviction for discreditable conduct.

The appellant appealed a Hearing Officer's decision finding the respondent police officer not guilty of discreditable conduct.

The respondent had engaged in a course of unwanted contact with the appellant following the end of their relationship, including attending her workplace while on duty and having a child deliver a letter to her home.

The Commission found the Hearing Officer erred by applying subjective elements, such as the appellant's state of mind and the opinions of superior officers, rather than the objective test of whether the conduct would likely discredit the police service.

The Commission revoked the not guilty finding and substituted a conviction for discreditable conduct.

The appellant appealed a Hearing Officer's decision finding the respondent police officer not guilty of discreditable conduct.

The respondent had engaged in a course of unwanted contact with the appellant following the end of their relationship, including attending her workplace and home while on duty and in uniform, despite being counseled by superior officers to stay away.

The Commission denied a motion to introduce fresh evidence.

On the merits, the Commission found the Hearing Officer erred by applying subjective elements to the test for discreditable conduct.

Applying the objective standard of the reasonable expectations of the community, the Commission revoked the finding of not guilty and substituted a conviction for discreditable conduct.