A police officer charged with discreditable misconduct earlier this year must forfeit 90 hours as punishment, ruled a disciplinary hearing officer.
Const. Robert Rheaume is required to work an additional 90 hours in addition to his regularly scheduled hours, in consultation and with the approval of his divisional commander, said hearing officer Greg Walton. These hours must be worked within 12 months of this decision or commencing upon Rheaume’s return to work.
However, Rheaume was suspended from duty in May 2018. He was found guilty of the discreditable conduct early this year based on clear and convincing evidence, Walton wrote in his disposition. His hearing took place Jan. 15.
“After weighing all aggravating and mitigating factors, I find a forfeiture of 90 hours to be a fitting sanction,” Walton said. “I do not find that the seriousness of misconduct is at the extreme end of the spectrum and a 12-month demotion is not warranted. Constable Rheaume’s intent was to damage the reputation of his employer by making commentary which also disparaged the reputation of co-workers.”
Prosecutor David Migicovsky was seeking a demotion in rank from first-class constable for a term of 12 months. Rheaume's defence lawyer, Peter Brauti, was seeking a 40-hour forfeiture.
Rheaume is being punished for comments he made on March 24, 2017 on an article was about the annual Sunshine list. In the comment thread under that article, he highlights the salary of the police service CAO Sharon Baiden, whose salary he said increased from $130,000 to $205,000 in four years.
“The year former (police) chief Frank Elsner left, she got a $48,000 raise. Sudbury taxpayers should be asking council how that happened,” he said in his post, according to the statement of facts.
Then, on March 28, he posted another comment on Facebook critical of raises given to higher-ups at Greater Sudbury Police Service.
“There are a handful of them that got extremely hefty raises; your taxes and mine going up because of the police service board's approval.”
He called out several members of the police service in his post by name, all women, some of whom received raises of more than $30,000 over a one-year period, asking “How do you f***ing justify that?”
Rheaume submitted a letter of apology on May 6. In that letter, Rheaume writes he felt strongly at the time his comments were protected political speech, but that he respects the hearing officer's decision and will abide by it going forward.
Here is his letter in full:
“To whom it may concern,
On March 24, 2018 and March 28, 2018, I posted comments online regarding the salaries of several of my colleagues at the Greater Sudbury Police Service.
While I felt strongly at the time that my comments were protected political speech, I respect the Hearing Officer’s decision to the contrary and will abide by it going forward.
It was never my intention to damage the reputation of the GSPS or any of the individuals named in posts. If that occurred I am truly sorry.
As my employment record shows, I care deeply about the GSPS and the community that we serve. I have worked diligently for 18 years in the pursuit of bettering that community and establishing vital connections between the Service and the public.
I regret that my conduct may have jeopardized all those years of work or damaged those connections in any way. The consequences of my actions have been an intensely embarrassing experience for me and my family. However, it is an experience that I have grown from.
I can honestly say that I have learned a great deal from the experience. I have a better understanding of the limits of political speech, and I am now acutely aware of the restrictions placed on officer’s activity on social media.
I hope you will accept my heartfelt apologies for my actions and the impact they have had on everyone involved.”
Walton said the letter holds little weight in his decision. He calls the letter a “feeble effort” to apologize for several reasons.
First, it's addressed “To whom it may concern” and not the Greater Sudbury Police Service, the public or the people named in his Rheaume's posts, leaving it unclear as to who was his intended audience.
Furthermore, Walton said he received no information suggesting Rheaume apologized in person or in writing directly to the co-workers he mentions in his posts. Rheaume doesn't even acknowledge the damaged reputation he caused GSPS, stating in his letter that he was sorry “if that occurred.”
“I accept the letter of apology, but I question the sincerity of it,” Walton writes. “I do not accept Constable Rheaume appreciates the gravity of his actions.”
Rheaume's second of three disciplinary hearing took place last week. At issue is the GoFundMe page he created to help fund his legal fees, but on that page, he makes comments critical of both the Greater Sudbury Police Service, as well as Chief Paul Pedersen and other members of the service. For that story, click here.
Following the almost six-hour long meeting, Brauti said Rheaume intends to appeal the punishment; however, that was before he knew what the punishment was.
Rheaume will appear before another disciplinary hearing on Aug. 15 to face a charge of breach of confidence on an unrelated matter.
To read the full decision on Rheaume's punishment, click here.
