A A

I do not find that he was acting on reasonable grounds but, to the contrary, he was acting in a manner prohibited by law, namely conducting an unreasonable search. - Judge Chris Manning

A provincial court judge found a Halifax Regional Police officer guilty on three counts on Friday for surreptitiously looking in windows of rooms at the Esquire Motel.

Const. George Farmer, 44, was convicted of voyeurism, trespassing at night and breach of trust for his actions in late November and early December of 2017.

In rendering his decision, Judge Chris Manning referenced the case’s agreed statement of facts, in which the defence did not dispute that Farmer on several occasions, while on night duty, went to the Esquire Motel, located on the Bedford Highway, left his HRP vehicle, approached several rooms and looked through the windows. He also disabled security lights by unscrewing the light bulbs and once ran into the nearby woods after peering inside a room.

He did this while ostensibly on his lunch break and did not notify dispatch that he was leaving his vehicle.

His activities were observed by other HRP officers, who put him under surveillance after his supervisor put in a complaint about suspicious activities.

They also put an undercover RCMP officer in one of the motel rooms, dressed in shorts and a tank top, and had her leave the curtains slightly open. Farmer was seen looking into her room eight times.

At one point, the surveillance team had the undercover officer call the HRP dispatch and report a prowler. The dispatchers called Farmer, as that area was within his duty range. Farmer was seen restoring the security light and then called dispatch back to say there were no suspicious persons at the motel.

Defence lawyer Joel Pink maintained Farmer was operating for the public good by checking to see if any women were being forced into underage prostitution or other criminal activities. And, in fact, Farmer did break up an altercation at the motel at one point.

But Manning did not buy that argument.

“These actions were not necessary or advantageous to religion or morality, to the administration of justice, the pursuit of science, literature or art or other objects of that nature,” Manning said.

Having found that the acts did not support the public good, he said he was satisfied that Crown prosecutor Sylvia Domaradzki met the burden of proving her case beyond a reasonable doubt.

Similarly, Manning did not believe the defence assertion that Farmer was conducting foot patrols on the grounds of the motel instead of trespassing and that he dashed into the woods to relieve an urgent need to urinate instead of attempting to avoid being caught.

Had the constable’s activities been limited to walking about the grounds and checking locks, that might have been sufficient, the judge said, but Farmer’s actions were clearly more than that.

“He was surreptitiously observing guests in their motel rooms,” Manning said, adding that he took measures to conceal his activities.

“I do not find that Const. Farmer was authorized by the law to look into windows of patrons of the Esquire at the time,” Manning said. “And I do not find that he was acting on reasonable grounds but, to the contrary, he was acting in a manner prohibited by law, namely conducting an unreasonable search into an area where an individual should expect to be able to enjoy a high expectation of privacy.”

On the breach of trust charge, Manning pointed out that the offences occurred while Farmer was on duty and that he was wearing his uniform at all times during the incidents.

“At the times that he was committing the offences where he was trespassing at night, he was clearly acting in connection with the duties of his office,” the judge said.

He also pointed out that while Farmer claimed that he was trying to determine if any crime such as underage prostitution were being committed, at no time did he track any evidence of any such activities or share his concerns with anyone else.

“His actions were of a nefarious nature and he clearly tried to conceal them at all times,” Manning said.

Pink said the defence will consider their options.

“We will study the decision of Judge Manning and we’ll decide where we go from here if we go anywhere,” he said outside court.

He did not say whether he saw any ground for appeal at this point.

“Time will tell,” Pink said.

Domaradzki did not offer any comment to media after the court session. Neither did Farmer

The parties will return to court on April 12 for sentencing.

RELATED: