‘Gay’ policeman quits after hearing

Press, 18 October 1986, Page 9

‘Gay’ policeman quits after hearing

PA Wellington A homosexual policeman resigned yesterday after being cleared of disciplinary charges, saying the hierarchy had made it clear it did not want him.

The Wellington, constable, aged 20, admitted filing a false report in which he applied for a transfer to be with his “fiancee,” who was in fact his male lover.

A police disciplinary tribunal dismissed the charges yesterday on condition that he paid $5OO costs, including witnesses’ expenses.

The Police Department had asked the tribunal to sack the constable. The constable, who did not want to be named, said he resigned because he felt the police hierarchy would have made it difficult for him to continue working. . They had made it clear that they did not want him because he was homosexual, he said. “I felt that this (the acquittal) wasn’t going to be the end of the matter. I was disillusioned with the administration, with the things that they had said about me,” he said. He had wanted to be a police officer since he was 13. He had even studied criminology for a

year before applying to join the police at 19 because he believed that would help his prospects.

The constable admitted that he had filed a false report referring to his fiancee as “she”. “I knew if I had stated the facts that I would have no chance of a fair hearing. I also thought I would lose my job,” he said. "I felt bad about it, but I had no option.” The police had not asked him if he was homosexual when he joined. They had asked him if he had girlfriends and he had replied, “Nothing serious.”

“I didn’t know about their policy (of not recruiting homosexuals),” he said. “I wasn’t sure about my own sexuality then.”

He had applied for a transfer from Gisborne to Wellington so that he could be with the other man, whom he had met at police college. The relationship had since ended, he said.

The police had not explicitly said that they wanted him out because he was “gay”. But the administration had made it clear that it was its real attitude, he said. A letter from the police head of personnel, quoted by the constable’s submis-

sions to the tribunal, said: “The whole inquiry arose from your client’s (the constable’s) shortcoming in his work performance. On the information available to me, this seems to be due at least in part to the consequences of his homosexual relationship. “As you are no doubt aware, he is on probation under section 10 of the Police Act, 1958. In terms of section 10 (3), I will be giving consideration to whether or . not he should be discharged. “Shortly he will be asked for his comments. Two of the matters which will be relevant to that issue will be the effect on his work of his homosexual relationship and secondly, the consequences for the effective administration of the police because of his professed sexual preference.”

The constable said the reference to the effect on his efficiency was just an excuse. If the administration investigated any police officer, it would be able to find something that interfered with his or her efficiency. The administration had indicated to him that it wanted to interview him on another matter after the tribunal hearing. They had not said with what

they were going to charge him.

The constable said he had received a lot of support from his fellow officers in the lower ranks. They had visited him since he was suspended and had sent messages of support. He had been suspended without pay in August after admitting that he had made a false report and after making a written statement about his homosexual relationship.

After the intervention of the Police Association, however, his basic salary was restored during his suspension, he said.

The constable said that he was a little disappointed in the lack of response by the association. Aside from the assistance over pay, it had done nothing to help him, he said.

He was angry and disillusioned by the police administration’s actions. It claimed it was progressive and forward-looking, but had just thrown away an opportunity to show those qualities. “I can think of so many things that need their attention far more than my sexual preferences,” he said. To think of the manhours that have gone into investigating my background...”

The constable said he planned to return to university to study law. The constable’s lawyer, Mr Bruce Scott, said a false report on a strictly personal matter such as this would usually have only resulted in “a slap on the hand.” But he believed the homosexual issue had prompted the police to take it to the

stage of a formal hearing before a tribunal. The police had indicated they would ask the constable about a separate disciplinary matter. Mr Scott said this was a very minor matter and the constable had done nothing wrong at all. The police had not substantiated the charge, he said. He declined to give details about the matter.