Former Halifax cop loses appeal of voyeurism conviction - Action News
Home WebMail Tuesday, November 26, 2024, 11:48 AM | Calgary | -13.1°C | Regions Advertise Login | Our platform is in maintenance mode. Some URLs may not be available. |
Nova Scotia

Former Halifax cop loses appeal of voyeurism conviction

A former Halifax police officer has failed in his bid to have convictions for voyeurism and breach of trust thrown out.

George Edward Farmer caught peering into windows of Bedford motel

George Farmer in Halifax provincial court on Jan. 18, 2019. (CBC)

A former Halifax police officer has failed in his bid to have convictions for voyeurism and breach of trust thrown out.

In a decision released Tuesday, a three-member panel of the Nova Scotia Court of Appeal found the trial judge had made no reversible error in his decision to convict George Edward Farmer.

Farmer received a six-month conditional sentence, followed by probation. He is no longer a police officer.

Farmer was caught while on dutypeering into the windows of rooms at the Esquire Motel on the Bedford Highway in November and December2017.

Police had become concerned by Farmer's unexplained absences from his police cruiser and they set up an undercover operation to catch him. They stationed two officers with night vision goggles and video cameras at the rear of the motel. They also put a young, female RCMP officer in plain clothes in one of the rooms.

According to their evidence, the officers observed Farmer at the rear of the motel on a few occasions. They said he would unscrew the security lights at the back of the building, plunging the area into darkness before he would peer into windows.

On one occasion, the undercover officer made an anonymous complaint about a prowler outside her room. Farmer never acknowledged that he was in the area at the time. Another time, the officers observed Farmer getting two plastic chairs to stand on to look into a window that had its curtains partially closed.

Farmer did not deny he was at the motel, but he claimed he was acting in the public good because of reports of prostitution in the area.

"The appellant rationalized that his evening shift foot patrols were animated by his concerns about prostitution activities," Justice Duncan Beveridge said in writing for the three-member panel.

"However, at no time did he tell his supervisors or colleagues about his concerns or his foot patrols."