Rendered from the court's authenticated repository
Searchable full text
3,212 characters extracted
—
ADMINISTRATIVE COURT
State of Ridgeway
IN RE
salvus_baguette
Respondent
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING REPORT
REPORT ON ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING
HEARING SUMMARY
Agency: Ridgeway County Sheriff’s Office
Presiding Judge: Eagleeye785
Dept. Command: Undersheriff Dino_Raf
Impaneled Officers: Sergeant TaxesArentAwesome
Deputy d_reamily
Date: 06/04/2022
Time 23:55PM BST
SUMMARY OF ALLEGATIONS
OFFENSE NAME OFFENSE CITATION OFFENSE SRC PENALTY
Desertion RCSO Pun. Code § 4.08 DEPT POLICY TERMINATION
DISHONOURABLE
DISCHARGE
Intentional Refusal to
Abbide by Contractual
Obligation
RCSO Pun. Code § 4.09 DEPT POLICY TERMINATION
DISHONOURABLE
DISCHARGE
FINDINGS OF FACT
(TO BE COMPLETED BY THE IMPANELED OFFICERS)
1) RCSO Pun. RCSO Pun. Code § 4.09 requires that all employees must notify a
supervisor of their intention to resign. The same provision lists a punishment of
dishonourable discharge pursuant to the agency’s standards.
2) On May 25th, the employee left the agency without proper notification with the
department.
3) RCSO Pun. Code § 4.09 requires that all employees abide by their contractual obligation
of which they agreed to at the start of their employment. The same provision lists a
punishment of dishonourable discharge pursuant to the agency’s standards.
4) On May 25th, the employee left the agency in a manner to avoid complying with their
search agreement, a contractual obligation between the employee and the agency.
FINDINGS OF LAW AND POLICY
(TO BE COMPLETED BY THE ADMINISTRATIVE COURT JUDGE)
1) If the tribunal, or the court through the aforementioned pleading of facts, finds a wanton
disregard for policy (in regards to departmental activity policy), then the tribunal shall be
permitted to recommend a punishment. If no finding of wanton disregard is found then
the petitioner shall be fully and forever exonerated with no punishment.
2) It is a violation of RCSO Departmental policy to leave the department without proper
notification to the department.
3) It is a violation of RCSO Departmental policy to leave the department without complying
with the contractual obligation of a search - per agreement when hired.
4) If the tribunal finds that the subject conducted such intentionally, or by negligence, then
Administrative Procedures Act 1.3 (b)(i) shall be justified and the tribunal may
recommend relevant punishment for the subject of this administrative hearing.
RECOMMENDATIONS
1) Dishonorable discharge of the petitioner from Palmer Police Department.
2) Termination of the individual from Palmer Police Department.
CERTIFICATION
We, the tribunal, duly impaneled, do hereby certify the findings of this hearing, and have
forthwith put our recommendations as part of this report. These findings are findings of our own,
and purely our own without any outside interference or coercion. We make this recommendation
in good faith, under pains and penalties of perjury, and that it is not the result of bias, prejudice,
or other unlawful influence on our own judgment.
/s/ TaxesArentAwesome
IMPANELED OFFICER ONE
/s/ d_reamily
IMPANELED OFFICER TWO
/s/ Eagleeye785
ADMINISTRATIVE COURT JUDGE
APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE
A) https://gyazo.com/d92498437cdbafcd6361c72d4df0ccc1
Document record
File size
66.9 KB
Uploaded
May 28, 2022 12:00 PM
Filed
May 28, 2022 12:00 PM
Filing code
ADMINISTRATIVE_APPLICATION
Uploaded by
salvusbaguette
Notes
Ruling_RSC-AH-394_1855-060422.pdf — archived from the Trello docket (https://trello.com/c/gcUdZYs4)
