The Hearing Officer did not simply accept the joint submission but went on in his decision to consider a number of the factors that may be mitigating or aggravating in deciding an appropriate penalty as set out in Krug v. Ottawa Police Service, 2003 CanLII 85816 (ON CPC). He considered the following factors: • Public interest • Seriousness of the misconduct • Remorse • Employment history • Ability to reform or rehabilitate the officer • Need for specific and general deterrence • Damage to the reputation of the service • Consistency in penalty • Effect of publicity
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.