Nelles fired, but still gets salary during appeal

Disgraced Cobourg Police officer Shawn Nelles is out of a job, but he will continue to receive his $69,000 salary until an appeal is heard regarding his unprofessional conduct.
Adjudicator Robert Fitches left no doubt about his disgust with Nelles.
"He has behaved in an abysmal fashion," he said. "He (Nelles) has demonstrated, through his actions, that he is quite capable of neglecting his duty, deceiving his superiors and bringing discredit upon himself and his police service on more than one occasion over a period of almost three years."
Nelles pleaded guilty to four charges: neglect of duty, deceit and two counts of discreditable conduct, in October 2005.
The scathing decision and his behaviour have left Nelles' life in shambles. He was suspended in June 2004 and has received a salary from the force since.
The Police Services Act hearing has been a very public event with lots of details being regularly published in local media, including graphic accounts of sex he had with a young 18-year old female.
The community and the Police Service Board chairman were shocked by the continuation of Nelles' salary. The local radio station played some listener comments, many condemning the situation. Boar chairman Bryan Baxter would not give detailed comments, saying the matter is still before the courts, but he did express his amazement the municipality would need to still pay Nelles.
While it is easy to get upset over the salary issue, laws are not made for specific cases, but for all instances. Nelles clearly admits to his misconduct and, in some people's opinion, should no longer be a police officer in Cobourg. (He will be lucky to every get a job in policing again after this stain on his record). Yet, the law was put in place to prevent harming innocent officers who have been mistreated by the system. Consider a case where an officer, who has been maligned with undeserved charges, who has a family and mortgage etc. The salary may be the only income. In a case of a miscarriage of justice, the continuation of a salary is fair, even during an appeal. That is the aim of the law.
Unfortunately, Nelles is exploiting this aspect. He has admitted to his misconduct, but he is failing to accept the full consequences of his actions. Certainly, the law provides this opportunity. And, his lawyer, Jonanne Mulcahy, is doing her job when she offers to carry on the appeal process.
It is time Nelles moved on, both literally and figuratively. He cannot expect to go back to work or be an officer in the community that does not respect him. Law enforcement is 90 per cent trust and respect. Without it, the only way to maintain order is through violence. Nelles should know this and realize his has lost this. It is time to move forward. He needs to heal and so does the community.
Meanwhile, critics of the salary issue should hesitate for a moment to consider their comments. While Nelles presents a possible extreme at one end of the scale, the law was meant to protect the opposite perspective. To change it could hurt innocent people and those are the ones who deserve the protection.