Hearing to decide if Hamilton police officer banned from carrying gun can keep his job

A Hamilton police officer barred from carrying a gun for five years after two incidents involving his service weapon is fighting to keep a job with the force while he waits out the weapons ban. 

At a Police Services Act hearing Thursday, the Hamilton Police Association (HPA) lawyer defending Const. Brandon Terdik said the officer, who has pleaded guilty of weapons offences in both criminal and police act proceedings, could still be of use to a force facing administrative staffing challenges.

"I will ask… that you permit him to continue in his employment as a police officer," said K.C. Wysynski, general counsel for the HPA, in the online hearing. "If permitted to continue as a police officer, what would or could that look like?"

Terdik was charged with pointing a firearm and careless use of a firearm in October 2021 after he pointed his gun at a fellow officer while on duty. The investigation that ensued revealed another, previous incident where he "used his service firearm in a careless manner," according to a media release from police shared in November of that year, and resulted in another charge of careless use of a firearm.

He pleaded guilty to those charges in Ontario court last year, and guilty of discreditable conduct charges under the police act earlier this year, according to the Hamilton Spectator.

Terdik wore a dress shirt to Thursday's proceedings. He had short dark hair and a short beard.

The purpose of Thursday's appearance was to determine whether Terdik's defence lawyer could enter documents that showed there were numerous available jobs on the force that could be done without a gun. Wysynski referenced an affidavit from HPA president Jaimi Bannon, several staffing reports and internal emails as among the documents.

Prosecutor Jessica Barrow argued that the staffing challenges faced by Hamilton police were not the purview of hearing officer Greg Walton, a retired member of the Ontario Provincial Police.

"That would suggest the conduct of our officers should be on a sliding scale based on the staffing needs of that time," she said, something Wysynski disputed.

Barrow said the key issue at hand should be whether someone such as Const. Terdik, who made multiple, significant errors in judgment, was an appropriate police-force employee.

"Do the individual characteristics of this officer continue to align with those of a sworn police officer?" Barrow asked the hearing.

Ottawa lawyer Joël Dubois, who has worked for multiple police services, previously told CBC News that tribunals see charges that contradict an officer's duty to uphold the law as particularly serious. But, when a tribunal is considering dismissal, it asks whether an officer is still useful to the service and the public, Dubois added.

"The analysis is whether or not, taking into consideration all of the sentencing factors … that police officer can still be, if you will, quote-unquote useful," Dubois said. 

In Terdik's case, Walton said he would decide on whether to allow the affidavit within a couple days.