Town of Geneva police officer charged with misconduct
GENEVA TOWNSHIP — A former town police sergeant will be in Walworth County Court on Monday on two felony charges of misconduct in public office accusing him of mishandling evidence and reports.
Robert B. Haase, 42, of 155 N. Cranberry St., Elkhorn, faces up to seven years in prison and a $20,000 fine if convicted.
Haase remains on paid administrative leave from the police department pending an investigation.
According to the criminal complaint:
Haase is accused of mishandling evidence in an April 2008 sexual assault case and other cases. He is suspected of breaking department policy.
Haase didn’t document or secure evidence taken in the sexual assault case, including photos and underwear. He also failed to give prosecutors or defense attorneys evidence such as recorded interviews.
Haase also collected pieces of evidence but listed them on an evidence sheet as being collected on a different date.
In the area around Haase’s desk, he had 86 pieces of evidence from various cases, including knives, drug paraphernalia, drugs and other items. The evidence was unsecured.
The department’s policy states that investigators should mark, package and store evidence in a secure room.
Police Chief Ed Gritzner in August also filed two complaints against Haase.
Gritzner accused Haase of frequently meeting with a town court clerk, including an unfounded complaint the two had sexual contact in a town squad car while he was on duty.
Gritzner’s attorney argued Haase violated department policy by having a relationship with the clerk and spending an “inordinate amount of time” texting and meeting during work hours.
Haase was demoted in November for engaging in conduct unbecoming an officer and mishandling evidence. He was suspended for 90 days and permitted to return as a patrolman with a lower salary.
Haase’s attorney has argued Haase did not compromise any cases or investigations by keeping evidence at his desk.
Haase has denied mishandling evidence.
He has been with the Town of Geneva Police Department since 2001.
May 2, 2010 at 10:52 a.m.
Suggest removal
hmmmm...
Apr 24, 2010 at 2:33 p.m.
Suggest removal
to sandman...the village of darien in in fact in walworth county so nice try on that one. the "evidential lawn mower" incident? nice try on that one as well, that was the town of linn!
Apr 24, 2010 at 1:44 p.m.
Suggest removal
I'd be willing to bet that if people were fired for having "affairs" (there is no proof this relationship was sexual) on the job - a WHOLE lotta people would not have a job right now. And, when a police department finds out about an affair - is it necessary to make it public knowledge? Isn't this what should be discussed in a closed session?
As far as the lawnmower - that was a different police department I believe! You have to keep the correct scandals in the right townships!
Apr 24, 2010 at 1:29 p.m.
Suggest removal
It's appears that the Town of Geneva is the Walworth County's present Town of Beloit, which is Rock County's Village of Darien!
These small town police agencies seem to have some real lack of leadership and check-and-balances at the top that often festers in their operations and officers.
PS Can Geneva's Boss Gritzner still get me a good deal on and "Evidential"-brand lawnmower?
Apr 24, 2010 at noon
Suggest removal
wow
Apr 24, 2010 at 11:37 a.m.
Suggest removal
I don't know the facts of this case, but wouldn't a married officer having a sexual relationship with a clerk qualify as conduct unbecoming of an officer? At the least it's an adultrous affair, which is still illegal (on the books). At most, it's inflicting undue pain, embarassment and emotional injury on his wife and family. Divorce her first and then "carry on"....not the other way around.
Apr 24, 2010 at 11:05 a.m.
Suggest removal
Another taxpayer funded PAID VACATION WHY do these people have this in their contracts? I bet every working taxpayer would like this kind of perk! Example; imagine going in to work and the boss says something that ticks you off so you tell him to shove it and he tells you to go home with pay until they decide your fate, SWEET.
Apr 24, 2010 at 10:33 a.m.
Suggest removal
I cannot believe this is still an issue. Does anyone want to discuss the amount of money that has been spent on this "case." First, if the policeman was acting in a manner that was unbecoming to a police officer, shouldn't the police chief or the police committee have done something about this long ago?
As someone who knows quite a lot about this case, I know that the township simply wanted to get rid of the police officer. Because he wouldn't resign, they have found ways in which to charge him. He is married and has a family; must this be done to this family?
If his conduct has been less than professional as a police officer, than that should have been addressed as the issues were occuring. (This is a very small police office - no one noticed that the items were sitting around his desk before this?)
The community and the taxpayers have been duped by politics within the township itself. Maybe someone should look into the behavior of the police chief himself? I believe all charges against this officer should be dropped for the good of the community, to save money, and to let all those involved with this case get on with their lives.
I believe the officer should have a second chance to resign, all charges should be dropped, and let's stop targeting individuals because a few elected officials have the power to do so.
Apr 24, 2010 at 9:02 a.m.
Suggest removal
Sounds to me like this guy was overworked with an overwhelming caseload. Did anyone give him any help? Where was the guidance from the command staff?
Apr 23, 2010 at 8:48 p.m.
Suggest removal
That also defines a number of other officers in Beloit, Walworth and Rock county.
Apr 23, 2010 at 4:53 p.m.
Suggest removal
He's also been a power abusing meathead since 2001.
Before you post a comment, consider this:
Note: GazetteXtra.com does not condone or review every comment. Read more in our User Policy AgreementPost Comment
Commenting requires registration.