The test supervisor said after reviewing the results of his tests "she had never seen so many red lines indicating mistakes". Greenslade's speed was negative 62 words per minute, and after one test he had made 106 mistakes.
In an email to a colleague she referred to Greenslade as "my applicant with dyslexia who will not be able to pass the typing test". She said he had "failed dramatically".
She also said Greenslade "has typed what he sees". It was Greenslade's evidence he had never said that.
The colleague contacted another co-worker at Police Psychology Services and asked whether it would be appropriate to make an exception for Greenslade so he could still be considered for a position with Police.
But Inspector Ian Saunders, then senior psychologist for Police, said Greenslade's performance could indicate "highly relevant cognitive issues, related to his dyslexia" and could be a problem when it came to recording evidence and giving reliable evidence in court, among other things.
In May 2016, Greenslade was informed his application to join the police was declined because he would be unable to succeed at the typing test due to his dyslexia and cognitive ability.
One year later, Greenslade was assessed by an educational psychologist and registered teacher who had him do a dictated typing test. He achieved 46 words per minute with only two errors.
His counsel in the appeal to the tribunal argued the typing test was outdated, did not account for the use of technology among police and, according to an independent review, it was of "uncertain reliability and validity".
Greenslade also claimed it was wrong for Police to assume he failed due to his dyslexia, and that he could have passed the test but wasn't given further opportunities due to this assumption. He said he failed because he did not practice.
The tribunal dismissed Greenslade's claim, and he then appealed the decision to the High Court at Wellington.
In a judgement released late last month, Justice Cooke declined an application for Greenslade to bring new evidence to the appeal.
He said Greenslade now wanted to include evidence relating to training that may or may not have been available to him if he had attained a spot in Police College. Documents relating to training were included in the evidence.
But Justice Cooke said the evidence was not fresh as Greenslade could have obtained the documentation for the tribunal hearing if he had asked for it.
"The appellant did not contend before the Tribunal that he had a typing deficiency as a result of his dyslexia, and that this deficiency could have been remedied by training made available after acceptance into the college. Yet this is the argument that the appellant now wishes to include as part of the appeal by reference to the additional evidence," Justice Cooke said in the High Court judgement.
The documents referred to also contained only oblique references to training at college, and none referred to typing training.
"There is reference to computer training, and to training that may be needed by particular
candidates, but little more than that."
The application to adduce more evidence was dismissed. The full appeal is yet to be heard in court.
