What is the test for determining whether a police officer's conduct was reprehensible or reprehensible?

The case of R v. Foran confirms that the court is not looking at whether the police officer’s conduct was reprehensible, but whether that conduct lead to a belief, upon which it could be objectively determined that the accused was justified in believing that the test would not be administered fairly.

Finally in R v. McCallum, the accused asserted that she was psychologically intimidated by the female police officer who she saw as impatient and overbearing. She offered a psychologist to explain why she may have felt that way due to a possible incident of sexual abuse by a female sometime in the past. The accused was not even aware that this may have happened, but according to the psychologist, the occurrence would explain her reaction and refusal to the female police officer. While the court was hesitant to accept the psychologist’s evidence, the court said even if that evidence was accepted, the test is an objective one and that the accused had not established an objective basis to justify the refusal.