Benson Lau

The appellant police officer appealed a disciplinary penalty of reduction in rank from first-class to fourth-class constable for one year, imposed after he pled guilty to discreditable conduct stemming from a criminal conviction for uttering a death threat.

The Ontario Civilian Police Commission allowed the appeal, finding that the Hearing Officer erred in principle by failing to treat the guilty plea as a mitigating factor and by treating the officer's defence strategy at his criminal trial as an aggravating factor.

The Commission also found the penalty was harsh and excessive given the officer's unblemished employment record and the principle of rehabilitation.

The penalty was varied to a reduction in rank to second-class constable for one year.

The respondent brought a motion to quash the appellant's appeal of his termination from employment as a police cadet.

The Commission held that a police cadet is not a 'police officer' within the meaning of the Police Services Act and therefore has no right of appeal under Part V. Furthermore, the Commission found it had no statutory authority to extend the 30-day time limit for filing an appeal, and that even if the appellant were a probationary police officer, his termination would be governed by section 44(3) without a right of appeal under Part V. The motion was allowed and the appeal was quashed.

The appellant police officer appealed a conviction for discreditable conduct and the resulting penalty of forfeiture of 15 days off.

The conviction arose from a telephone conversation in which the appellant used racially offensive language.

The Commission upheld the Hearing Officer's credibility findings, concluding they were not void of evidentiary foundation.

The Commission also upheld the penalty, finding it was within the appropriate range for serious misconduct involving racial slurs, despite the appellant's exemplary prior record.