David G. Stewart

The appellant police officer appealed the penalty of resignation or summary dismissal imposed after he pleaded guilty to discreditable conduct for driving under the influence of alcohol.

The appellant argued the penalty was excessive and failed to account for his alcoholism, rehabilitation efforts, and unblemished record.

The Ontario Civilian Police Commission dismissed the appeal, finding that despite the Force's support and counselling, the appellant's deliberate preparations for a drinking spree while en route to an alcohol clinic demonstrated a lack of intent to reform, justifying the severe penalty.

The appellant, a police constable, appealed his conviction and sentence for insubordination under the Police Act.

He had been charged for leaving his residence without permission while off duty due to illness, contrary to Regulation 4.26.4.

The appellant argued that the regulation only applied during hours he would have been on duty, and since his scheduled shift had ended, he was not in breach.

The Commission found that the regulation was penal in nature and must be strictly interpreted.

Given the ambiguity of the regulation regarding off-duty hours, the Commission resolved the doubt in the appellant's favour, concluding he was not in breach.

The appeal was allowed and the conviction quashed.

The appellant, an off-duty police officer, appealed the penalty of forfeiture of five days' pay following a conviction for discreditable conduct.

The charge arose from an altercation involving the appellant, two other off-duty officers, and a civilian, which later escalated to involve members of the local police force.

The Commission found no error in the trial officer's assessment of the evidence or the penalty imposed, and dismissed the appeal.

The appellant, a police officer with 31 years of service, appealed his demotion from Staff Sergeant to Sergeant after being found unfit for duty due to alcohol consumption.

The Ontario Civilian Police Commission dismissed his appeal against conviction, rejecting arguments under section 11(d) of the Charter.

However, considering his prior good service, his efforts at rehabilitation through Alcoholics Anonymous, and the financial penalties already suffered, the Commission varied the sentence.

The appellant was reinstated to the rank of Staff Sergeant without the requirement to rewrite qualifying examinations.

The appellant police officer appealed his conviction and penalty of dismissal from the force for discreditable conduct.

The charge arose from an off-duty incident where the appellant, while intoxicated and bearing a black eye, attempted to cash a post-dated police cheque at a bank, used profanity when refused, and attempted to rip up the cheque.

The Ontario Civilian Police Commission found no error in the original hearing or the subsequent appeal to the Board of Commissioners of Police.

Given the incident and the appellant's long list of previous offences, the Commission affirmed the conviction and the penalty of dismissal.

The appellant, a police constable, appealed her conviction for neglect of duty after a prisoner escaped from her custody.

The appellant was one of three officers at the scene of an arrest where four individuals were taken into custody.

While the prisoners were outside, one escaped into the bush.

The appellant, who was closest to the escaping prisoner, failed to immediately pursue him or notify another officer who was leaving the scene.

The Ontario Civilian Police Commission found that the escape of a secured prisoner raised a reasonable assumption of carelessness, compounded by the appellant's failure to seek assistance.

The appeal was dismissed, and the conviction and penalty of an admonishment were confirmed.

The appellant police constable appealed his conviction and penalty for Neglect of Duty after failing to respond to a hold-up alarm while getting a haircut.

The appeal against conviction was abandoned on consent.

The Commission altered the penalty to a reduction in rank from First Class to Second Class Constable for a period of six months, with discretion for the Chief of Police to review the penalty after three months.