E. Kelly Culin

The appellant, a police officer, appealed a conviction for discreditable conduct and the resulting penalty of dismissal.

The conviction stemmed from allegations that the appellant engaged in an inappropriate relationship and sexual harassment with a 16-year-old girl while off duty.

The Ontario Civilian Police Commission upheld the Hearing Officer's findings of credibility, concluding that the standard of clear and convincing evidence was met.

The Commission also upheld the penalty of dismissal, finding it consistent with prior cases involving similar off-duty misconduct.

The appellant police officer appealed a conviction for discreditable conduct and the resulting penalty of dismissal.

The conviction stemmed from allegations of off-duty sexual harassment and an inappropriate relationship with a 16-year-old girl.

The Commission dismissed the appeal, finding that the hearing process was fair, the Hearing Officer applied the correct 'clear and convincing evidence' standard of proof, and the credibility findings were supported by the evidence.

The penalty of dismissal was upheld as appropriate given the seriousness of the misconduct, the officer's extensive prior disciplinary record, and the damage to the reputation of the police service.

The appellant police officer appealed a conviction for discreditable conduct and the resulting penalty of dismissal.

The conviction stemmed from allegations of an inappropriate off-duty relationship and sexual harassment involving a 16-year-old girl.

The appellant argued he was denied natural justice, that the hearing officer applied the wrong burden of proof, and that the penalty was excessive.

The Ontario Civilian Police Commission dismissed the appeal, finding that the hearing officer correctly applied the 'clear and convincing evidence' standard, made reasonable credibility assessments, and imposed a penalty consistent with similar cases of serious misconduct.

The appellant, a police officer, appealed a conviction for discreditable conduct and the resulting penalty of dismissal or resignation.

The conviction stemmed from allegations that the appellant engaged in an inappropriate relationship and sexual harassment involving a 16-year-old girl while off duty.

The appellant argued he was denied natural justice, that the Hearing Officer misapplied the burden of proof, and that the penalty was excessive.

The Ontario Civilian Commission on Police Services dismissed the appeal, finding that the Hearing Officer correctly applied the 'clear and convincing evidence' standard, made reasonable findings of credibility, and imposed an appropriate penalty given the seriousness of the conduct and the appellant's extensive prior disciplinary record.