G. Douglas Smith

The appellant police officer appealed convictions for neglect of duty and deceit arising from unauthorized CPIC queries, spending excessive time on a follow-up call with a personal acquaintance, and making false notebook entries.

The Ontario Civilian Police Commission admitted some fresh affidavit evidence but ultimately dismissed the appeal, finding that the Hearing Officer's conclusions were supported by clear and convincing evidence and that no manifest errors were made.

The County of Wellington applied to the Ontario Civilian Commission on Police Services under section 40 of the Police Services Act for consent to abolish the municipal police services of Fergus, Harriston, and Palmerston, transitioning to an integrated Ontario Provincial Police (OPP) contract.

The Commission reviewed the proposed staffing, facilities, communications, and equipment, concluding that the OPP arrangement would provide adequate and effective police services.

The Commission granted consent for the abolishment effective September 7, 1999, and ordered that any unresolved severance issues between the Board and the police associations proceed to arbitration if not settled within 45 days.

The appellant police officer appealed his convictions on two counts of neglect of duty and the resulting penalty of a reduction in rank for six months.

The convictions arose from his failure to conduct a proper investigation and failure to arrest a suspect for breach of recognizance during a domestic violence call.

The Ontario Civilian Police Commission dismissed the appeal, finding that the standard of proof is 'clear and convincing evidence' regardless of the penalty sought, and that the two counts did not violate the rule against multiple convictions.

The Commission upheld the penalty, noting the serious nature of the misconduct, the officer's prior disciplinary record, and his failure to acknowledge responsibility.

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, a police sergeant with 26 years of service, appealed a penalty of dismissal imposed after he pled guilty to seven counts of misconduct, including corrupt practice, deceit, and discreditable conduct.

The misconduct involved taking a shotgun and a knife from members of the public, failing to place them in the property system, and submitting false reports to cover up his actions.

The appellant argued that the hearing officer failed to properly consider medical evidence of his long-standing depression.

The Commission dismissed the appeal, finding that the hearing officer correctly weighed the medical evidence and that the appellant's actions constituted an absolute misuse of his position of trust, warranting dismissal.