GAMING CONTROL ACT 1992
In the Matter of: JOHN CARLINI 1190 North Service Road Windsor, Ontario N8W 5H7
Registration Number: 17943
Notice of Order: Immediate Suspension Dated November 29, 2006.
Presiding Board Member: Alex McCauley, Member
Counsel for the Registrar: Ed Wren
Counsel for the Registrant: Edward Posliff
Hearing: Holiday Inn Select 1855 Huron Church Rd. Windsor, Ontario February 13, 2007.
Attendance: Detective Constable Sam Amormino, O.P.P., for the Registrar Donald Bourgeois, AGCO
Exhibits: #1 - Criminal Information re: Criminal charge against Giovanni Carlini
Case Law: Re: Tot [1994] O.C.R.A.T.D. No. 113 (QL) David Grunberg (1990) 26 CRAT 446
The Board of the Alcohol & Gaming Commission of Ontario (“AGCO”) held a hearing on February 13, 2007 pursuant to a Notice of Proposed Order of the Registrar dated November 29, 2006 to Immediately Suspend the Registration of John Carlini, 1190 North Service Road, Windsor, Ontario, N8W 5H7, registration number 17943.
Preliminary Matters
Both counsel provided brief opening statements.
Evidence
Detective/Constable Sam Amormino advised that he is a member of the Ontario Provincial Police, assigned to the Windsor Casino. He stated that Windsor police attended at the Casino regarding Mr. John Carlini. Detectives Belanger and Gervais wanted to speak to Mr. Carlini in respect of an allegation that he had committed the offence of “Communicated with a person he believed to be under the age of 14 years by means of a computer system for a sexual purpose within the meaning of section 343.1(2) Criminal Code of Canada.” Mr. Carlini was charged under section 172.1(1) Criminal Code of Canada for computer sex crime. He was released on his own undertaking, with a number of conditions.
Mr. Carlini is alleged, by use of a web cam, to have sent nude photos of his genitals to a person whom he believed was a female under the age of 14 years. In fact, he sent the photos to a police sting operation of which the Windsor detectives were a part of.
The charging of Mr. Carlini was the subject of a press conference of the Windsor City Police.
The information received by Det./Cst. Amormino was forwarded via a report through the Ontario Provincial Police chain of command to the AGCO where the matter was referred to the Registrar.
The Registrar ordered the immediate suspension of the registration of John Carlini pursuant to Subsection 14(1) of the Gaming Control Act, for the reason that the Registrar considered it to be necessary in the public interest.
Cross Examination
Det./Cst. Amormino stated that he was sent to Mr. Carlini’s residence to seize his Gaming registration. While there, and in conversation with Mr. Carlini, Det./Cst. Amormino advised Mr. Carlini that, in his opinion, the charges faced by Mr. Carlini had nothing to do with a breach of trust or integrity.
Don Bourgeois
Don Bourgeois is the Deputy Registrar of the AGCO. He stated that at the time the Carlini matter came to his attention, he was director of licensing and registration. He took charge of the matter.
He directed that an order for immediate suspension be drafted after he had reviewed the reports around the incident. He signed off on the order and it was forwarded to Jean Major, the Registrar, who signed the official order of suspension.
Mr. Bourgeois, in his view, felt the immediate suspension was necessary in order to protect the integrity and public confidence in the gaming industry, an industry which is extremely sensitive to any perception of dishonesty or unethical behavior. The industry relies on the confidence of the public.
He stated that certain activities, more than others, can impact on negative public perception. The public is very sensitive to matters of sexual misconduct involving children. The fact that the offence occurred in a place other than the Casino is not a factor. The alleged misconduct is what is of concern.
Mr. Bourgeois pointed out that the Registrar has not concluded that Mr. Carlini is guilty of any offence and is clearly waiting for further information. He said that that is why there has been no action on the part of the Registrar to permanently move to revoke the registration of Mr. Carlini. He reiterated that the public has to have confidence in the gaming industry.
Cross examination by Registrant’s Counsel
Cross examination by Mr. Posliff dealt with the terms of release that Mr. Carlini was under and how that did not impact on his ability to work in the casino.
Mr. Bourgeois reiterated that his decision was based on the information he had before him and his experience as a regulator in the gaming industry.
Submissions
Registrar’s Counsel
In submissions, Mr. Wren pointed out that the Registrar is not restricted on what conduct it can review. It is not dependant on convictions in matters of law. The focus of the Registrar in determining matters of conduct pursuant to the Act is not narrowly focused. The Registrar has broad powers of review of conduct in matters which may relate to public confidence.
Perception of the public is clearly a factor, and the public are very concerned when there are serious allegations involving youth who are viewed as vulnerable members of society. The regulatory responsibility of the Registrar is not hinged on the criminal process.
Mr. Wren offered up 2 cases for review: David Grunberg: (1990) 26 CRAT 446 and Steven Michael Tot (Re: Tot [1994] O.C.R.A.T.D. No. 113). These cases were public interest matters where the principals were denied registration based on past conduct.
Mr. Wren asked the Board to maintain the order of suspension until the conclusion of the criminal matter of Mr. Carlini.
Registrant’s Counsel
Mr. Posliff stated in his submission that Mr. Carlini has never been found guilty of any offence. Mr. Carlini has been suspended for being charged, not his conduct. Mr. Posliff referred to the presumption of innocence afforded accused persons before the courts and that this presumption was absent here. Mr. Posliff pointed to the evidence of Det./Cst. Amormino when he stated that Mr. Carlini’s alleged offence was not a breach of honesty or integrity. His opinion should have equal weight as Mr. Bourgeois’. The charge against Mr. Carlini and the opinion of Mr. Bourgeois are not sufficient to deprive his client of his livelihood.
Decision and Order
The Board is to decide, based on the evidence heard, if it is in the public interest to continue the suspension of Mr. Carlini.
The authority for the Registrar to impose an immediate suspension is clear within Subsection 14(1) of the Gaming Control Act in order to protect the public interest. In order for the section to become operative the Registrar must have REASONABLE grounds to believe the past actions of the registrant will not be in the public interest, as outlined in section 11 of the Gaming Control Act.
In the view of the Board, the very public allegations against Mr. Carlini are very serious on the face of them. Alleged sexual misconduct involving children causes a great deal of concern in the community.
The Registrar has a duty to ensure that the confidence of the public in relation to the gaming industry is protected. The Board anticipates that the public confidence in the gaming industry would be shaken if the public was aware that a person facing serious sexual misconduct allegations involving children was permitted to work in the casino while the matters were being investigated.
Although Registrant’s counsel has alluded to a presumption of innocence argument here, with respect, it has no relevance in this context. Having said that, it must be pointed out that the Registrar has taken no steps to permanently revoke the registration of Mr. Carlini. The Registrar is simply taking a course of action at this time in order to satisfy the public with regards to the integrity of an industry that relies on public confidence.
The Board is satisfied that the Registrar’s order is in the public interest and hereby CONFIRMS the order imposed by the Registrar on November 29, 2006 and the order shall remain in effect until the conclusion of the criminal matters, and any subsequent action by the Registrar.
In that regard, the Board is not comfortable in leaving the suspension order open ended and ORDERS that the following condition be added:
“The immediate suspension order will conclude at the end of the criminal and regulatory processes involving Mr. Carlini. In that regard the Registrar, if it so chooses, must commence a regulatory process regarding Mr. Carlini within 15 days of the conclusion of the Criminal matters which gave rise to this suspension.”
DATED AT TORONTO THIS 21ST DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2007.
ALEX MCCAULEY, BOARD MEMBER
AM/mw