Registrar, Alcohol and Gaming Commission of Ontario v. Jason Daniel Mancuso, 2011 CanLII 19767

IN THE MATTER OF The: Gaming Control Act, 1992, as amended

B E T W E E N:

Registrar, Alcohol and Gaming Commission of Ontario Registrar

-and-

Jason Daniel Mancuso Registrant

Panel: Brian Ford, Board Member; Allan Higdon, Board Member

Decision Date: February 23, 2011

Hearing Location: Niagara Falls, Ontario

Alcohol and Gaming Commission of Ontario 90 Sheppard Avenue East, Suite 300 Toronto, Ontario M2N 0A4 Phone: (416) 326-0366 Fax: (416) 326-5566 Toll Free In Ontario: 1-800-522-2876 Website: www.agco.on.ca

Appearances

Registrar, Alcohol and Gaming Commission ) Bryna Kaplan, Representative Jason Daniel Mancuso, Registrant ) Terrence Hill, Representative

Allegations

A hearing into an Order of Immediate Suspension (“OIS”) dated June 29, 2010 to immediately suspend the registration of Jason Daniel Mancuso, as a gaming assistant in the class of gaming employee, registration number 49192, on the basis that it is necessary in the public interest under subsection 14(1) of the Gaming Control Act, 1992 (“GCA”), was held on December 14, 2010 in the City of Niagara Falls.

Decision

After considering all the evidence and submissions, the Board UPHOLDS the Registrar’s OIS until such time as the matter before the Criminal Courts is concluded, at which time the Registrar may take further action depending upon the outcome. Reasons follow.

Preliminary Matters

Ms Kaplan entered into evidence the Registrar's Book of Documents as Exhibit #1.
The Board ORDERED the exclusion of witness on consent of the parties.

Registrar’s Evidence

Gerald Brian Adkin is an Investigator in gaming and lottery with the Investigation and Enforcement department of the Alcohol and Gaming Commission of Ontario (“AGCO”). Mr. Adkin advised the Board that he had 33 years of experience with the Ontario Provincial Police (“OPP”) and had been with the AGCO for three years.
Mr. Adkin stated that he was assigned to conduct an investigation of an arrest by the Niagara Regional Police, of Jason Daniel Mancuso an employee of the Niagara Falls Casino.
Mr. Adkin stated that he went to the Niagara Falls office of the AGCO and received information regarding the employment and a copy of the interim report and personnel information on the registrant Jason Mancuso.
Mr. Adkin stated that Jason Mancuso is a slot attendant at the Fallsview Casino in Niagara Falls, registration number 49192.
Mr. Adkin stated that Mr. Mancuso had been charged with ten (10) counts of sexual offences under the Criminal Code of Canada (“C.C.C.”) as outlined in Tab 4 of the Registrar's Book of Documents.
Mr. Adkin read out the charges:
1. Sexual assault on A.D. contrary to section 271 (1) of the C.C.C.
2. Touching for sexual purpose the body of a person under the age of 14 years, namely A.D. contrary to section 151 of the C.C.C.
3. Counsel, a person under the age of 14 years namely A.D. for a sexual purpose, to directly touch with a part of her body the body of Jason Mancuso, contrary to section 152 of the C.C.C.
4. Did for a sexual purpose expose his genital organs to a person under the age of 14 years, namely A.D. contrary to section 173 (2) of the C.C.C.
5. Sexual assault on A.D. contrary to section 271(1) of the C.C.C.
6. Touch with a part of his body, for a sexual purpose, direction touch the body of a person under the age of 14 years namely A.D. contrary to section 151 of the C.C.C.
7. Did of a sexual purpose expose his genital organs to a person under the age of 14 years, namely A.D., contrary to section 173(2) of the C.C.C.
8. Did without lawful excuse, surreptitiously make a video recording of a person who was in circumstances that gave rise to a reasonable expectation of privacy when that person was in a place in which that person could reasonably be expected to be nude, exposing his or her genital organs or anal region or exposing her breasts or be in engaged in explicit sexual activity, namely the basement bathroom at 4957 Tara Avenue, and thereby commit an offence under section 162 (1)(a) of the C.C.C. and contrary to section 162(5) of the C.C.C.
9. Did without lawful excuse, make child pornography in the form of computer images, contrary to section 163.1(2) of the C.C.C.
10. Did without lawful excuse, possess child pornography in the form of computer images, contrary to section 163.1(4) of the C.C.C.
The full detail of each charge is contained in the Court Documents at Tab #4 of the Registrar’s Book of Documents (Exhibit 1).
Mr. Adkin then advised the Board that he contacted Detective Constable (“D/C”) Brett Atamanyk of the Niagara Regional Police on June 19, 2010 who advised him of the investigation into Jason Mancuso.
Mr. Adkin stated he was provided a copy of the Niagara Regional Police Service report and was given an overview of the investigation conducted.
Mr. Adkin stated that Mr. Mancuso and a R.D. live together with Ms R.D.’s two daughters and their son. He also stated that the two daughters discovered a camera hidden in the daughter’s bathroom.
Mr. Adkin stated that the camera had been installed so that it was pointed in the direction of the shower.
The victim A.D. saw a picture of her sister exiting the shower on Jason Mancuso's computer screen.
Mr. Adkin stated that an anonymous complaint had been received at the Niagara Family and Child Services. S.M. a worker at the Family and Child Services had interviewed one of the daughters and subsequently contacted the Niagara Regional Police. Ms S.M. passed the information gathered from the interview on to the Child Abuse unit of the Niagara Regional Police.
Mr. Adkin stated the matter was referred to D/C Atamanyk and D/C Lora Henderson of internet Crime to investigate.
Mr. Adkin continued to relay information contained in the Niagara Regional Police Report with respect to the incident.
Mr. Adkin entered into evidence as Exhibit #2 Ontario Court of Justice Criminal Division Court information charge sheet # NR10-5068, against Jason D. Mancuso. The Charge Sheet outlined the ten charges against Mr. Mancuso.
Under cross-examination Mr. Adkin stated that Mr. Mancuso was an employee of the Fallsview Casino.
Mr. Adkin stated he did not make any inquiries as to Mr. Mancuso's character in the Casino, or any inquiries about his duties.
Mr. Adkin also stated in response to a question that his role in the investigation was to speak with the Niagara Police Investigator and not to go into specifics of the matter. He only made inquiries as to names and dates.
Brett Atamanyk is a Detective Constable with the Niagara Regional Police Service. D/C Atamanyk stated he is assigned to the Child Abuse unit within the Service. The unit handles cases of abuse against children under the age of 16 years of age.
D/C Atamanyk stated that on May 20, 2010 the Niagara Regional Police received a referral from the Niagara Family and Child Services. The referral was assigned to him for investigation.
D/C Atamanyk stated that the Niagara Family and Child Service had received an anonymous complaint with respect to R.D. regarding a video camera being hidden in a bathroom used by two daughters and a son.
The Daughters were aged 17 years and 14 years the son is also a teenager.
D/C Atamanyk also stated that there is another 2-year-old boy in the household.
D/C Atamanyk stated at the time of receiving the complaint the information was that the 14-year-old daughter walked by a computer owned by Mr. Mancuso and saw an image of the bathroom and her 17-year-old sister who was getting out of the shower.
D/C Atamanyk stated the he was also informed that Family and Child Services were talking to the children at that time.
D/C Atamanyk accompanied by D/C Henderson of the Internet Crime Unit attended the home of Mancuso and seized the computer and other devices related to the computer. It was noted that Mr. Mancuso was at the residence at the time. R.D. and son D.D. were also home.
D/C Atamanyk stated that he advised those present of the reason for the Police being here.
D/C Atamanyk stated that as a result of exigent circumstances a search without a warrant was conducted.
Mr. Mancuso's H.P. Laptop computer was seized along with:
1. Sonny Video Camera,
2. Blue Nextar External Hard Drive,
3. Black Nextar External Hard Drive,
4. Lexar 2 Gigabyte S.D. Card,
5. Two Red Lexar thumb drives,
6. Black Scan Disc thumb drive and,
7. Seven Memorex Thumb drives.
The computer and related items were seized by D/C Henderson.
D/C Henderson also spoke with R.D. and arranged for interviews with the three older children.
D/C Atamanyk advised the Board that he interviewed the children. D/C Atamanyk advised the interviews were conducted at the Child Advocacy Centre in St. Catharines, Ontario. All of the interviews were done individually with the children and recorded on DVD.
D/C Atamanyk stated he interviewed the 14-year-old female about the hidden camera and while interviewing her she began to cry. When he asked what was wrong she stated she did not want people to know what happened.
D/C Atamanyk stated during the course of the interview the young girl told him of incidents of sexual abuse. She stated she believed she was 10-years-old at the time.
D/C Atamanyk stated based on what he was told during the interviews there was a basis for Criminal Charges.
D/C Atamanyk stated the camera incident occurred in October of 2009, when the young 14-year-old walked by Mr. Mancuso's computer and saw the image of her sister.
The image showed the 17-year-old putting on a red house coat and the image was in the basement shower. The young girl was not sure if it was a live or stored image.
The young 14-year-old talked to her sister and brother about the image and they all went to the bathroom to see if they could find a camera.
The youths located a penlike object which was pointed in the direction of the shower. The camera was removed and brought back to the young woman's room.
Mr. Mancuso at that point in time attended the bedroom and apologized. He had overheard the conversation about the matter.
Mr. Mancuso stated that he had the camera in the bathroom to determine who was leaving the lights on or using so much water. Mr. Mancuso broke the camera at that time.
D/C Atamanyk stated the 14-year-old also found a second camera in her room and it was thrown in the recycle bin.
D/C Atamanyk stated the information about looking for and finding the camera in the bathroom was verified by the 17-year-old female.
D/C Atamanyk stated that the mother had at the time learned of the discussion and was told of the camera.
D/C Atamanyk stated as a result of the interviews several charges were laid against Mr. Mancuso. At the time eight charges were laid and further charges were laid as a result of viewing the hard drive to a total of ten Criminal Code charges.
The images on the drive were of a female whose breasts and genital area were exposed. The images were of the 17-year-old female.
D/C Atamanyk stated he interviewed the mother and showed her the images and she stated they were images taken in their residence in the basement bathroom.
D/C Atamanyk interviewed Mr. Mancuso he advised the images were of the basement bathroom but provided no further information.
D/C Atamanyk stated the investigation is still ongoing and he anticipates further charges will be laid.
Under cross-examination D/C Atamanyk stated the 14-year-old believed she was 10 when she was sexually abused.
D/C Atamanyk also stated in response to a question that there were no allegations of sexual abuse for 2007, 2008, 2009 or 2010. He also stated the 17-year-old did not talk of any sexual abuse.
D/C Atamanyk confirmed the image of the 17-year-old was in the shower.
When asked why the matter was not brought to the police in 2009, D/C Atamanyk said he did not know.
D/C Atamanyk was asked if the mother viewed the images on the computer and D/C Atamanyk stated he did not know.
D/C Atamanyk was asked if the court was aware of where Mr Mancuso works and he replied that the court knew.
Jeff Longhurst is a Deputy Registrar with the AGCO.
Mr. Longhurst stated he had received information about Mr. Mancuso who is a Registrant with the AGCO.
Mr. Longhurst stated there was a problem with a person who is charged with such a serious criminal offence, and involved in the gaming industry.
The Gaming Act, Mr. Longhurst stated, requires that a person act in accordance with honesty, integrity and the law.
Mr. Longhurst stated he heard about the charges and forwarded the file on to the legal branch of the AGCO.
Having reviewed Mr. Adkin’s report, a recommendation was forwarded to the Registrar that the Registrant, Mr. Mancuso, be suspended immediately. The Registrar concurred.
Mr. Longhurst felt that in view of the very serious nature of the criminal charges, that Mr. Mancuso’s ability to act with honesty and integrity was brought into question. There was also the issue of public interest and public safety.
Mr. Longhurst was asked about the bail condition of Mr. Mancuso that he was to remain employed.
Mr. Longhurst stated Mr. Mancuso has not been terminated but has been suspended as an employee.
Under cross-examination Mr. Longhurst was asked the rationale for suspending Mr. Mancuso. He replied that Mr. Mancuso’s ability to act with honesty, integrity and within the law is brought into question. The Criminal Code charges against Mr. Mancuso bring into question that ability.
Mr. Longhurst stated that the severity of the criminal charges definitely plays a role in determining the issue of public interest.
Mr. Longhurst in reply to questions regarding the public interest stated that the protection of children is very high on the public interest agenda and it is also a public trust issue.
Mr. Longhurst stated in response to a question that minors were not allowed in Casino's.
In reply Mr. Longhurst stated the process is not an ad hoc process but is very much a case by case approach taking into consideration the type of issue. The process is viewed very seriously.
Mr. Mancuso's position is one of trust and his conduct vis-à-vis the criminal charges is what is at issue here, and the fact that more criminal charges may be laid.

Registrant’s Evidence

No evidence was tendered by the Registrant.

Registrar’s Submissions

Ms Kaplan notes that the Gaming Control Act sets out criteria for working in the industry and gaming registrations.
Ms Kaplan points out that an applicant can be refused registration or renewal if there are reasonable grounds to believe that the applicant will not act as a gaming assistant in accordance with law, or with integrity, honesty or in the public interest, having regard to the past conduct of the applicant or persons interested in the applicant.
She notes that section 12 of the Act provides that the Registrar may propose to suspend or to revoke a registration for any reason that would disentitle the registrant to registration or renewal of registration under section 10 or 11 of the Act.
Ms Kaplan notes that the Board is to treat the Registrant as if he were an applicant and if the Registrar has reasonable grounds to suspend the Registrant. We are not here to revoke the registration but to deal with the order of immediate suspension. It is mandatory for the public interest that an immediate suspension be served.
Ms Kaplan stated the Board has to consider all of the facts and based on the balance of probabilities, answer the question are there reasonable grounds to make a finding in this matter?
The test, she states, is for the Board. Was the Registrar correct in his belief that the conduct of the Registrant could give rise to the belief he will not act in accordance with law, with integrity or in the public interest?
Ms Kaplan notes that the facts the Registrar looked at are those delineated in the evidence of Mr. Adkin and D/C Atamanyk for a total of ten very serious criminal charges.
The Board also heard that there may be more criminal charges pending.
Ms Kaplan notes the Registrar is mandated by law to do his own assessment in respect to gaming operations.
Ms Kaplan also stated that with respect to public perception or interest it does not matter how much media coverage there is on the issue. The media is not the issue, public perception and trust is.
Ms Kaplan stated that if the charges against Mr. Mancuso were ignored it would call the gaming industry into disrepute. The Registrar is asking what the courts will do to protect the reputation of the industry.
Ms Kaplan states once the criminal charges are concluded the Registrar will come back to this case and deal with it then.
With these kinds of criminal charges outstanding, it is important that the order of immediate suspension be upheld pending disposition of the criminal charges.

Registrant’s Submissions

Mr. Hill states that he is mindful of the statutory provisos of the Act. He stated that the difficulty is that the issue of integrity of the gaming operations is one of personal integrity and personal honesty. He asked the question, how does one measure honesty and integrity?
Mr. Hill admits the allegations are upsetting and disturbing and they can't be made into something they are not. He notes however the allegations are of incidents that happened several years in the past. They are dated.
Mr. Hill also asks the question, what is public interest? He notes that the incident is not known to the public at large.
Robbery he notes affects gaming, however the nature of the offences and the terms of Mr. Mancuso's employment are such that this could never occur during his employment.
Mr. Hill believes that public interest and the alleged conduct will not affect the gaming operations in Ontario.

Registrar’s Reply

Ms Kaplan states it is her belief that when a child is abused the public at large is affected.
Ms Kaplan notes the test is that on the balance of probabilities based upon reasonable ground the Board believes that demonstrated by the alleged actions of Mr. Mancuso there is a risk.

Decision

The Board has carefully considered all of the evidence and submissions presented.
The Board heard from Mr. Adkin of the AGCO and D/C Atamanyk of the Niagara Regional Police Service that Jason Daniel Mancuso who is a registered gaming assistant in the class of gaming employee under the Gaming Control Act, 1992 had been arrested and charged with 10 counts under the Criminal Code of Canada. The charges ranged from sexual assault to possession and making child pornography.
The Board heard as a result of the information regarding these charges against Mr. Mancuso being brought to the attention of the Registrar, that it was determined that it was in the public interest that Mr. Mancuso's registration as a gaming assistant be immediately suspended.
Mr. Mancuso was served with an Order of Immediate Suspension on June 29, 2010. The reasons for the suspension under section 14(1) of the Act were laid out in the order.
The Board is to determine based on the evidence before it as to whether the suspension should remain in effect, until such time as the criminal matter is disposed of.
Section 11 of the Act states:

The Registrar shall refuse to register an applicant as a gaming assistant or renew the registration of an applicant as a gaming assistant if:

(a) there are reasonable grounds to believe that the applicant will not act as a gaming assistant in accordance with law, or with integrity, honesty, or in the public interest, having regard to the past conduct of the applicant or persons interested in the applicant.

Section 12 of the Act states:

The Registrar may propose to suspend or to revoke a registration for any reason that would disentitle the registrant to registration or renewal of registration under section 10 or 11 if the registrant were an applicant.

The Board heard evidence from D/C Atamanyk that the Registrant Mr. Mancuso was charged with the following offences under the Criminal Code of Canada:

1) Sexual assault on A.D. contrary to [Section 271(1)](https://www.canlii.org/en/ca/laws/stat/rsc-1985-c-c-46/latest/rsc-1985-c-c-46.html#sec271subsec1_smooth) of the [C.C.C.](https://www.canlii.org/en/ca/laws/stat/rsc-1985-c-c-46/latest/rsc-1985-c-c-46.html)

2) Touching for sexual purpose the body of a person under the age of 14 years, namely A.D. contrary to [Section 151](https://www.canlii.org/en/ca/laws/stat/rsc-1985-c-c-46/latest/rsc-1985-c-c-46.html#sec151_smooth) of the [C.C.C.](https://www.canlii.org/en/ca/laws/stat/rsc-1985-c-c-46/latest/rsc-1985-c-c-46.html)

3) Counsel, a person under the age of 14 years namely A.D. for a sexual purpose, to directly touch with a part of her body the body of Jason Mancuso, contrary to [section 152](https://www.canlii.org/en/ca/laws/stat/rsc-1985-c-c-46/latest/rsc-1985-c-c-46.html#sec152_smooth) of the [C.C.C.](https://www.canlii.org/en/ca/laws/stat/rsc-1985-c-c-46/latest/rsc-1985-c-c-46.html)

4) Did for a sexual purpose expose his genital organs to a person under the age of 14 years, namely A.D. contrary to [section 173(2)](https://www.canlii.org/en/ca/laws/stat/rsc-1985-c-c-46/latest/rsc-1985-c-c-46.html#sec173subsec2_smooth) of the [C.C.C.](https://www.canlii.org/en/ca/laws/stat/rsc-1985-c-c-46/latest/rsc-1985-c-c-46.html)

5) Sexual assault on A.D. contrary to [Section 271(1)](https://www.canlii.org/en/ca/laws/stat/rsc-1985-c-c-46/latest/rsc-1985-c-c-46.html#sec271subsec1_smooth) of the [C.C.C.](https://www.canlii.org/en/ca/laws/stat/rsc-1985-c-c-46/latest/rsc-1985-c-c-46.html)

6) Touch with a part of his body, for a sexual purpose, direction touch the body of a person under the age of 14 years namely A.D. contrary to [Section 151](https://www.canlii.org/en/ca/laws/stat/rsc-1985-c-c-46/latest/rsc-1985-c-c-46.html#sec151_smooth) of the [C.C.C.](https://www.canlii.org/en/ca/laws/stat/rsc-1985-c-c-46/latest/rsc-1985-c-c-46.html)

7) Did of a sexual purpose expose his genital organs to a person under the age of 14 years, namely A.D., contrary to [Section 173(2)](https://www.canlii.org/en/ca/laws/stat/rsc-1985-c-c-46/latest/rsc-1985-c-c-46.html#sec173subsec2_smooth) of the [C.C.C.](https://www.canlii.org/en/ca/laws/stat/rsc-1985-c-c-46/latest/rsc-1985-c-c-46.html)

8) Did without lawful excuse, surreptitiously make a video recording of a person who was in circumstances that gave rise to a reasonable expectation of privacy when that person was in a place in which that person could reasonable be expected to be nude, exposing his or her genital organs or anal region or exposing her breasts or be in engaged in explicit sexual activity, namely the basement bathroom at 4957 Tara Avenue, and thereby commit an offence under [section 162 (1)](https://www.canlii.org/en/ca/laws/stat/rsc-1985-c-c-46/latest/rsc-1985-c-c-46.html#sec162subsec1_smooth) (a) of the [C.C.C.](https://www.canlii.org/en/ca/laws/stat/rsc-1985-c-c-46/latest/rsc-1985-c-c-46.html) contrary to [section 162 (5)](https://www.canlii.org/en/ca/laws/stat/rsc-1985-c-c-46/latest/rsc-1985-c-c-46.html#sec162subsec5_smooth) of the C.C.C.

9) Did without lawful excuse, make child pornography in the form of computer images, contrary to [Section 163.1](https://www.canlii.org/en/ca/laws/stat/rsc-1985-c-c-46/latest/rsc-1985-c-c-46.html#sec163.1_smooth), [(2)](https://www.canlii.org/en/ca/laws/stat/rsc-1985-c-c-46/latest/rsc-1985-c-c-46.html#sec163.1subsec2_smooth) of the [C.C.C.](https://www.canlii.org/en/ca/laws/stat/rsc-1985-c-c-46/latest/rsc-1985-c-c-46.html)

10) Did without lawful excuse, possess child pornography in the form of computer images, contrary to [Section 163.1 (4)](https://www.canlii.org/en/ca/laws/stat/rsc-1985-c-c-46/latest/rsc-1985-c-c-46.html#sec163.1subsec4_smooth) of the [C.C.C.](https://www.canlii.org/en/ca/laws/stat/rsc-1985-c-c-46/latest/rsc-1985-c-c-46.html)

It is the Registrar’s belief that such serious charges warrant in the public interest that the registration of Mr. Mancuso be suspended until such time as the matter is disposed of in criminal court.
Ms Kaplan notes that the issue of public trust and the integrity of the gaming industry are at risk not to continue the suspension of the Registrant.
Mr. Hill argues that the issue is a dated issue in that the offences happened some years earlier and that Mr. Mancuso's continued employment would not impact public interest.
The Board is of the opinion that the offences are very grave and involve children and, based on the balance of probabilities, it is the Board’s belief that there would be an issue of questionable integrity of the gaming industry and an issue of public interest if Mr. Mancuso were to continue as a gaming assistant while these criminal charges are outstanding.

Order

Therefore the Board ORDERS that the suspension of Gaming Registrant JASON DANIEL MANCUSO continue until such a time as the matter before the Criminal Courts is concluded. At that time the Registrar may take further action depending upon the outcome.

DATED AT TORONTO THIS 23rd DAY OF February, 2011

BRIAN FORD, BOARD MEMBER ALLAN HIGDON, BOARD MEMBER