Heather Hutchison

The appellant police officer appealed a conviction for discreditable conduct and the resulting penalty of dismissal, which arose from his use of excessive force in disciplining his infant children.

The Commission upheld the conviction, finding that the hearing officer did not err in admitting hearsay statements from the appellant's wife or in concluding there was clear and convincing evidence of misconduct.

However, the Commission allowed the appeal on penalty, finding that the hearing officer erred in applying precedent without establishing the requisite elements for dismissal.

Noting the appellant's successful rehabilitation efforts and the absence of any attempt to subvert justice, the Commission reduced the penalty from dismissal to a reduction in rank to Second Class Constable.

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

The officer had engaged in off-duty secondary employment acting as an escort for a member of the public without seeking permission or disclosing the potential conflict of interest.

The Commission found that while the Hearing Officer's reasons were deficient and an off-the-record discussion with the prosecutor was imprudent, there was clear and convincing evidence of discreditable conduct based on the undisputed facts.

However, the Commission found the penalty of dismissal to be excessive, as this was the officer's first disciplinary infraction chronologically, and reduced the penalty to a demotion to Third Class Constable for one year.

The appellant police officer appealed a conviction for discreditable conduct and a penalty of five days without pay.

The charge arose from allegations of sexual harassment involving off-duty physical contact with another officer over a two-and-a-half-year period.

The Commission found that the adjudicator erred in linking the off-duty activities to the workplace to conclude the environment was poisoned.

The Commission held that the private, off-duty conduct between consenting adults did not bring discredit upon the police service.

Furthermore, the evidence did not clearly and convincingly establish that the appellant knew or ought to have known the conduct was unwelcome.

The appeal was allowed, and the conviction and penalty were quashed.

The appellant, a Staff Sergeant with the OPP, appealed a finding of Discreditable Conduct for utilizing an OPP vehicle for personal use to visit a woman in the White Dog community.

The Commission found that while two of the alleged visits were incidental to legitimate police business, the third visit involved driving a police vehicle for strictly personal reasons.

The Commission upheld the Hearing Officer's finding that the charge was proven and dismissed the appeal.

The Appellant, a police officer, appealed a conviction for Discreditable Conduct and the penalty of an eight-hour loss of time.

The conviction stemmed from an incident where the Appellant allegedly called an assault victim a 'bitch' outside a courtroom.

The Appellant argued that the prosecution failed to provide clear and convincing evidence, citing conflicting witness testimony and another individual's admission to making the comment.

The Commission dismissed the appeal, finding that the Hearing Officer reasonably assessed witness credibility and that the penalty was not excessive given the circumstances.