Smith v. London Police Service, 2014 HRTO 737

Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario

B E T W E E N:

Larena Smith Applicant

-and-

London Police Service Respondent

DECISION

Adjudicator: Brian Cook Date: May 22, 2014 Citation: 2014 HRTO 737 Indexed as: Smith v. London Police Service

APPEARANCES

Larena Smith, Applicant Self-represented

London Police Service, Respondent Frank Angeletti, Counsel

1This Application alleges discrimination with respect to the provision of police services contrary to the Human Rights Code R.S.O. 1990, c.H.19, as amended (“the Code”). In particular, the applicant alleges that the respondent police service has not properly investigated her complaints that she is being followed and harassed. In the Application, she identified a number of Code grounds for this, including race, colour, ethnic origin, sex, family status, and association with a person identified by a Code ground.

2The Application was delivered to the respondent, and the respondent filed a Response. According to the Response, the applicant contacted the respondent on several occasions in 2012 with complaints that she was being telepathically harassed by various individuals. The Response indicates that the respondent told the applicant that there was no evidence of any criminal behaviour and that they could not address problems associated with telepathic powers.

3In a Case Assessment Direction dated October 23, 2013, the Tribunal directed that a summary hearing be held by telephone conference call. The summary hearing was scheduled for May 6, 2014.

4At the summary hearing, the applicant stated that the problems that she has been experiencing relate largely to the person who is the father of her child and with members of the autistic spectrum community. She indicated that these people are not necessarily communicating telepathically but there is some sort of communication happening through her computer and she believes that she has been followed. She also indicated that there are unresolved issues relating to a break and entry at her parent’s house that she believes was not properly investigated.

5The applicant stated that she believes that the police are not responding to her complaints because she is aboriginal. The Application alleged discrimination on the grounds of race, colour, ethnic origin, sex, family status, and association with a person identified by a Code ground. At the summary hearing, the applicant was not able to point to evidence either in her possession or evidence that may be reasonably available to her that would assist the applicant in establishing her allegations, or explain how she could successfully prove this allegation.

6The Tribunal’s Practice Direction on Summary Hearings states:

A summary hearing usually considers:

· whether, assuming all of the allegations are true, the Application has no reasonable prospect of success. In these cases, the focus will generally be on the legal analysis and whether what the applicant alleges may be reasonably considered to amount to a Code violation; and/or

· whether there is a reasonable prospect that the applicant can prove, on a balance of probabilities, that his or her Code rights were violated by the respondent(s). The applicant has to show that he or she can make a link between the event that led to the Application and the alleged ground(s) of discrimination.

7In this case, the applicant has not shown that she will be able to provide evidence, apart from her own belief, that the respondent has discriminated against her on any of the Code grounds identified by the applicant. For this reason, I must dismiss the Application on the grounds that there is no reasonable prospect that the Application could succeed if it were to go forward.