OCPC 1992

The appellant police officer appealed a conviction for discreditable conduct arising from his use of profanity toward a civilian whose vehicle he had towed.

The officer argued that the charge was a nullity due to missing particulars, that the signing of the charge sheet was invalid, and that the hearing board erred in its credibility findings and application of the standard of proof.

The Ontario Civilian Police Commission dismissed the appeal, finding that the missing particulars did not prejudice the officer, the signing officer adequately considered the allegations, and there was sufficient evidence to support the conviction on a balance of probabilities.

The appellant police officer appealed his conviction for discreditable conduct and the penalty of a loss of five days' leave.

The officer had supplied cases of beer to a civilian on Sundays through the back door of a restaurant owned by his wife.

The Ontario Civilian Police Commission upheld the adjudicator's finding that the conduct was likely to bring discredit upon the police force, rejecting the argument that it was merely an exchange among friends.

The Commission also confirmed the penalty, noting the application of progressive discipline given a prior conviction for discreditable conduct.

The appellant police officer appealed a finding of guilt and penalty for discreditable conduct.

The charge arose after the appellant attended a residence at 2:00 a.m. to deliver provincial offence notices for minor infractions to individuals known to be hostile to police and who had been consuming alcohol.

The Ontario Civilian Police Commission found the appellant's actions were unnecessary, inappropriate, and likely to bring discredit upon the police force.

The Commission dismissed the appeal, sustaining both the finding of guilt and the penalty.

The appellant, an off-duty police officer, was convicted of discreditable conduct and ordered to resign or be summarily dismissed after verbally abusing a civilian driver during a traffic altercation.

On appeal, the Ontario Civilian Police Commission confirmed the conviction, finding that off-duty conduct can bring discredit to the police force.

However, the Commission found the penalty of dismissal too severe given the appellant's 11-year service record and the fact that related criminal charges were still pending, which limited the evidence available regarding the full incident.

The penalty was reduced to a demotion from First Class Constable to Fourth Class Constable.

The appellant, a Detective Sergeant and Detachment Commander, appealed his convictions on two counts of discreditable conduct and the resulting penalty of a reduction in rank to First Class Constable.

The charges stemmed from allegations of sexual harassment, including unwelcome comments and physical touching, directed at a civilian dispatcher and a co-op student.

The Ontario Civilian Police Commission dismissed the appeals against both conviction and penalty, finding that the evidence supported the convictions, the procedural rulings were appropriate, and the penalty was the minimum acceptable given the serious nature of sexual harassment by a superior officer.