ONTARIO CIVILIAN POLICE COMMISSION
IN THE MATTER OF The POLICE SERVICES ACT, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.15, as amended
BETWEEN:
CONSTABLE RAYMOND RIDGE
Appellant
-and-
METROPOLITAN TORONTO POLICE SERVICE
Respondent
DECISION
Panel: Murray W. Chitra, Chair Karl R. Fuller, Member
Hearing Date: May 8, 1995
Hearing Location: Toronto, Ontario
Ontario Civilian Police Commission 250 Dundas Street West, Suite 605 Toronto, Ontario M7A 2T3 Tel: 416-314-3004 Fax: 416-314-0198 Website: www.ocpc.ca
Presiding Members:
Murray W. Chitra, Chair Karl R. Fuller, Member
Appearances:
- Harry G. Black, Q.C., Solicitor for the Appellant George S. Monteith, Solicitor for the Respondent Inspector Thomas Dalziel, Metropolitan Toronto Police Service
Hearing Date: May 8, 1995
This is an appeal from a finding of misconduct and the penalty of a reprimand imposed on Constable Ridge on March 13, 1992. The original charge read as follows:
"You are alleged to have committed misconduct in that you did fail to report anything that you know concerning a criminal or other charge, or failed to disclose any evidence that you know, or any person within your knowledge, can give for or against any persons or defendant, contrary to section 56(a) (vii) of the Police Services Act, 1990, and section 1(c)(vii) of the Schedule Code of Offenses of Ontario, Regulation 791/80".
Constable Ridge was attached to North Traffic of Metro Toronto Police Force as an Accident Investigator. On the evening of September 13, 1990 at about 10:40 p.m. he investigated a personal injury accident on Allen Road in the vicinity of Sheppard Avenue West, which resulted in a citizen being charged with two drinking driving offences. A second citizen who witnessed the accident came forward at the location and provided the Appellant with information concerning the cause of the accident. Constable Ridge did not include or make reference to the statement of this witness in the Crown Brief. This failure to disclose was later discovered at trial and was the cause of the dismissal of the case against the accused and resulted in disciplinary action against Constable Ridge. The subsequent disciplinary conviction and penalty of March 13, 1992 was appealed to the Metro Toronto Police Services Board. The Board rendered a divided decision leading to a dismissal of the appeal on November 17, 1992.
Counsel for the Appellant:
- In his submission on the Appellant's behalf, Mr. Black requested that the Commission overturn the decision of the Metropolitan Toronto Police Services Board and reverse the finding of misconduct made by the Hearing Officer. His submissions to the panel included the following:
(1) In preparation for the criminal trial, Constable Ridge completed the Crown Brief in accordance with established mandatory procedures. Specifically, Administrative Procedure No. 2(a) item 15 directed that "only those witnesses essential to prove a charge are included on the witness list".
Constable Ridge did not include the second citizen's name on the list of witnesses because in his mind, the evidence was not essential to prove the Crown's case. Further, based on his assessment of the physical evidence at the scene and the reports of other witnesses, he had doubts as to its correctness.
(2) The Confidential Instructions for Crown Counsel were reviewed, approved and signed by Sergeant Stephen Morse and Sergeant Dwayne Petzold, Supervising Officers, prior to sending them to the Crown.
(3) Staff Inspector Douglas Reynolds who was at Operational Planning when Administrative Procedure 2(a) was drafted, testified that Constable Ridge complied with procedures in not putting the second citizen's name on the witness list in the Confidential Instructions. Operational Planning was the Branch of the Service responsible for establishing such procedures.
(4) The Ministry of Transportation Motor Vehicle Accident Report completed by Constable Ridge and included in the Crown Brief was left blank (as opposed to being crossed out). Evidence given by three sergeants seem to agree that the blank box was understood to mean that there were eye witnesses to the accident.
(5) Constable Ridge included in his Accident Investigation Field Notes a detailed account of the accident, including a summary of the second citizen's statement.
DATED THIS 10^TH^ DAY OF JULY, 1995
Murray W. Chitra, Chair
Karl R. Fuller, Member