My take on the Fantino circus!

In my opinion, here's what is going to happen in the disciplinary hearing up in Orillia!

Julian Fantino said it best "Hysterical Nonsense"

This disciplinary hearing is on the third appeal from the Fantino camp to have the adjudicator tossed, retired judge Leonard Montgomery was personally selected for the disciplinary hearing by Fantino himself!

On Monday March 30 2009 The Fantino circus, the same day as the appeal was to be heard, MORE allegations surfaced from another officer, the complaint, which has not been proven, alleges Fantino "engaged in unlawful acts of reprisals against defence witnesses.

The Messham probe came as a Divisional Court panel was still weighing a Fantino request to force retired justice Leonard Montgomery to step down as adjudicator in the misconduct case.

In a letter to the lead investigator filed with the Appeal Court, Messham's lawyer Scott Fenton called the probe of his client a "gross misuse" of criminal investigative power.

"The decision to direct a criminal investigation against Insp. Messham (ret.) appears to be part of a broader pattern of misuse of authority by the commissioner of the OPP against current and former senior officers who the commissioner perceives are disloyal, recalcitrant or disrespectful of his authority and his particular methods of enforcing discipline," Fenton wrote

After so many appeals and heel dragging by the Fantino camp, and now rumors floating around, about Fantino retiring next year and running for the Mayor of Vaughan, which would be a great place for Mr. Accountability.Would this mean that under the PSA(police services act) that all this TAX payer money and time would be a waste, as the allegations would be considered NULL and VOID as he would no longer be a police officer?

You can find more info here: http://www.metronews.ca/toronto/canada/article/204632

Two OPP officers charged, Daddy Dalton where does it all end!

The two ever so helpful OPP constables will be able to exercise the Rights as a Canadian Citizen, and receive their day in court, with no up front penalties!


March 21, 2009
Emma Reilly
The Hamilton Spectator


Two OPP officers face mischief charges after allegedly helping native protesters block construction on a Hagersville development site.

Jeff Parkinson, the author of the blog Caledonia Wake up Call, alleges that in May 2007, two officers helped build a fence to keep a developer from getting access to his property.

Parkinson, who says he caught the interaction between the officers and protesters on video, filed the private charges against the officers.

"It's been my view that there's been a lack of accountability since the beginning, and that's something that needs to change," Parkinson said of his decision to pursue the charges.

OPP Sergeant Dave Rektor confirmed the two constables have been served and will face mischief charges in Cayuga court March 25.

He also confirmed they were laid by a private citizen and concern an incident at a development site in Hagersville some time ago.

"I really can't say too much about the case at this time as it is before the courts," he added.

Parkinson said he's been fighting to have the officers charged for nearly two years.

He filed a complaint about the officers' behaviour to the Ontario Civilian Commission on Police Services in the summer of 2007, which rejected it. A subsequent appeal was also rejected.

In March 2008, Parkinson decided to file criminal charges privately. The battle ultimately went to Superior Court.

Parkinson, an associate of Caledonia activist Gary McHale, said he's likely spent "100 hours, very likely a lot more" on the case.

"I'm proud of having stuck with this and a little bit frustrated with all the effort that it took."

Charged are Constables Christopher Galeazza and Rick Fraracci.

http://www.thespec.com/article/534104

Habitual Heidi?

Lots of questions need to be answered, but never will, this 6 month limitation is a cats ass if your a police officer, just ask Sergeant Kevin Dhinsa!

Juicy Stuff originally posted, 12 Feb 2009 http://www.gorskiconsulting.com/news.php

By pure coincidence I happened to flip through the National Post newspaper yesterday and came across the following article "Police car impounded after officer allegedly clocked at 165 km/h". The article indicated:

"The OPP intelligence officer, driving an unmarked OPP car, was stopped by a fellow officer on Highway 403 near Brantford Ontario for travelling 65 km/h above the posted of 100 km/h limit, according to the OPP. The subsequent investigation found the officer was not within the lawful execution of her duties at the time. In accordance with so-called street racing rules under the Highway Traffic Act - defined as driving 50 km/h over the limit - Detective Constable Heidi Fischer had her driver's license suspended and the police car was impounded, both for seven days."

This would simply have been another news eye-catcher except for one important fact - I had just recently reconstructed a collision involving a Constable Heidi Fischer where it was determined that her unmarked OPP police cruiser was travelling 168 km/h as she crested a hill and collided with a left-turning Caravan operated by an elderly female driver. Her speed was derived from the vehicle's event data recorder ("black box") whose data was not downloaded by police investigators until forced to by the defense. Despite the elderly woman's injuries the investigating officer, who happened to be Constable Fischer's supervising sergeant, claimed he received erred information and this was the reason why he did not transfer the investigation over to Ontario's Special Investigations Unit (SIU).

Still further, statements taken from officers involved were not taken until months after the event yet those statements contained remarkably, and exactly, the same erred information as the error contained in a witness statement which seemed to support the officer's story. Meanwhile, a second witness, who was within point-blank contact with officers at the site and who saw the complete incident, and who had the best view of the events, was not interviewed nor was he identified in any police documents. The only reason why he was eventually identified was that he lived at the site and approached me with curiosity as I conducted my examinations.

My eventual analysis would have demonstrated that, at such a high approach speed, the short viewing distance over the hillcrest, the fact that the elderly driver had to search for the unmarked cruiser from behind her in her mirrors (including a darkly tinted rear window) would have made it extremely unlikely that a normal, law-abiding, elderly citizen could be expected to react to the situation any better. Despite informing the OPP reconstructionist and the prosecutor of these facts the prosecutor pursued a charge of "fail to yield the right of way" against the female driver. In a remarkable set of circumstances, even her own defense paralegal would not put questions to me on the witness stand that would allow my evidence to be heard and the Justice of the Peace also refused to listen to my objection citing the fact that I was "speaking out of turn" when I stated that not allowing this evidence to be heard was improper.

Despite all scientific reason, the elderly driver was convicted on the fail-to-yield charge. While my advice to her was that she should appeal and file a complaint with the Ontario Civilian Commission on Police Services (OCCPS), she was so traumatized by what she termed the "corruption" of the police that she did not want to have any further part of it. My own filing of complaints to the Ontario Attorney Generals office was met with resistance in that I was not the primary party involved in the matter and therefore the Attorney Generals office did not have to reply to my complaint. Similarly, a complaint to the OCCPS was met with similar bureaucracy as they stated the collision date of October 22, 2005 was well beyond the limitation of 6 months to which they will respond to complaints. This despite that the trial events were concluded only a couple of months prior to the filing of my complaint.

In all, it shows how improperly the justice system can function. Constable Heidi Fischer made an honest and understandable mistake to travel at extreme speed to an emergency without taking proper care that she not create a further emergency by causing an accident . The accident that occurred was narrowly short of being fatal as Constable Fischer was able to brake and steer sufficiently to direct the impact away from the the elderly driver's door. But a fraction of a second would have resulted in a fatality. Despite this, her supervising sergeant failed to conduct a proper investigation, and either failed to understand the dangerous actions of Fischer, or simply knew the facts but determined he was going to change them. By failing to report the incident to the SIU and by conducting the investigation on his own, despite the conflict of interest as he was responsible for the actions of the officers under his shift, he created the perception that the OPP attempt to hide their misbehavior's and look after themselves. The elderly driver involved was a respectable person who will undoubtedly spend the remainder of her few years talking to others in her community and to her family and the result will be a damaging of the police reputation in the local area. I have spent a number of years interacting with good police officers who have conducted themselves fairly and properly and they do not deserve the fallen reputation as a result of the OPP's failure to review and respond properly.

Apparently there are honest OPP officers in the vicinity as evidenced by the charge laid against Constable Fischer in the noted newspaper article. And this is not to place blame solely on Constable Fischer. By not addressing her problem driving the OPP are creating dangerous situations where constables are unaware of the dangers they are creating. Citizens cannot move out of the way of any vehicle travelling 168 km/h over a hillcrest from behind them. Add the difficulties that an elderly driver has in making such perceptions and the apparent lack of analysis and understanding by the OPP this is a disaster just waiting to re-occur.


http://www.gorskiconsulting.com/news.php

Another officer on criminal charges!

Another shocker, one of Julian's crew is up on criminal charges, I'm sure she is a great cop, outstanding community member and will no doubt be collecting full pay while all this hysterical nonsense goes through the courts while she exercises her Guaranteed Rights as Canadian citizen!

Mar 15, 2009 04:30 AM
THE CANADIAN PRESS

ORILLIA – An Ontario Provincial Police officer faces several charges, including attempted murder, in connection with a fire at a home in Timmins.

Detective Constable Cecile Fournel, 52, is also charged with arson, disregard for human life and administering a noxious thing, according to an OPP press release.

She is being held in custody until she appears in a Timmins court tomorrow.

The Timmins Fire Department responded to a house fire on Feb. 25, according to the release.

The lone female occupant managed to escape unharmed, but the fire caused extensive damage to the house.

The statement says Detective Constable Cecile Fournel and the female occupant are known to each other outside of the officer's professional duties.

Detective Constable Cecile Fournel is a 10-year member of the OPP and is stationed at the South Porcupine detachment.

She has been suspended from duty.

The investigation into the fire was conducted jointly by the Timmins Police Service and the OPP, who describe the case as an isolated incident.(lets hope so)


http://www.thestar.com/News/Ontario/article/602631

Brain Surgery at it's finest!

By The Canadian Press
Dec 22/08

TORONTO - The head of the Ontario Provincial Police says drivers who crash in bad weather because of their own negligence should have to pay the bill.

Commissioner Julian Fantino will propose absolute liability legislation today under the Highway Traffic Act to hold irresponsible drivers accountable. This essentially means making drivers pay for accidents in which they were driving aggressively in poor weather, not insurance companies

Fantino says at least 40 per cent of crashes are caused because people are going too fast in poor conditions and not paying attention.

He says his proposal targets people "who could care less" about how they are driving when the roads are bad.

Fantino says his proposal mirrors laws currently on the books in almost every state in the U.S.

How many nail's are needed for his own coffin?

Fantino will have to resume testifying at OPP hearing

Ontario's Divisional Court has rejected a move by the head of the OPP to stop a disciplinary hearing involving two high-ranking officers.
OPP Commissioner Julian Fantino was halfway through a tough cross-examination last month, facing accusations of abuse of power, when he tried to shut down the hearing, accusing the adjudicator of bias.
The hearing in Orillia was investigating whether Supt. Ken MacDonald and Insp. Alison Jevons — who were charged with neglect of duty over their handling of an internal investigation in Eastern Ontario — are victims of a political witch hunt by Fantino and the OPP union.
On Thursday, Superior Court Judge Janet Wilson of Ontario's Divisional Court ruled against Fantino.
"Most importantly ... [the court] found that it was inappropriate to have stopped the proceedings midway into Commissioner Fantino's cross-examination for the purposes of going to the higher courts," said Julian Falconer, the lawyer for the two accused officers.
Falconer went on to say that he was relieved by the decision.
"I think these interruptions do nothing but create longer, larger proceedings and expenses that are simply crushing for these officers. They are anxious — from a reputation point of view and their ability to do their jobs as police officers — to bring this to an end," he said.
Fantino has said suggestions he is abusing his power are "hysterical nonsense."
MacDonald and Jevons were ordered to look into why OPP supervisors in Eastern Ontario looked the other way when a local officer allegedly took a baseball bat to his wife's car.
When MacDonald and Jevons concluded there was misconduct, the police union filed a complaint claiming major problems with the whole investigation. Fantino, then fresh to the commissioner's job, ordered a review of the findings. He later agreed with the union and charged the two senior officers with neglect of duty and deceit for their handling of the investigation.
In turn, the two officers have charged Fantino with abuse of power.
No date has been set for the resumption of the hearing. When it gets going again, Fantino is expected to return to the witness box to face more questions about his involvement in the case.

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/toronto/story/2008/11/28/opp-fantino.html

Another nail in the coffin!

Ontario Provincial Police Commissioner Julian Fantino testified against two of his top officers at a disciplinary inquiry on Friday, saying their allegations against him are "hysterical nonsense."
The hearing against Supt. Ken MacDonald and Insp. Allison Jevons is being held at OPP headquarters in Orillia. MacDonald used to head the unit that probes internal corruption and Jevons was a senior investigator in the unit. Both now face charges of neglect of duty and deceit.
They claim they are victims of a witch hunt inside the OPP being orchestrated by Fantino and the head of the OPP union, the Ontario Provincial Police Association.
MacDonald and Jevons were ordered to look into why OPP supervisors in eastern Ontario looked the other way when a local officer allegedly took a baseball bat to his wife's car.
When MacDonald and Jevons concluded there was misconduct, the police union filed a complaint claiming major problems with the whole investigation.
Fantino, who was fresh to the job as commissioner, ordered a review of the findings.
He later agreed with the union and charged the two senior officers with neglect of duty and deceit for their handling of the investigation.
MacDonald and Jevons, however, are fighting back and in the process have made their own allegations.
Part of the evidence is an e-mail in which the union said it wanted to "Take down MacDonald."
MacDonald and Jevons also claim Fantino bowed to union pressure.
Days before charging MacDonald, Fantino asked another senior officer, "Are you going to execute the disloyal one, or am I?"
Fantino learned the senior officer made notes of the comments. The defence claims that when Fantino learned those notes were about to become evidence, the officer was told he was being transferred to North Bay.
Lawyers for the two accused say that amounts to witness tampering.
During Friday's hearing, Fantino called the allegations "hysterical nonsense."
The OPP commissioner denied he was bowing to pressure from the OPP union.
Fantino also denied any personal vendetta against MacDonald and Jevons.
Why then, Fantino was asked, did he ask senior commanders, "Are you going to execute the disloyal one, or am I?"
Fantino explained: "I tend to use police-appropriate language. I often use the word 'execute' [meaning] forceful.... It just brings humour to the situation."
Fantino was then asked why he transferred one of the commanders to North Bay almost immediately after learning the officer made notes about the comments about executing disloyal officers.
At that point, Fantino became angry, calling the notes "cheat notes."
"People who know me wouldn't hold onto those notes," he said.
Fantino denied it was a reprisal and said the transfer was part of a regular OPP restructuring.
MacDonald and Jevons have filed a motion claiming they are victims of abuse of process and are asking the charges be thrown out.


http://www.cbc.ca/canada/toronto/story/2008/10/17/opp-fantino.html#socialcomments

Fireman Busted under HTA 172

OPP NEWS RELEASE************************POITRAS TOWNSHIP, ON – (October 17) - An officer from the Highway Safety Division, North Bay, seized a fire truck yesterday afternoon on Highway 63 as a result of the Street Racing Legislation.On October 16th, 2008, at approximately 6:30 pm, the officer was travelling on Highway 63 when he observed a vehicle overtake another vehicle near the crest of a hill. The vehicle was travelling in excess of 70 km/h of the posted speed limit. The driver, a fireman, was operating a Fire Department Emergency/Rescue Response vehicle, GMC Yukon. He was not responding to an emergency call at the time. As a result of his actions, John P. DANDY, 31 years old of Kipawa, Quebec, was charged under the Street Racing Legislation, s.172 and with Drive left of center – approaching crest of grade, s. 149 of the Highway Traffic Act. His driver's licence was seized and suspended for seven days as well as the Fire Department Emergency/Rescue Response vehicle was towed and also seized for seven days.


http://www.sootoday.com/content/news/full_story.asp?StoryNumber=35149