Opening comments: More at the end.
#.2 Complaint.
Constable Jeff Correia.# 2991, the investigating officer regarding events June 7th, 2006 and his investigation left a lot to desire in order to call it proper and fair.
Peel Regional police
ATTN: Peel Regional police - Public Complaints Bureau.
7750 Hurontario Street,
Brampton. Ont. L6V 3W6
RE: Complaint against Constable Jeff Correia.# 2991, Division/Platoon 12 B., process began Dec. 7/06.
Dear Sirs: May 31, 2007
On June 7th., 2006 I was falsely arrested for Cause Disturbance and Assault X2 by the Peel police resulting from false statements made by City of Mississauga security guards. It is my understanding that Constable Jeff Correia.# 2991, was the investigating officer at City hall speaking directly to City staff. Constable Rob Stepan.# 2147, was made aware that the matter was a political one, that no crime had taken place, that I was set-up because I was a community leader who opposed the Mayor and told this was passed on to Constable Jeff Correia.# 2991, or should have been.
Constable Jeff Correia.# 2991, failed to full and properly Investigate for a number of reasons. Given the fact this is a political matter, his failure to Investigate and/or Neglect of Duty, is totally unacceptable and shows bias Conduct in favour of the City of Mississauga and its politicians. His actions should also be seen as a Political Activity as they took place in an election year when I ran against Hazel McCallion. As an Unnecessary Exercise of Authority or abuse of authority with Discreditable Conduct on his part and bias towards the City’s politicians. Peel police and officer.# 2991,were using the one sided story that the City had supplied them, again failing to properly Investigate, to justify their unlawful actions/charges, that set-out to eliminate the political, Charter Rights and Freedoms of those who opposed Mississauga politicians. This is bias and political service in favour of the City and its politicians should also be seen as a Political Activity, as it takes place in an election year. And as the Peel police can be seen as granting a political favour to City politicians and political favours are often returned, City politicians are in a position to grant the Peel police many favours they would not otherwise get, this matter then becomes a Corrupt Practice.
- 1 - ....2
After all, where was the over-sight of a case that directly involves Mayor Hazel McCallion right in City hall, during a Council meeting? It would be foolish to suggest that the events noted in this political case would not receive the attention and blessing of the Chief of Peel police. Whose role would be to make sure the matter was written up to read like it was nothing more than a simple case of a loner, trouble maker running amok and the poor old City Council just didn’t know what to do - others had to save them and that they did no wrong. Regardless, why would Constable Jeff Correia.# 2991, apparently not seek guidance from more senior officer so as not to “bring discredit upon the reputation of the police force”? After all how hard could it be for him to call home-base?
No where does it note his discovery that I am a well known and long term community representative, acting for the good of the community and was in this case too. A very major issue that shows he did not do an unbias Investigation. Did not look beyond what City told him to think - no independent mind.
As the creditably of the Peel police was at stake, there were video tapes that could easily be viewed of the events, no physical evidence to support the charges and there was no pressing need to arrest me - he nonetheless needlessly rushed the matter (as if it had been scripted), no doubt to show the Mayor, Hazel McCallion and other City politicians that the Peel police are tough on taxpayers who wrongly think they live in a Democracy and have Charter Rights and Freedoms. In a case involving politicians and the circumstances as this one did, the Peel police has a duty to prove that politics did not play a role or that other abuses of legal process were occurring - before laying a charge and as there were no compelling reasons to lay a charge that day, why was it as fast tracked as it was and then Peel police made sure I was unlawfully denied bail?
Did Constable Jeff Correia.# 2991, interview the Mayor who is charge of not only that meeting but of all City staff to make sure staff had acted properly, see no record of it. I see no record of his review of the video tapes, a very important point as why would he lay a charge that they recorded without this review? (Some would even say that would be incompetent.) If he did, then why did he not see there was no disturbance caused - he appears to be doing just as City staff were telling him to do. To not look at video or interview me in a political case is the same as cherry picking evidence, a very bias way to ensure a certain outcome and a totally improper Investigate. Why would he not review the tape with me or ever interview me before laying a charge in a political matter expect to be bias?
The fact that the Crown has already dropped the Cause Disturbance charge proves the point that the Cause Disturbance charge should never have been laid in the first place. As the claim of Cause Disturbance was used by the City security to justify their forcing us out of City hall, this makes those actions unlawful as well.
- 3 -
By law only the Mayor of a City can “expel any person for improper conduct at a meeting.”, the officers rash actions meant that this was not discovered, in spite of me stating the Mayor had no problem with my addressing Council - Therefore security should not have.
And how could Constable Jeff Correia.# 2991, fail to not know to ask City security guards if there had be past problems with us/me leaving City hall? We would have had no problem leaving the building as that has always been the case in the past. We, meaning Mr. Willis and I - for that matter why did everyone make such an effort to keep his name off the record? Did Constable Jeff Correia.# 2991, not inquire about this? Do not see it. Maybe he didn’t want to hear the answer and discover there was no need for the actions taken by City security except to make false claims to police for Mississauga’s politicians political gain. Because then Constable Jeff Correia.# 2991, would have to lay charges against City guards for misleading a peace officer. That would not be a career move for a Peel policeman, why that would be as bad as arresting Hazel McCallion drunk driving! So it was best for him to Neglect of Duty & not Investigate and do as City staff told him to.
If he had viewed the tape, he would have heard the Mayor’s rambling non-sense about changing rules for Council meetings but not changing them - clearly entrapment, lying to try & cover it up, while using the legal system for political goals. Given the fact that this is a political matter, his refusal to properly Investigate and/or Neglect of Duty, is totally unacceptable and shows his Discreditable Conduct, bias conduct in favour of the City of Mississauga and its politicians - his actions should also be seen as a Political Activity as they took place in an election year when I ran against Hazel McCallion. As the Crown withdrew the Cause Disturbance charge it proves that as well to any reasonable, intelligent and unbias person, the matter was not properly Investigate and false charges were laid. The Peel police were acting on events that did not take place as well as aiding and abating government in cover-up of actions/events. While defaming a community representative for political gain & who is known to be a political rival of the Mayor’s. Who was in City Council while it was being broadcasted by Cable 10, earlier making public and exposing the fact Hazel has been a drunk driver but due to Constable Jeff Correia.# 2991, bias service and a refusal to properly Investigate that was stopped. It can make a person MADD.
In his note book it contains the false statement that I was asked to leave by Council (not on video tape), - Deceit - he is entering falsehoods into the record as well and the lie of omission where the details behind events were are not noted as it is known they would show that City security are wrongly bullying us.
- 4 -
In a case where there is no physical evidence to support the claims of assault by a women (female security guard), it is only reasonable to look at what her motivation could be, even more so when it directly involves politicians (females), in a purely political matter. Great care must be taken to ensure no miscarriage of justice that will put Canadian justice into ill repute take place and not just taking the attitude of let the Courts sort it out, with it being up to the victims of wrongful arrests to buy justice to fix Peel police errors. After all, how can Canadians with a clear conscience send its troops over seas to fight for Democracy and in an act of supreme hypocrisy, force a police state on its own citizens, all the while saying, do as we say - not as we do? In fact, Constable Jeff Correia.# 2991, is aiding City politicians to legalizing political bullying, entrapment and other unlawful act to turn Canadians political scene into a third world one.
It also needs to be noted he appears to be involved in the with-holding of the video evidence for the defence. It was not released to my lawyer before the trial when in fact the police had it. I did not get it till over a month after the schedule trial date! This after repeated requests. It shows a pattern of abuse of power and process to end my chances at fair trail and proven innocence by adding unnecessary hardships.
His actions are at least an offenses according to the below noted Acts, etc., and there are likely more reasons they are offensive;
Municipal Act, 2001 - S.O. 2001, Chapter 25
PART VI - PRACTICES AND PROCEDURES
Municipal Organization and Administration
Role of head of council
225. It is the role of the head of council,
(a) to act as chief executive officer of the municipality;
(b) to preside over council meetings so that its business can be carried out efficiently and effectively;
Meetings - Meetings open to public
239. (1) Except as provided in this section, all meetings shall be open to the public. 2001, c. 25, s. 239 (1).
Head of council
241. (1) The head of council, except where otherwise provided, shall preside at all meetings of the council. 2001, c. 25, s. 241 (1).
Power to expel
(2) The head of council or other presiding officer may expel any person for improper conduct at a meeting. 2001, c. 25, s. 241 (2).
Police Services Act ONTARIO REGULATION 123/98 Amended to O. Reg. 82/00
...
PART V CODE OF CONDUCT
14. (1) Any conduct described in the code of conduct, set out in the Schedule, constitutes misconduct for the purpose of section 74 of the Act.
(2) The code of conduct applies to municipal police forces and the Ontario Provincial Police. O. Reg. 123/98, s. 14.
[Also found in contained in most annotated versions of the Ontario Police Services Act. Regulation 927 of R.R.G. 1990 (page 159) ]
SCHEDULE - CODE OF CONDUCT
(a) DISCREDITABLE CONDUCT, in that he or she,
(i) fails to treat or protect a person equally without discrimination with respect to police services because of that person's race, ancestry, place of
origin, colour, ethnic origin, citizenship, creed, sex, sexual orientation, age, marital status, same-sex partnership status, family status or
handicap,
(x) contravenes any provision of the Act or the regulations, or
(xi) acts in a disorderly manner or in a manner prejudicial to discipline or likely to bring discredit upon the reputation of the police force;
(c) NEGLECT OF DUTY, in that he or she,
(i) without lawful excuse, neglects or omits promptly and diligently to perform a duty as a member of the police force,
(ii) fails to comply with any provision of Ontario Regulation 673/98 (Conduct and Duties of Police Officers Respecting Investigations by the
Special Investigations Unit),
(f) CORRUPT PRACTICE, in that he or she,
(i) offers or takes a bribe,
(iii) directly or indirectly solicits or receives a gratuity or present without the consent of the chief of police,
(v) improperly uses his or her character and position as a member of the police force for private advantage;
(g) UNLAWFUL OR UNNECESSARY EXERCISE OF AUTHORITY, in that he or She,
(ii) uses any unnecessary force against a prisoner or other person contacted in the execution of duty;
From the Police Services Act R.S.O. 1990, CHAPTER P.15.
Political activity - 46. No municipal police officer shall engage in political activity, except as the regulations permit. R.S.O. 1990, c. P.15, s. 46.
His actions also violated the Peel Regional Police Statement of Mission and Values as noted below;
Peel Regional Police
Statement of Mission and Values
MISSION
The Peel Regional Police strive to protect life and property under the law, with full respect for human dignity, and according to the highest standards of professional skill, integrity and accountability.
VALUES - In carrying out our mission, members shall:
*Protect human fife as the highest priority.
*Enforce laws and police society with respect for the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
*Perform their duties with the highest ethical standards.
*Pursue truth and justice with vigour.
*Share responsibility with the community for improving the quality of life.
*Create a professionally effective and satisfying police service.
*Seek excellence in each activity undertaken.
I, Donald Barber ____________________________ of the City of Mississauga and Region of Peel do solemnly declare that - the contains of this letter, a letter of complaint to the Peel police - is true and factual. {it was done}
I am willing to discuss my letter with you and there is an answering machine you can leave a detailed private message on. My phone number is (905) ***-**** & E-mail.
Sincerely yours,
_______________________________
Mr. Donald Barber - Editor - Candidate for Mayor 1994, 1997, 2000 and 2006.
Home Page - Main Table of Contents - Back up a page - Back to Top
[COMMENTS BY DON B. - ]