Mississauga News - Nov. 3, 2011 - By Louie Rosella
Peel Regional Police violated the Police Services Act by not reporting a serious crash involving one of their officers, the Province's Special Investigations Unit (SIU) said this week.
In a report summarizing the SIU's probe of the Aug. 12 incident, in which a Peel officer was speeding excessively when his cruiser crashed into a car on Erin Mills Pkwy., seriously injuring an eight-year-old boy, SIU director Ian Scott said the Act, as it relates to the SIU, requires a police chief to notify the watchdog agency immediately of an incident involving an officer that may reasonably be considered to fall within the agency's mandate. The SIU investigates reports involving police where there has been a death, serious injury or allegations of sexual assault to determine whether charges are warranted.
Scott said the agency only became aware of the crash on Aug. 15, when contacted by a reporter from The Mississauga News.
He has now asked Peel police Chief Mike Metcalf to review the case with his officers, as the force didn't notify the SIU of the incident.
The Peel police SIU liaison officer said he did not notify the agency because he believed there was no criminality involved on the part of the officer.
“In my view, the lack of notification in these circumstances was inappropriate and may well have impacted upon the adequacy of the investigation," Scott said. "SIU investigators did not attend the scene and had to rely largely upon the investigative work product of Peel police."
In a statement released Tuesday, Peel police said the circumstances surrounding the accident were reviewed at the time and a decision was made, based on the Police Services Act, to not contact the SIU.
Furthermore, Peel police will not discipline their SIU liaison officer, Metcalf said.
“It is my responsibility as chief of police to notify the SIU in accordance with my duties under the Police Services Act," he said. "I have full confidence in our SIU liaison officer. I will continue to work closely with the SIU and will notify them of incidents that fall within their authority.”
Meanwhile, although the SIU determined that the officer was travelling at 98 km/h in a 70 km/h zone, wasn't responding to a call and didn't have his emergency lights on, he will not be charged.
Scott said "there are no reasonable grounds to believe" the officer committed a criminal offence.
The SIU found that the officer was driving his marked cruiser southbound on Erin Mills Pkwy. at about 9 p.m. As he approached Sheridan Park Dr., where the traffic light was green in his direction, he began increasing his speed from 76 km/h, the SIU found.
At the same time, the driver of a northbound Mazda was turning left onto Sheridan Park Dr. Her eight-year-old son was seated in the front passenger seat when the vehicles collided.
The boy was initially transported to Credit Valley Hospital with a broken collar bone, bruised lung and facial lacerations. Due to the seriousness of his injuries, he was transported to the Hospital for Sick Children in Toronto.
The woman suffered neck whiplash, bruises and a chipped tooth.
The police officer was also taken to hospital.
"While the speed was excessive, there were no other classic indicators of dangerous driving such as erratic driving, or distractions such as cell phone use, nor suggestions of alcohol or drug impairment," said Scott.
As a result, Scott added, he couldn't form reasonable grounds that the "subject officer committed a criminal offence."
Letter by Mark Goldstein, Mississauga - Nov 10, 2011
Dear Editor:
Re: “Not above the law, editorial in the Nov. 2 edition of The News.
Kudos to The News for drawing attention to the second failure within months of the Peel Police to report to the Special Investigations Unit an incident in which a resident was injured in an interaction with the police.
The excuse given by the police — that they did not report the incident because there was no criminal behavior — is untenable. It is the Chief’s duty under the Police Services Act to report all such incidents, and the responsibility of the SIU to determine if criminal charges should be laid.
This demonstrates yet again that police can violate the law with impunity, and that the SIU is a toothless body whose powers to obtain compliance need to be greatly augmented by the Province of Ontario.
Does the Police Services Board have the fortitude to insist that Chief Mike Metcalf report all relevant incidents to the SIU and co-operate fully with its investigations? Not likely.
Comments by others, 9, to this web-page;
ConcernedResident Nov 4, 2011 4:55 PM
@TJ
You throw around the term "friend of Hazel", like it is some derogatory term. Sorry, some people are proud to be a "friend" of hers
Disagree 1
Tony Jackson Nov 4, 2011 4:34 PM
@Mantis - the head of propaganda machine, F-of-H.
I can see the frustration, Mantis. I never want to out-smart YOU. I didn’t mention ‘Mayor’ in specific; it’s your guilty conscience that brought her in. Do you feel your efforts to white-wash those corrupt people, through your inane opinions on this website, not working? Do you feel that you really didn’t earn that 30-silver coins the F-of-H mob paid you, for twisting the comments in their favor, and betraying and poisoning the general public from knowing the real facts? If anyone wants to outsmart you, mantis, that is either Prol or ConcernedResident with whom you share an office and task.
Agree 1 - Report Abuse 1
Mantis Nov 4, 2011 4:04 PM
@Tony Coprophartgia Fiend Jackson
You really should go back on yor meds. Ever single F-ing article no matter what the subject gets some snide anti-mayor comment from you. Are you trying to out-crazy the crazy one?
Agree 2 - Disagree 2
Tony Jackson Nov 4, 2011 3:21 PM
@CR
We keep Kool-Aid in the refrigerator. And, I don't drink it as you (CR) do. Angelface: I agree with you. What I mentioned in the comment below is Mississauga's official cliche to justify criminal/offensive activities.
Agree 1 - Disagree 1 - Report Abuse 1
Tony Jackson Nov 4, 2011 3:21 PM
@CR
We keep Kool-Aid in the refrigerator. And, I don't drink it as you (CR) do. Angelface: I agree with you. What I mentioned in the comment below is Mississauga's official cliche to justify criminal/offensive activities.
Agree 1 - Disagree 1 - Report Abuse 1
ConcernedResident Nov 4, 2011 3:09 PM
TJ
Your mom called. She said the repeat of your medication was upstairs in the kitchen.
Report Abuse 1
angelface Nov 4, 2011 2:58 PM
@Tony
The facts of the case are actually that he was not on a call, nor did he have his emergency lights/siren activated at the time of the accident; in other words, while he may have been on duty at the time of the accident, he was not performing his duties. It's a hard pressed argument to say that "he did it in the best interest of the people of Mississauga" when he was not on a call at the time.
Tony Jackson Nov 4, 2011 1:49 PM
@cdn41
He did it in the best interest of the people of Mississauga whom he's serving. He's a hands-on officer. He was on a job, not on a pleasure road-trip. If it doesn't make sense, try this, it's a good read " Report of the Mississauga Judicial Inquiry - xxxxx" by Hon.J.D.Cunningham
Agree 1 - Report Abuse 1
cdn41 Nov 4, 2011 9:50 AM
Why would the officer increase his speed from 76 km/h to 98 km/hr while approaching an intersection on a green light? That really makes no sense.