“Vancouver Police Sergeant Found Guilty of Lying to RCMP Officer: B.C. Court of Appeal”

Accident – Death – Obituary News : Breadcrumb Trail Links
News
Local News
The B.C. Supreme Court had stopped the process, citing procedural errors

Published Jan 19, 2024 • Last updated 1 hour ago • 4 minute read

A disciplinary hearing involved a Vancouver police sergeant can now proceed, after a B.C. Court of Appeal decision. Photo by DARRYL DYCK /THE CANADIAN PRESS

Article content

A B.C. Court of Appeal panel of three judges has reversed a decision by a lower court that had dismissed a finding that a Vancouver Police sergeant lied to an RCMP officer.

The province’s highest court this week ruled that a decision reached under the authority of the Office of the Police Complaint Commissioner, that VPD Sgt. Ajmer Sandhu had “committed misconduct by knowingly making false statements in the course of an investigation into the conduct of another officer,” would stand.

The conduct of that VPD officer, only identified as “Const. M”, included trying to intimidate a Crown prosecutor while off duty and attending a hearing in Surrey provincial court in 2018, in which Sandhu’s nephew was the accused, according to the reasons for judgment written by Justice Gail Dickson and agreed to by Justice Lauri Ann Fenlon and Justice Peter Wilcock.

A complaint lodged with the police complaint commissioner alleged Const. M “was standing in the courthouse hallway with a group of people associated with the accused when he attempted to intimidate her (the prosecutor),” according to the judgment. Sandhu was part of the group, it said.

In its initial investigation, the Vancouver Police Department ordered Sandhu to write a report on the incident. His details conflicted with the Crown prosecutor’s description and other prosecutors who witnessed it and the case, so the police complaint commissioner ordered an investigation by the RCMP overseen by Chief Les Sylven of the Central Saanich police.

Sylven rejected RCMP Insp. Brian MacDonald’s first report of his investigation, instructing him to “investigate whether Sgt. Sandhu appeared to have committed misconduct by providing other witnesses with information in order to mislead the investigation and deceit by knowingly making a false or misleading statement in his report and statements,” the judgment said.

MacDonald then interviewed Sandhu in March 2019.

Sylven eventually ruled that three of four allegations of deceit against Sandhu were proved on a balance of probabilities, the judgment said. His discipline was a demotion to first class constable with no chance to compete for promotion for five months, it said.

Sandhu, who denied the allegations, applied for public hearing but the police complaint commissioner instead scheduled a review on the record, which was to be held in, 2020, the judgment said.

But that review was put on hold because Sandhu applied for a judicial review.

During that review, B.C. Supreme Court Chief Justice Hinkson quashed the police complaint commissioner’s ruling of misconduct and the discipline Sandhu faced because he found Sylven erred in issuing the notice of complaint against Sandhu as it was outside of his jurisdiction, the judgment said.

He ruled that Sylven “acted in the overlapping roles as the complainant and adjudicator” and he disagreed that was a “benign procedural flaw,” finding the proceedings were therefore “procedurally unfair.”

Hinkson dismissed the ruling of misconduct and Sandhu’s demotion, according to the judgment.

In the appeal reversing Hinkson’s decision, Dickson wrote that this was an “exceptional case” and “it would not be in the interests of justice to quash the decisions regarding Sgt. Sandhu and require the process to be repeated, with all of the associated cost and delay.”

She added: “The process was fair, the misconduct in question was serious, and the substantive decision is unchallenged.”

She said the police complaint commissioner’s decision would have been the same if Sylven hadn’t made a jurisdictional error.

“In these circumstances, no useful purpose would be served by requiring the parties to start the process over again,” she wrote.

Andrea Spindler, the deputy police complaint commissioner, said in an email that her office is reviewing the decision.

“The Police Act is complex and is intended to strike the appropriate balance of accountability and fairness,” she said. “The guidance of the courts is critical to maintaining this balance.”

She said the review on the record, which was put on hold so Sandhu during the court action, will now go ahead in front of retired provincial court Judge Carole Baird Ellan.

The VPD didn’t return a request for comment. Sandhu couldn’t be reached.

In 2015, Sandhu was awarded a “police exemplary service medal” from Canada’s Governor General.

The medal, for officers with 20 years or more of service, “recognizes police officers who have served in an exemplary manner, characterized by good conduct, industry and efficiency.”

In 2007, when he was a VPD detective constable, he led the surveillance team following gangster Jamie Bacon on the day of the Surrey Six murders on Oct. 19, testifying in 2013 police were watching Bacon to collect intelligence about him and his associates and not in connection with a specific criminal investigation..