PASSAGE OF THE DAY: "Schertzer, who took the stand in her own defence, echoed her earlier claim to internal police investigators that she would have arrested Calvin herself if she suspected he’d been drinking. And she strenuously denied that she’d interfered in the police investigation in her capacity as a senior officer. “I was there as Aunt Joyce. I was there as Calvin’s family member,” she testified, saying she wanted to be an advocate for her nephew in a “wellness capacity” in part because of his communication challenges. Calling her love for her family commendable, police prosecutor Scott Hutchison nonetheless said it was precisely what drew Schertzer into an obvious conflict of interest — one she “drove headlong into.” “Her affection for her family is why she shouldn’t have been there,” Hutchison said.
---------------------------------------------
STORY: "‘I was there as Aunt Joyce’: In closing submissions tribunal hears competing narratives about officer’s involvement in nephew’s collision," by Crime Reporter Wendy Gillis, published by The Toronto Star, on June 11, 2024. (Reporter Wendy Gillis joined the Toronto Star staff in 2010 and has since been nominated multiple times for National Newspaper Awards. She previously worked for the StarPhoenix in Saskatoon, her hometown.)
SUB-HEADING: ".A former homicide investigator who is now an inspector at the Toronto Police Operations Centre, Schertzer has pleaded not guilty to three counts of misconduct under Ontario’s police legislation stemming from a May 1, 2022 single-vehicle collision involving her nephew."
A senior officer acting as a caring aunt under “upsetting” circumstances, or a cop who “drove headlong” into an obvious conflict of interest?
Competing narratives about a high-ranking officer’s involvement in her nephew’s 2022 collision were put forward Tuesday, as prosecution and defence lawyers made final submissions in the high-profile misconduct hearing of Toronto police Insp. Joyce Schertzer.
A former homicide investigator who is now an inspector at the Toronto Police Operations Centre, Schertzer has pleaded not guilty to three counts of misconduct under Ontario’s police legislation stemming from a May 1, 2022 single-vehicle collision involving her nephew. If found guilty, she faces a penalty ranging from a reprimand to a demotion or dismissal.
Schertzer’s nephew was pulling out of licensed recreation facility The Boulevard Club at 11:20 a.m. when he crashed into a light standard on the north side of Lake Shore Boulevard West. Surveillance video shows he’d been waved through to turn left by a private security guard — directing traffic because a marathon was on that day — but had to accelerate to avoid a collision with another car, before losing control of his white pick-up truck.
It’s undisputed that Schertzer, who was then in charge of the west-end 11 division, asked a subordinate at her division to send a police car to her nephew Calvin’s collision — which happened outside her detachment’s jurisdiction — then rushed to the collision herself, becoming the first officer on scene. A constable from 11 division then arrived, briefly questioned Calvin, deemed the accident non-criminal and sent him home within 10 minutes, a decision the tribunal heard resulted in Traffic Services officers losing their chance to administer a breathalyzer test.
The tribunal has heard competing evidence about Calvin’s sobriety. One traffic officer testified that when Calvin later returned to the scene there was a smell of alcohol on his breath. Const. Braden Doherty, the 11 division officer initially on scene, said he did not believe Calvin had been drinking, a view also held by a paramedic who said he did not detect any impairment.
At issue at the tribunal is Schertzer’s motivation. In her closing arguments, Joanne Mulcahy, Schertzer’s lawyer, characterized her client as an officer who got an “upsetting” call about a vulnerable relative and responded as a caring family member. She sprung into action because both her nephew’s parents and his sister were out of town.
“Police are humans. They are not robots,” Mulcahy said, stressing that her client had done “the best that she could” to put herself at a remove from the probe, including by standing back and away from the 11 division officer during his investigation, being transparent that the call involved her nephew, and taking memo notes about the incident.
Schertzer was also the one who pointed out the light standard was damaged as a result of the crash, necessitating the involvement of Traffic Services because there was damage to city property, Mulcahy said.
Schertzer, who took the stand in her own defence, echoed her earlier claim to internal police investigators that she would have arrested Calvin herself if she suspected he’d been drinking. And she strenuously denied that she’d interfered in the police investigation in her capacity as a senior officer.
“I was there as Aunt Joyce. I was there as Calvin’s family member,” she testified, saying she wanted to be an advocate for her nephew in a “wellness capacity” in part because of his communication challenges.
Calling her love for her family commendable, police prosecutor Scott Hutchison nonetheless said it was precisely what drew Schertzer into an obvious conflict of interest — one she “drove headlong into.”
“Her affection for her family is why she shouldn’t have been there,” Hutchison said.
She did nothing to disabuse the other officers involved, who saw the conflict “immediately,” that she was not there in her official capacity, he said. Schertzer’s presence at the scene while her subordinate, Doherty, went on to conduct “the gentlest traffic investigation you’ll ever see” had to have influenced his probe, and the subsequent decision to let Calvin leave the scene, Hutchison said.
“It’s that decision that turns out to have the various cascading effects that make it impossible” to investigate whether alcohol was or was not a factor, he said.
Earlier Tuesday, Hutchison’s cross-examination of Schertzer occasionally got testy, at one point prompting a brief recess when Schertzer became overcome with emotion.
“I’m going to suggest to you that what happened here is you got this phone call. You didn’t know what you were going into, and you wanted to control the situation by having it investigated by a friendly 11 division officer. Correct or incorrect?”
“Incorrect,” Schertzer answered.
Hutchison later pressed Schertzer on whether she believed what she did that day had, in the least, an appearance of a conflict.
“Your position is that there is no apparent conflict of interest for you attending and to advocate on behalf of Calvin at the scene of this collision?” he asked.
“That’s my position,” she replied.
The tribunal hearing officer, retired OPP Supt. Lisa Taylor, said she would return her decision at an appearance August 7.
“Clearly this is a very serious matter and I will very carefully weigh the evidence,” she said."
The entire story can be read at:
PUBLISHER'S NOTE: I am monitoring this case/issue/resource. Keep your eye on the Charles Smith Blog for reports on developments. The Toronto Star, my previous employer for more than twenty incredible years, has put considerable effort into exposing the harm caused by Dr. Charles Smith and his protectors - and into pushing for reform of Ontario's forensic pediatric pathology system. The Star has a "topic" section which focuses on recent stories related to Dr. Charles Smith. It can be found at: http://www.thestar.com/topic/charlessmith. Information on "The Charles Smith Blog Award"- and its nomination process - can be found at: http://smithforensic.blogspot.com/2011/05/charles-smith-blog-award-nominations.html Please send any comments or information on other cases and issues of interest to the readers of this blog to: hlevy15@gmail.com. Harold Levy: Publisher: The Charles Smith Blog.
SEE BREAKDOWN OF SOME OF THE ON-GOING INTERNATIONAL CASES (OUTSIDE OF THE CONTINENTAL USA) THAT I AM FOLLOWING ON THIS BLOG, AT THE LINK BELOW: HL:
https://www.blogger.com/blog/post/edit/120008354894645705/4704913685758792985
---------------------------------------------------------------
FINAL WORD: (Applicable to all of our wrongful conviction cases): "Whenever there is a wrongful conviction, it exposes errors in our criminal legal system, and we hope that this case — and lessons from it — can prevent future injustices."
Lawyer Radha Natarajan:
Executive Director: New England Innocence Project;
—————————————————————————————————
FINAL, FINAL WORD: "Since its inception, the Innocence Project has pushed the criminal legal system to confront and correct the laws and policies that cause and contribute to wrongful convictions. They never shied away from the hard cases — the ones involving eyewitness identifications, confessions, and bite marks. Instead, in the course of presenting scientific evidence of innocence, they've exposed the unreliability of evidence that was, for centuries, deemed untouchable." So true!
Christina Swarns: Executive Director: The Innocence Project;
————————————————————————————
YET ANOTHER FINAL WORD:
David Hammond, one of Broadwater's attorneys who sought his exoneration, told the Syracuse Post-Standard, "Sprinkle some junk science onto a faulty identification, and it's the perfect recipe for a wrongful conviction.
https://deadline.com/2021/11/alice-sebold-lucky-rape-conviction-overturned-anthony-broadwater-12348801
———————---------------------
SEE BREAKDOWN OF SOME OF THE ON-GOING INTERNATIONAL CASES (OUTSIDE OF THE CONTINENTAL USA) THAT I AM FOLLOWING ON THIS BLOG, AT THE LINK BELOW: HL:
https://www.blogger.com/blog/post/edit/120008354894645705/4704913685758792985
---------------------------------------------------------------
FINAL WORD: (Applicable to all of our wrongful conviction cases): "Whenever there is a wrongful conviction, it exposes errors in our criminal legal system, and we hope that this case — and lessons from it — can prevent future injustices."
Lawyer Radha Natarajan:
Executive Director: New England Innocence Project;
—————————————————————————————————
FINAL, FINAL WORD: "Since its inception, the Innocence Project has pushed the criminal legal system to confront and correct the laws and policies that cause and contribute to wrongful convictions. They never shied away from the hard cases — the ones involving eyewitness identifications, confessions, and bite marks. Instead, in the course of presenting scientific evidence of innocence, they've exposed the unreliability of evidence that was, for centuries, deemed untouchable." So true!
Christina Swarns: Executive Director: The Innocence Project;
————————————————————————————
YET ANOTHER FINAL WORD:
David Hammond, one of Broadwater's attorneys who sought his exoneration, told the Syracuse Post-Standard, "Sprinkle some junk science onto a faulty identification, and it's the perfect recipe for a wrongful conviction.
https://deadline.com/2021/11/alice-sebold-lucky-rape-conviction-overturned-anthony-broadwater-12348801
———————---------------------
