BACKGROUND: From a previous post of this Blog: "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."
https://draft.blogger.com/blog/post/edit/120008354894645705/6580536408272224673
---------------------------------------------------------
PASSAGE OF THE DAY: "During submissions on penalty last year, police prosecutor Scott Hutchison criticized Schertzer for failing to acknowledge that how she acted amounted to a conflict of interest. He said the case was a clear example of why there are strict rules against officers inserting themselves into probes involving relatives, no matter how well meaning. “It was a profound error in judgment,” he said."
------------------------------------------------------
STORY: "Toronto police inspector found guilty of meddling in nephew’s crash investigation appeals misconduct ruling, demotion", by Crime and Police Reporter Wendy Gillis, published by The Toronto Star, on February 6, 2025,
SUB-HEADIG: Toronto Insp. Joyce Schertzer is appealing the recent tribunal ruling that found her guilty of meddling in a collision investigation involving her nephew, alleging the senior officer who adjudicated the case engaged in “speculation” and “hyperbole” and relied on analysis “replete with errors.”
PHOTO CAPTION: "Insp. Joyce Schertzer is seen in police body camera footage at the scene of her nephew’s collision. Schertzer is appealing a recent tribunal ruling that found her guilty of meddling in a collision investigation involving her nephew."
GIST: "Toronto Insp. Joyce Schertzer is appealing the recent tribunal ruling that found her guilty of meddling in a collision investigation involving her nephew, alleging the senior officer who adjudicated the case engaged in “speculation” and “hyperbole” and relied on analysis “replete with errors.”
In a lengthy notice of appeal filed Tuesday, the veteran officer outlined more than 60 grounds of appeal for both her demotion and the adjudicator’s conclusion she was guilty of two counts of professional misconduct under Ontario’s policing legislation.
Among retired OPP Supt. Lisa Taylor’s errors, the documents allege, was concluding a reasonable citizen would find Schertzer’s actions “incompatible” with the high expectations for a senior officer — “exaggerating the conduct and disregarding the overwhelming positive character evidence and exemplary employment history of (Schertzer).”
“The hearing officer erred in imposing a harsh and excessive penalty that was unwarranted,” wrote Schertzer’s lawyer, Joanne Mulcahy, in appeal documents filed with the Ontario Police Arbitration and Adjudication Commission.
Last month, at a hearing inside Toronto police headquarters packed with high-ranking cops, Schertzer was sentenced to a nine-month demotion for behaviour Taylor found was “a major deviation from the expectations of a senior officer.”
The divisive case stemmed from a May 2022 incident in which Schertzer — then in charge of a west-end police division — sprang into action to respond to her nephew’s single-vehicle collision on Lake Shore Boulevard West, physically going to the scene and dispatching one of her own subordinates to investigate.
Those actions — a “clear conflict of interest” — began a domino effect that warped the police probe, spawning a “lacklustre” investigation that resulted in the crash being deemed non-criminal within minutes, Taylor found.
Schertzer’s actions, Taylor found, circumvented a careful system that prioritizes calls based on urgency, to the benefit of the officer’s family.
Schertzer, a well-known former homicide cop, has always maintained that she was acting in her capacity as an aunt when she jumped into action. During the tribunal hearing last year, she tearfully said she regretted her actions, saying “there isn’t one day that hasn’t gone by ... where I didn’t wish I had a rewind button.”
Tuesday’s appeal means Schertzer’s demotion to the rank of staff sergeant will be delayed until the conclusion of the proceeding.
A spokesperson for the Toronto police declined to comment while the appeal was ongoing. Mulcahy, Schertzer’s lawyer, also declined to comment, saying the notice of appeal speaks for itself.
The document alleges Taylor applied “differential scrutiny” to Schertzer’s evidence compared to prosecution witnesses, alleging some of those called to testify against her had significant credibility and bias problems, including, in one case, a “lack of truthfulness under oath.”
It also pushed back on Taylor’s finding that there was any benefit to her family.
During submissions on penalty last year, police prosecutor Scott Hutchison criticized Schertzer for failing to acknowledge that how she acted amounted to a conflict of interest. He said the case was a clear example of why there are strict rules against officers inserting themselves into probes involving relatives, no matter how well meaning.
“It was a profound error in judgment,” he said.
The incident has prompted division and outrage within the Toronto police force, where in the last few years a succession of misconduct cases involving senior officers have tarnished the force’s reputation.
Schertzer has, however, seen significant support from some colleagues; dozens of letters of support from current and retired police officers were submitted by the defense to argue for a lighter sentence, including from past chiefs, deputy chiefs, and other high-ranking cops in the force."
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;
