She gets to keep that “tarnished” badge after all.
Durham Regional Police Const. Erin Howard was a hero of the anti-mandate crowd last winter — sworn to uphold the law, she was defiantly and vocally against the legal measures put in place to protect the health of the people she was supposed to serve.
And during her outspoken political statements, she made sure to identify herself as a cop — even posting her enthusiastic support for the so-called Freedom Convoy while on duty, in her uniform and in a squad car.
It was outrageous — and yet her bosses have let her off with the mildest of reprimands.
In a brief hearing Tuesday, Howard pleaded guilty to a single count of discreditable conduct under the Police Services Act between Nov. 7, 2021 and Jan. 24, 2022 and under the plea deal, five other charges — including subordination — were dropped.
https://smartcdn.gprod.postmedia.digital/torontosun/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/durhamcopjan25.png?quality="90&strip=all&w=576 2x" height="428" loading="lazy" src="https://smartcdn.gprod.postmedia.digital/torontosun/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/durhamcopjan25.png?quality=90&strip=all&w=288" width="548"/>
As for her penalty, the joint submission was for a mere three-month demotion from first to second-class constable.
How fortunate for a rogue officer who didn’t utter a word of apology before the tribunal. We were told the four-year veteran has apologized to her bosses, so I suppose that has to suffice.
According to the agreed statement of facts, Howard admitted she “acted in a disorderly manner or in a manner prejudicial to discipline or likely to bring discredit upon the reputation of the police force” when she appeared at an anti-mandate rally at Nathan Phillips Square in November 2021, identified herself as an off-duty police officer and declared that enforcing pandemic laws violated the oath she swore to uphold.
She also made “disparaging remarks” about her fellow officers and supervisors.
“Our colleagues, a lot of them appear to be brainwashed,” she said in the speech broadcast on Rebel News. “Our services appear to be so influenced by politics and the fear of economic reprisal that they have completely backed down. They’ve capitulated.
“For some reason, they’re not supporting us. And it’s wrong and I am ashamed and I feel that my badge, my brand new badge that I was so proud to receive, has been tarnished.”
If that wasn’t enough, the uniformed Howard then posted a video on social media on Jan. 24, 2022 pledging her support for the truckers as they planned to lay siege on Ottawa, calling them “true heroes.”
“You’re fighting for our rights and freedoms,” she said, “and, right now, it feels like we’re a little bit at war and those rights and freedoms are at stake.”
Hearing officer Greg Walton heard the DRPS was inundated with media calls, social media comments and more than 500 emails about her unprofessional comments while in uniform. Three members of the public made formal complaints to the Office of the Independent Police Review Director (OIPRD), with one calling for her to be fired.
On March 25, Howard was charged with two counts each of misconduct, insubordination and breach of trust.
Prosecutor Alex Sinclair said the DRPS expects its officers to conduct themselves “professionally and impartially” and the officer’s misconduct was serious.
“Const. Howard’s conduct fell below this standard when she engaged in a highly visible criticism of government mandates imposed to contain the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic,” Sinclair said.
Her misconduct damaged the reputation of the DRPS in the eyes of the public, the prosecutor added. “The community has an interest in knowing that its police officers are sworn to uphold the law and will do so in an impartial manner.”
In Howard’s favour, he said she pled guilty, accepted responsibility, apologized for her actions and removed her post from social media. She also has positive reviews and no previous formal disciplinary history.
Lawyer Andrew McKay said his client was among the great number of people who didn’t agree with COVID mandates but now recognizes “she expressed her personal opinion in an inappropriate manner.”
But what about the next time she disagrees with a law she’s sworn to uphold?
Post a Comment