Ottawa police officer docked 10 days pay for off-duty fight with teens

The sign outside Ottawa Police headquarters on Elgin St. is seen in this undated photo. (CTV News Ottawa)

An Ottawa police constable who was found guilty of discredible conduct for an off-duty fight with a group of teenagers in 2021 will have to forfeit 10 days, or 80 hours of pay.

• Sign up now for our daily CTV News Ottawa newsletters
• The information you need to know, sent directly to you: Download the CTV News App

A sentence handed down on Friday by retired superintendent Chris Renwick found that Const. Pierre Fournier fell "well below" the expectations the public demands of its police officers, that his conduct was "unprofessional" and his actions caused the incident to escalate to a physical confrontation.

Fournier was found guilty of discreditable conduct under the Police Services Act in January.

The decision handed down on Friday comes as a sharp rebuke of Fournier's defense, but was lower than the penalty asked for by prosecutors.

Prosecutors had been asking the tribunal to dock Fournier 40 days pay following a finding of guilt.

Fournier had asked the tribunal not to dock any pay and went further, asking for an apology from the Inspector of the Professional Standards Unit (PSU), the prosecutor and the Ottawa Police Association. In addition, Fournier had been seeking an in-person meeting with Chief Eric Stubbs.

Fournier represented himself in the hearing and was being assisted by Const. Cedric Nizman.

The decision comes following an incident at the Osgoode sand and gravel pit on April 24, 2021 while Fournier and his brother were on his way to go hunting in the area.

A decision by Renwick in January says Fournier noticed the teenagers riding motocross bikes near the gravel pit and went to confront them.

When Fournier approached the teens, all but one of them rode away while two of them gave him the finger. Fournier then ran up the hill and put his hand on the bike or shoulder of one boy, who was 15 at the time, and said, "You're not going anywhere," and ordered the other teens to return. The confrontation escalated to profane language and a physical altercation, at which point Fournier called 9-1-1.

According to defence submissions, Fournier was aware of recurring incidents of trespassing in the area and believed that "no one was doing the right thing to address the taunting of the property owners and the risk of litigation from accident or injury."

Fournier had been off work at the time because of a work-related injury and was undergoing therapy for mental stress.

The defence said he approached the youths "as a concerned citizen," but the finding says he identified himself as a police officer during the incident. Renwick declared that restraining the teen was effectively detaining him, which constituted a violation of the teen's Charter rights.

Renwick recognized in the sentencing that there has been a longstanding issue of youth on motor bikes trespassing on private property and that the issue has caused some reputational damage to the OPS with certain rural landowners.

However, Renwick states there is a "right way" for a member of the police service to engage.

"Improperly detaining, using profane, mocking language, and allowing the escalation to physical contact is not acceptable and has indeed tarnished the reputation of the OPS," Renwick writes.

"This is an aggravating factor and, in my view, eclipses the damage of perceived police inaction to a community problem."

Renwick found that Fournier's rebuttal to the penalty of zero hours pay docked and an apology from the police service was an "inappropriate disposition consideration" and cannot be considered a viable sanction under the Ontario Police Services Act.

Renwick considered a number of factors in the sentencing, including Fournier's employment history, seriousness of his misconduct and damage caused to the reputation of the police service.

Prosecutor Vanessa Stewart submitted that it is "imperative that the public has faith in its police service and that officers behave in a professional manner."

"That did not happen here with Const. Fournier’s behaviour falling well below reasonable expectation," Stewart submitted to the tribunal.

"I find that, despite the initial good intention of Const. Fournier to intervene, his behaviour quickly fell well below the expectation that the public demands in its police officers. His language and conduct were unprofessional, particularly in confronting youth, and his actions caused the incident to escalate to a physical confrontation," Stewart said.

The prosecution also argued that Fournier's conduct was "extremely serious" and that a sanction must show that "the behaviour exhibited was wrong, not acceptable, and will not be tolerated by the OPS."

"Ms. Stewart submitted that the actions of Cst. Fournier have received media attention, came to the attention of the public, and have brought the reputation of the OPS into disrepute. Specifically with the young persons involved and their families, the reputation of the OPS has been tarnished," the tribunal heard.

The defense entered 21 letters of reference and support and read four into the record. The letters came from police co-workers, sand and gravel pit owners, ex-colleague mental health professionals and several business owners and residents in the Osgoode area.

Renwick recognized that the letters refered to him as a person with a "generous and giving nature" with a "strong sense of integrity and ethical conduct."

Const. Nizman, assisting Fournier with submissions, provided statistics and instances of youth being responsible for serious crimes and the failure of police and the community in enabling and encouraging youth to break laws.

Nizman submitted that the tribunal had "failed" the public and made Fournier a "scapegoat" by the police service.

"Cst. Nizman spoke to Cst. Fournier’s sense of frustration and dismay with his treatment by the OPS and his experience with his criminal charges, suspension, and the effect that will remain with him for the rest of his life," the decision said.

Renwick noted the importance of holding police officers to account.

"The goal of the police discipline process is to permit the employer to maintain discipline in the conduct of its officers and to impose corrective sanctions when officer’s behaviour falls below the expected standard," Renwick writes.

"There is also the element of deterring other officers from similar substandard behaviour and demonstrating to the public that officers shall and will be held to a higher standard and be accountable for their actions."

Fournier will have 30 days to appeal the decision.

With files from CTV News Ottawa's Ted Raymond