ACTION trial 'paints all police officers in the city in a bad light'

A top investigator at Hamilton Police Service said Friday that four officers on trial for allegedly faking tickets paint "all police officers in the city in a bad light."

"Police officers as a whole become police officers because they believe in truth. Our credibility is paramount," said Det. Staff Sgt. Steve Hrab, who led the internal probe into the tickets beginning in fall 2014.

There were alternatives that could have been employed by these officers – if they'd had the ambition.- Det. Staff Sgt. Steve Hrab

Closing submissions were made in the case in court Friday. Constables Bhupesh Gulati, Shawn Smith, Stephen Travale and Dan Williams face charges of obstructing justice and falsifying tickets between April and September 2014. Another officer, Const. Staci Tyldesley, is being tried on similar charges separately.

Crown prosecutor David King argued the tickets were deliberately faked, sometimes even written by officers who didn't bother to leave the station, and any explanation the defence attorneys gave during the trial and in their arguments Friday were not credible.

The defence attorneys argued the four were disorganized, sloppy, even lazy – but vehemently denied they'd made anything up.

• 'Everybody knows they won't pay, they can't pay.' So why issue the tickets?
• ACTION cops police the 'same 25 people, day in, day out,' sergeant testifies
• What is the future of Hamilton Police's ACTION team?

The trial began in November, and Justice Pamela Borghesan is expected to render a verdict April 28.

'If they'd had the ambition'

Testimony in the trial opened a window into the activities of the high-profile, yellow-jacketed ACTION team, a project part of the legacy of former Chief Glenn De Caire, who stepped down at the beginning of 2016.

It raised questions about the effectiveness of the police team working downtown, the value of the statistics touted to justify their work and the appropriateness of part of their strategy.

It's unclear from the trial whether any problem was localized just to the squad the officers served on, or whether it pervades through the other 3 ACTION teams.

Hrab directed questions about the merits of spending officer time ticketing the same people repeatedly to police administrators, and he declined to answer whether the ACTION strategy relies too much on numbers like how many tickets each officer gives out.

A spokesman for Hamilton Police Service declined to comment on what's been revealed in the trial, but in a statement signaled there was no change planned to the ACTION strategy, which is still "effective."

But Hrab said the trial reveals something about the four officers standing trial. There were alternatives for the officers in dealing with the "regulars," he said, like connecting them with resources like the service's Social Navigator.

"Repeat offenders, or repeat individuals, there were alternatives that could have been employed by these officers – if they'd had the ambition," he said.

'That's not reliable evidence'

You can feel sorry for him, but you can't bank on him.- Defence attorney Gary Clewley, speaking of Thomas Groves, one of the ACTION team 'regulars'

Court heard both from officers involved in the efforts, as well as from people on the business end of those tickets, including downtown street-involved people who testified they owed tens of thousands of dollars in unpaid fines, and the thousands of tickets they'd received didn't seem to change their behaviour.

Testimony showed the officers ticketed the same small group of people over and over, and that doing so had no apparent effect on their behaviour.

Gary Clewley, defence attorney for Gulati and Williams, seized on the testimony of one of the "regulars," Thomas Groves, who's received more than $48,000 worth of tickets for drinking in public.

"This thing's rife with differences and none of them could be resolved by him," he said. "The man didn't remember virtually anything about events during the relevant time period.

"That's not reliable evidence. You can feel sorry for him; but you can't bank on him."

No 'sinister, calculated plan'

The arguments made by the defence painted a picture of officers who'd become indifferent to some aspects of their job, but didn't reach the level of anything nefarious.

"There's a world of difference between failing to write something down or writing it down incorrectly, and making it up," said Clewley, entering a defence for Williams.

"Sloppiness, carelessness, maybe even laziness – let's call it for what it is – triumphs over some kind of sinister, calculated plan here," Clewley said, on Gulati's behalf.

Speaking for Travale, attorney Kevin McGilly argued: "It's acknowledged Travale came up short with his note-taking. But lack of organization is not a criminal offence."

And Daniel Moore, attorney for Smith, said there's "no excuse" for the officer's poor note-taking, but said, "it would take more effort to fabricate tickets than it would to just go out there and write them,"he said.

For the prosecution, the absence of good notes for tickets for nuisance behaviours like panhandling and drinking in public are worse than bad habits — they're negligent and even willfully fabricated.

"One has to look at this and say why would a police officer choose not to make notes?" said Crown prosecutor David King. "In my submission, one reasonable inference is they've got something to hide."

kelly.bennett@cbc.ca