A senior Edmanton Police Sergeant was removed from his leadership for making homosexual comments to three homosexuals under his command.
The Edmanton Police Service described the sanctions against the Service Service Service on Monday following the disciplinary action. Ken Smith.
Smith has been harassed by auxiliary officers and has been found to be crude and sexual comments on homosexuality, and that an investigation is involved in an unproductive and discredited behavior.
He has been deployed from Sergeant to Constable, which removes him from leadership and reduces his annual salary about 000 14,000.
Fred Comins, a retired RCMP chief superintendent, who led the investigation, found that Smith had proved “meaningless” to “meaningless” to the harm caused by his derogatory comments.
In a bad report, Smith discovered that Smith was cheating and avoidable during the trial and ruled that the senior officer was unworthy of leadership.
Smith “crossed a line” with his words, but worse, he failed to take responsibility for his actions and the investigation found.
Smith’s comments – this was isolated with his sub -officers and undermined the reliability of the police service – to be condemned, Comins said.
“As a supervisor, he faced failing, and when others were concerned about the mockery, he did not take any action. He blamed others,” Comins wrote.
“Based on my inventions above, I do not believe that Sharjet Smith is worthy of supervision.”
Between August 2021 and July 2022, there were three incidents of misconduct, while Smith worked as a sergeant at the EPS Eastwood Station.
During the first incident, Smith told a Constable that the man could not work with the team, because another member of the team was gay. Smith expressed his disgrace to his deputy officer and suggested that two gay officers would engage in sexual activity in patrol.
Smith was allowed for an incident in June 2022 and suggested that two other constables could have intercourse together when working together.
“Smith told the officer’s Const CD, he said he didn’t think it was a good idea to work with Const EF, but acknowledged ‘Const CD car.”
At the inquiry that the third incident took place a few days later, Smith wasolated three gay men during a pre-shift meeting called a parade.
Smith enters and point out the opposite side of the desk from where the gay members are sitting, “I think this is the straight side of the desk.”
Smith told three gay members that there were three “enlightened” people in the parade – in the presence of the entire team – the three gay members. He asked for men to tell their colleagues “a story.”
“Obviously, the ideas remember a obvious question,” Comins wrote. “What was he thinking of such a completely irrelevant views?
“In my mind, he never thought. If possible, the ideas are more intensifying, especially created by a supervisor to a sub -officer.”
‘Intentionally avoidable’
Smith initially denied that the first incident took place. At the time he gave the location surveillance data from his cell phone in an attempt to prove that he was not at the station.
The investigation decided that his claims were false and Smith had tried to mislead the investigation. Camins said Smith’s fraud during the operation made his misbehavior very well.
“Smith’s evidence in the cross -examination, proved that he tries to be ‘beautiful’ and deliberately avoided his answers or simply confused. There is nothing to keep his status.
“(He) increased his liberation by insistence on many occasions that he was not, and could not have been at the Eastwood Station at a time.”
During his testimony, Smith said his comments were “happy” efforts, and his ideas often respond to the kind of constables that are “well -time comedy.”
Comins don’t believe.
Smith failed to allow “gallows” and neglected to repair his behavior, found the comin.
His efforts to change the blame on the men he have persecuted “the” border with the victim “speaks to a man who is not worthy of guiding his” deliberate misleading “in providing his evidence.
The question of the character
During the misconduct, Smith Edmanton received the Service for more than 22 years with the police service, as the last six sergeant. It was classified as a bad factor.
As a colorist who had previously complained of harassment for abuse, Smith said that Smith should know better.
Comins are not distracted by letters of suggestions to appreciate Smith’s service and commit commitment to the police.
Smith’s EPS life includes work with diversity and disgusting crime. He was recognized with the Municipal Pride Award in 2011.
“How does the sergeant cannot understand that his ideas are very incompatible and most inappropriate for the workplace, especially when it comes to a color person, someone who is supervised and the ‘friend’ of the LGBTQ+ community?” Written by Comins.
“He expressed a significant lack of awareness on his duties and responsibilities as a supervisor.”
Smith will be eligible for at least two years of promotion. He will not allow the teams to move until his supervisor and the head of the police are recommended.
He must be subjected to harassment awareness training and completing any of the EPS required.
“The Sergeant I saw … differs completely from the submitted accounts,” Comins wrote.
“Although I recognize the significant contributions made by Sharjet Smith and the examples of his good character, I have left the clear image of a emotional supervisor determined to avoid responsibility and accountability.”
Edmanton Police Service Officers refused to comment, citing the appeal period of approval.
