In a very quick proceeding, Greater Sudbury Police Const. Melisa Rancourt had her first appearance at a disciplinary hearing March 1. The charges stem from Rancourt’s arrest on Sept. 26, when she refused to provide proof of vaccination to attend her child’s hockey game at the Espanola Recreation Centre.
Witness told Sudbury.com Rancourt yelled and screamed, called bystanders “nazis” and kicked a door while arguing with an OPP officer called by rec centre staff after the GSPS officer refused to show proof of vaccination.
Rancourt was arrested and charged with resisting a peace officer, and two charges of entering a premises when entry has been prohibited, contrary to the Trespass to Property Act (TPA). Her partner, Dana Rancourt, was also charged with trespassing in regards to the same incidents. You can read more about that incident here.
Rancourt has since completed the Direct Accountability Program through the John Howard Society, and because she has completed the program’s requirements, which include admitting to the crimes, two charges against Rancourt have now been officially withdrawn. A third charge, the remaining of the two trespassing charges, was dismissed upon payment of the fine by Rancourt.
But while one count of discreditable conduct discussed at the March 1 hearing was specific to the Sept. 26 incident, another count included a wider date range. When hearing officer and retired Toronto Police Service Superintendent, Peter Lennox, read the counts of misconduct, there were two:
Count one discreditable conduct: “You are alleged to have committed discreditable conduct in or on September 26, 2021,” said Lennox.
Count two of discreditable conduct is specific to “September 2021 to January 2022.”
Both counts allude to acting “in a disorderly manner or in a manner prejudicial to discipline or likely to bring discredit upon the reputation of the Greater Sudbury Police Service,” said Lennox.
When asked about the nature of the second discreditable conduct charge, GSPS communications co-ordinator Kaitlyn Dunn told Sudbury.com that date range refers to incidents that occurred during that time period.
“The details of the alleged discreditable conduct will be part of the disclosure and the agreed statement of facts that will be shared during upcoming hearing dates,” stated Dunn. “The details will be provided at that time as this is part of the ongoing PSA (Police Services Act) process.”
At this first appearance, Rancourt received a notice of the hearing and when asked, she attested to having the notice and understanding its meaning. When asked if she wished to enter a plea at that time, she declined.
Also present was the prosecutor, David Migicovsky, and representative for Rancourt, GSPS Staff Sgt. Jack Sivazlian.
As Rancourt did not have but intended to secure counsel, she had not yet received the disclosure of evidence that would be used in the hearings. Therefore, the proceedings were rescheduled until such time as the disclosure could be delivered and Rancourt and her attorney could review it. The next hearing will be held virtually on March 28. Rancourt has been assigned administrative duties while her case worked its way through the court, and the disciplinary process.
With two officers, both Rancourt and Cst. Thomas van Drunen facing disciplinary hearings, Sudbury.com wanted to know more about the investigation process. If you would like to learn more about how cases of police misconduct move through the system, click here.