LPS reprimands officer for improperly accessing data on Shannon Phillips
By Lethbridge Herald on October 8, 2024.
Herald photo by Al Beeber
Former NDP MLA for Lethbridge West Shannon Phillips is seen at a climate change rally in front of City Hall last week.Al Beeber
LETHBRIDGE HERALD
The Lethbridge Police Service has reprimanded an officer for improperly accessing information within a police database.
Police said Monday that an internal investigation was conducted upon the conclusion of an Alberta Serious Incident Response Team (ASIRT) investigation into allegations of improper data access involving former NDP West Lethbridge MLA Shannon Phillips in 2018.
Chief Shahin Mehdizadeh found the officer guilty of discreditable conduct and insubordination, said police in a news release.
The officer who was not named in the LPS release, was identified by Lethbridge Police Association in its own statement as Constable Joel Odorski. He was sanctioned by way of a reprimand which is to remain on his record of discipline for a period of three years.
LPS says that in his disposition Chief Shahin Mehdizadeh noted the reasons for the search do not excuse or justify the conduct, and the officer’s actions were unauthorized as he was not acting in compliance with policy or legitimate instruction from a superior officer in conducting the database inquiry.
The Chief’s decision was based on evidence gathered by the Professional Standards Unit, including a statement by the officer, says LPS. This information was not available to ASIRT or considered in their findings, as the officer was not required to provide a statement to ASIRT investigators and chose to exercise that right, said police.
Pursuant to Section 45 (4.1) of the Police Act, Mehdizadeh’s decision in the matter is final and there is no process to appeal.
The Lethbridge Police Association on Monday responded to the discipline, saying in part “the insinuations of conspiracy and coordinated harassment efforts by LPS are untrue and unfounded.
“We sat quietly out of respect for the process and in order for the full facts to be established, never thinking it might take seven years for that to happen. Now the facts have been established and, in the end, three officers have been held accountable for misconduct related to two specific and isolated incidents six and seven years ago. Two of those officers are no longer members of the Lethbridge Police and the third has just been held accountable with the lone blemish of a minor misconduct on an impeccable career. There are approximately 180 police officers in Lethbridge who have done nothing wrong and every one of them is committed to providing the highest degree of public safety for every member of the community they love.”
Earlier this year, ASIRT exonerated a civilian employee and three officers who were named in Phillips’ original complaint, but noted in their findings there were reasonable grounds to believe that two officers – one who is no longer employed by LPS – may have committed criminal offences by accessing the data, said LPS in the media release.
ASIRT forwarded the matter to the Alberta Crown Prosecution Service, which determined the test for prosecution was not met and the individuals would not be criminally charged.
In June, members of the LPS Professional Standards Unit conducted an internal investigation into the conduct of the serving officer.
The investigation determined the officer had seen posts on social media involving the former MLA and accessed a file containing her information to determine if there had been any misconduct by LPS personnel related to the posts. After finding no evidence to connect any employees to the posts, there was no further action taken by the officer.
LPS says it was releasing the information “within the public interest, to ensure transparency and accountability to our community. As this is a personnel matter, the name of the officer will not be disclosed.”
In its statement, the police association stated that after a complaint was filed by Phillips about multiple LPS officers accessing her information on the police database that “an investigation was initiated and ASIRT was able to quickly validate the access as being legitimate and related to policing duties by all individuals with the exception of two officers, for whom questions remained. ASIRT did not have sufficient evidence or the benefit of statements and explanations regarding the database access from both of the officers and was left to consult with the Alberta Crown Prosecution Service (ACPS).
“The ACPS evaluated the investigation results and recently recommended no charges be issued for any persons involved.
“With the ASIRT investigation concluded the Chief of police directed the Professional Standards Unit to resume its investigation into any potential misconduct for the only remaining police officer subject to the Police Service Regulations. As a result, and for the first time, evidence by way of the officer’s explanatory statement was made available for consideration. In possession of this information the Chief was able to firmly establish the details behind the database access in question and the actions constituted only a minor contravention of the Police Service Regulation under section 19(1)(b) of that legislation. The officer has been sanctioned with a reprimand and the matter is concluded.”
The association said that during the years the process took to draw to a fair conclusion, “there have been inaccurate accounts, broad accusations, and unfair speculations aimed at the men and women of the Lethbridge Police Service. . .
“Multiple people working at LPS were accused of conducting illegal activity and this, along with their names, was reported widely prior to any investigation or findings of fact.
“Most were exonerated early by ASIRT and for those who weren’t immediately cleared the ACPS did not identify criminality or support charges. Reports of “illegal searches”were premature, unfair, and based on allegations alone.
“Further, allegations or reports that Ms. Phillips’ police database information was accessed to target her for being a woman or for her political affiliation are wildly inaccurate. Multiple people within LPS were deemed to have legitimately accessed Phillips’ information as a requirement of their police-related duties.”
The one police officer who was recently sanctioned was given punishment exclusively for accessing police databases incorrectly, say the LPA.
The officer “was never accused or investigated for any of the separate instances of surveillance or other misconduct of any kind and his was an isolated instance.”
The assocation added that”according to documents filed in court for the civil lawsuit that Ms. Phillips has filed against him and others (including people since cleared of any wrongdoing by ASIRT), the single database access conducted by him was in an effort to determine if a coworker or former coworker had improperly leaked police report information on social media about Ms. Phillips.”
The association said that in his brief review the officer “did not find obvious evidence of misconduct that he could link to an LPS coworker so he took no further action.”
The association added the officer was, and is, a supporter of the NDP and voted for Phillips in three consecutive elections, “including the time during which she has accused him of gross misdeeds against her.”
It said the officer believe3s wholeheartedly in police accountability and “took it upon himself to conduct what is more properly a task assigned to investigators of the LPS Professional Standards Unit, and the reprimand he received was for that mistake alone.”
-27
With this outcome it pretty much ends the accountability amongst police officers and reporting. It is Sgt Schultz time, I see nothing, I hear nothing, I say nothing.
brilliant entry, buck. gosh, but he was handed a reprimand!
another policing whitewash of conduct that lends us more toward the police state that flies in the face of those that honour privacy (a pillar of freedom).
While I have little belief in the police force, I have no doubts Ms. Phillips would be prone to exaggeration. All politics aside, one if the nastiest people I’ve had the pleasure to meet
The police investigating themselves and ASIRT judging the cops is a joke. Although I don’t have the numbers I’m going to assume most cases brought to them are either dismissed or handed a slap on the wrist. How can ASIRT do a proper investigation if the charged officer can refuse to testify? Police use deadly or excessive force too often when there was no obvious threat to their safety and ASIRT eventually clears them. We need a better and more transparent way to determine if our police acted properly. George
“ Earlier this year, ASIRT exonerated a civilian employee and three officers who were named in Phillips’ original complaint, but noted in their findings there were reasonable grounds to believe that two officers – one who is no longer employed by LPS – may have committed criminal offences by accessing the data, said LPS in the media release.”
ASIRT recommended charges but the Alberta Crown(Clown) Prosecutor Service failed all Alberta citizens by not following through with charges. We do live in a police state!
yup