OPP botches Cobourg sex assault probe

COBOURG— Jane keenly remembers the day she found out the men who had sexually assaulted her wouldn’t be charged.

It was September 2015. Jane — not her real name — had just moved west to pursue her career, leaving behind, to the extent she could, the trauma of June 13, 2015, when she was assaulted. The incident was promptly reported to the OPP in Cobourg. Jane and her family waited for her assailants to be brought to justice.

But there was Jane’s mother on the phone, passing along the message she’d just received from the OPP officer in charge of the case: The officer said he’d consulted with the Crown attorney’s office and had been advised there was no reasonable prospect of conviction. No criminal charges would be laid against the men.

“I went up to the bedroom and I just fell to the floor. I remember wanting to die. I was so overcome with emotion,” said Jane.

“I just felt that nobody cared, that I’m another statistic — I’m another girl who hadn’t got help from anyone.”

What Jane and her family did not know at the time was that the officer’s description of a “roundtable” discussion with prosecutors was a lie. He’d never consulted with the Crown attorney’s office, in spite of insisting — both to Jane’s family and to his superior officer — that he had.

“I was thinking, why did I even report this?” said Jane, now 23. “It baffled me that this wasn’t

something they were pursuing.”

Four years after her assault, there has been some resolution, of sorts. The men who assaulted Jane were never arrested. But the officer in charge of the investigation, Det. Const. Adam Quemby, was charged under the Police Services Act. He pleaded guilty to neglect of duty and this past summer received his punishment; forfeiture of two weeks pay. Another officer at the Cobourg detachment awaits a disciplinary tribunal.

The penalty dealt to Quemby is cold comfort for Jane and her family.

“Two weeks,” said Jane’s father during a recent interview at home in Northumberland. “That just blows my mind.”

“I have fired people for less than that,” Jane’s mother concurred. “He lied to us. He lied to his superior officer. What would motivate you to treat a victim like that?”

Quemby declined to comment for this story. His lawyer, William MacKenzie, said Quemby accepts the sanctions imposed by a disciplinary tribunal.

MacKenzie said Quemby pleaded guilty to spare Jane and her family the trauma of recounting events through testimony at the tribunal.

“I can tell you that one of the biggest factors influencing the result was the desire on the part of the prosecutor and PC Quemby to not put the complainant through the rigours of having to relive the events through an examination in chief and cross examination,” he said.

Jane went to police to report her assault hours after it occurred on June 13, 2015. She went first to Cobourg police, who determined the incident fell under OPP jurisdiction.

At the OPP detachment in Cobourg, Quemby, a veteran officer, was assigned to interview Jane. She was candid about the fact that on the night of the assault she’d been drinking at a bar, and had accepted an invitation to attend a house party. It was at that house, she told Quemby, that she’d been held down and assaulted by three men.

Jane said the officer’s reaction to her report was troubling. “I remember him saying something about how I’d consented to it and that I regretted it in the morning,” she said. “He was trying to make the conversation go in a direction it shouldn’t have. That was the first red flag.”

Jane’s mother remembers her daughter being distraught when she emerged from the interview.

“When we got to the car she said, ‘No wonder women don’t report being raped’,” she said.

Still, Jane held out hope the men would be charged. A sexual assault evidence kit (SAEK) had been taken when she went to hospital and she urged Quemby to retrieve her tights, which she said had been torn off during the assault at the house.

“I was definitely skeptical as to how this was going to go, but I still had hope that somebody was going to help me — it was going to be OK,” she said.

By mid-July, however, Jane’s mom was getting anxious. The SAEK, which the family believed would indicate Jane’s level of intoxication — and her lack of capacity to consent to the acts she alleged — had not been retrieved from the hospital. And Jane was concerned that Quemby seemed to have arrived early on at the conclusion that whatever happened that night had been consensual.

In August of 2015 the SAEK still hadn’t been picked up. Jane’s mom said that Quemby left messages to inform the family that the case was being prepared for a review by the Crown attorney’s office, where ultimately the decision on whether to pursue charges would be made.

Jane’s mother said that on Sept. 11 she called Quemby for an update and received the bombshell news: After consultation with the Crown it was determined there was no reasonable prospect of conviction. No criminal charges would be laid.

“He had listed it unfounded,” she said. “I called Jane and said, the case is closed.”

Jane resolved to try and put the episode behind her.

“After that day I told myself, I’m going to pretend this didn’t happen,” she said. “I’m going to move on with my life.”

Although Jane was left wholly dissatisfied by the investigation into her assault, it wasn’t until 2017, as she continued to undergo counselling, that she learned she had recourse: She made the decision to file a report with the Office of the Independent Police Review Director (OPIRD), an agency that reviews complaints about police in Ontario.

Once again, Jane was skeptical. But she filed the report, citing her concerns about the OPP investigation.

“I honestly didn’t think it would go through,” she said.

To her surprise, however, the OIPRD ordered a review of the complaint. That review, conducted by Det. Angie Leigh of the OPP’s professional standards bureau, found Quemby had failed to conduct a thorough investigation of Jane’s allegations — and that he had misled Jane’s family and his superior officer in claiming he’d presented the evidence to prosecutors for consideration.

“This was a lie,” Leigh wrote of Quemby’s bogus “roundtable” assertion. “By his own admission PC Quemby stated that he did not consult with a Crown attorney, as he did not feel it was necessary.” Quemby said he did not recall being ordered by his superior officer to prepare information for the Crown, Leigh found.

Leigh’s investigation found that charges of neglect of duty and deceit against Quemby had been substantiated. Quemby’s disciplinary process resulted in him pleading guilty to a single count of neglect of duty and being docked two weeks’ pay.

Quemby’s superior officer was also found to have committed neglect of duty. Her disciplinary hearing is scheduled for this month.

The OPP’s approach to investigating reports of sexual assault has evolved, most especially since a sprawling analysis by the Globe and Mail in 2017 that found police were classifying 20 per cent of the reports they received as unsubstantiated. That revelation prompted a review that resulted in the OPP’s victim response support strategy, according to Jason Folz, media relations officer for the force’s central region.

Sexual assault investigators complete training in subjects including case management and investigative techniques, and regional training sessions reinforce the tenets of solid investigative practices and victim support, Folz said.

“These are important investigations,” Folz said. “The OPP is committed to ensuring investigating officers have the knowledge, skills and resources to effectively respond and document reports of sexual assault.” When Quemby entered his plea before a disciplinary tribunal in October 2018, Jane and her parents were present. When it was over, Jane walked up to Quemby and shook his hand.

“I wanted to look him in the face and touch his hand and say, here I am. This is the power I have when I take a stand,” she said.

Quemby’s lawyer, MacKenzie, said the officer took responsibility for his failure to diligently pursue the case.

“The matter was resolved with the consent of the prosecutor and the complainant. There was an agreed set of facts submitted and a joint penalty position,” MacKenzie said.

In written reasons for the sentence imposed, hearing officer K.M. Bickerton noted that the officer had accepted responsibility for the flawed investigation.

Quemby’s expression of remorse — which included a personal apology to Jane — is significant, Bickerton found, noting that the officer’s record is otherwise unblemished by disciplinary action or performance shortcomings.

“I am satisfied that PC Quemby recognizes the (seriousness) of his misconduct,” the hearing officer wrote. “There is nothing before me that would cause me to conclude that the behaviour related to this misconduct is anything but anomalous.”

The officer’s misconduct, however, warrants the disciplinary sanction imposed, Bickerton said: “It is of the utmost importance that victims/survivors of sexual assault are treated with empathy, compassion, respect and are made to feel like they are believed and supported.”

Jane, however, remains of the opinion that the punishment imposed on the officer is insufficient.

“I would say it’s bull- - - -,” she said. “It was almost like a slap in the face.”

Contrary to the suggestion that the plea deal saved Jane having to testify and relive the trauma of her assault, she insists she’d rather have had the opportunity to state her case for the hearing officer.

“I was actually looking forward to it,” said Jane. “I was ready; I prepared myself for months and months.

“I was ready to fight.”