Peel cop’s extortion probe called ‘biased’
Watchdog slams detective’s investigation into two men, including York police sergeant
“(The OIPRD’s findings are) a big relief for me and my family.” YORK POLICE SGT. GURDIP PANAICH
After a lengthy investigation, Ontario’s police complaints watchdog says it has found evidence that a Peel Regional Police detective conducted a “biased” extortion probe into two men, including a York Regional Police sergeant, then authorized a “misleading” press release erroneously linking the men with firearm offences.
The findings of an investigation by the Office of the Independent Police Review Director (OIPRD) are the latest devel- opments in a complex case that has already seen two York police officers and a Brampton businessman sue the Peel Regional Police Services Board, alleging they were victims of a “malicious” probe into an alleged extortion scheme investigated by Peel Det. Robert Crane.
The watchdog’s findings come as a relief to York police Sgt. Gurdip Panaich and civilian Surjit Brar, both of whom say their health, relationships and reputations have suffered as a result of being charged in March 2015 with extortion. Panaich was also charged with ob- struction of justice and was briefly suspended from his job with York Regional Police.
The charges against both men were withdrawn by the Crown a few months later. The OIPRD investigation alleges that Peel police did not have reasonable grounds to arrest and charge the two men, and that Crane’s evidence against them did not fit the Criminal Code definition of extortion.
“I hope and pray that no other person in the community is subjected to such false charges and a fabricated press release,” Panaich told the Star, calling the OIPRD’s findings “a big relief for me and my family.”
The allegations against Crane have not been tested at a police disciplinary tribunal. The OIPRD, which investigates complaints against police, has found evidence to substantiate five counts of misconduct as defined under Ontario’s Police Services Act, including discreditable conduct, unlawful or unnecessary exercise of authority, and neglect of duty.
However, professional misconduct charges have not yet been laid against Crane. Panaich told the Star that, because the probe by OIPRD investigators took longer than six months, the Peel police board must now determine whether the delay in the case was reasonable, a provision in the Police Services Act intended to avoid prolonged misconduct investigations.
Peel Regional Police Sgt. Josh Colley confirmed Monday that Crane has not been formally charged under the police act and said the OIPRD report is under review. “Once the review is complete, Peel Regional Police will proceed as directed,” Colley said. Colley said Crane wouldn’t be able to comment because of the ongoing review. Crane didn’t respond to a request for comment from the Star Monday. Peel Regional Police Board didn’t respond to a request for information by email or phone Monday.
The Peel police board has denied allegations of a negligent investigation in response to a $1-million law- suit filed in 2016 by Panaich, Brar and York Const. Sukhdeep Brar, Brar’s brother, who was investigated by Peel but never charged. In a March 2016 statement of defence, lawyers for the Peel police board and Crane, who is also named in the lawsuit, “expressly deny” malicious prosecution and false arrest.
“Det. Crane was, at all material times, acting in good faith in his conduct of the investigation and in compliance with his duties under the (Police Services Act),” the statement of defence says.
The incident dates back to 2014 and involves multiple players connected to a Brampton real-estate broker Dale Mundi, who came to Peel police with allegations that he was being defamed online.
As previously reported by the Star, and based on the Panaich and the Brar brothers’ statement of claim, the ordeal stems from a dispute with an employee who Mundi later suspected was responsible for a website containing defamatory statements about him.
According to the statement of claim, in late 2014, Mundi and Surjit Brar met with a man who apparently had text-message evidence implicating Mundi’s employee in the posts. The man was hesitant to give Mundi the evidence, so Mundi offered $25,000 for the text message that the man could use if a lawsuit arose, the statement of claim says. Mundi and the man proposed that Surjit Brar hold the money because he could be an independent third party.
Surjit Brar then contacted Sgt. Panaich, who worked with his brother in the York police, to tell him about this proposal, according to the statement of claim; Panaich and Const. Brar later told Surjit Brar not to get involved, the claim states.
But when Mundi met with Crane, he claimed the man with the text message had, in fact, demanded $25,000 in exchange for the evidence, according to the statement of claim. Mundi said these men could get away with such extortion “because of their ties to the police,” the claim says.
Bhupinder Nagra, Mundi’s lawyer, told the Star Monday she was unable to comment due to ongoing litiga- tion. Surjit Brar and Panaich were arrested in March 2015. According to the OIPRD, the charges were later withdrawn at the request of the Crown after reviewing the case. But Panaich and Brar say damage was already done, thanks to a Peel media release sent out after their arrests. The Peel media release linked Panaich and Surjit Brar to “an extortion plot” involving five men. It referred to 14 firearms-related charges against a Caledon man.
The OIPRD’s findings back up Panaich and Surjit Brar’s claims that the charges against the Caledon man stemmed from an “unrelated investigation.” Panaich and Surjit Brar say the inclusion of that man’s charges tarnished their reputations fur- ther, making it appear that there was a gang operating in Brampton involving police officers and people with guns.
The watchdog alleges the release contained misleading and inaccurate information and the name of an individual who was not connected to the investigation involved Panaich and Surjit Brar. Crane made a number of comments during an interview with Mundi that demonstrated “bias in his investigation” and that he had “made a determination regarding arrests and charges at the commencement of his investigation,” according to the OIPRD.