Cheating pervasive, cop testifies
Favouritism in promotions process an open secret, police tribunal told
Stressing it was “not an excuse,” Supt. Stacy Clarke says she was only doing what other officers have done when she helped preferred candidates cheat to rise in rank.
Under cross-examination at her ongoing police disciplinary tribunal, the high-ranking officer said her illfated decision to slip confidential promotional interview questions to her mentees was not the first time an officer gave their preferred candidates a prohibited leg up.
Clarke — who has pleaded guilty to seven charges of professional misconduct over a promotional scandal in 2021 — has told the tribunal that racialized officers believe the promotional playing field is skewed away from Black candidates. She cited a 2022 report by consulting firm Deloitte, which found “a clear perception” among officers that discrimination regularly occurs, including in a promotional process.
It is a commonly held belief — established before her own cheating scandal broke, “even before I became a cop” — that some candidates are given the interview questions beforehand, she said.
“We cannot for one second — and again, I’ve taken accountability, this is not an excuse, I’ve owned it — (but) what I am saying to you is you cannot be setting the stage to say that this is the first time. This is not,” Clarke said under cross-examination by police prosecutor Scott Hutchison.
“I’m not going to allow that to be the statement today,” she said.
Supt. Stacy Clarke’s lawyer called her actions an attempt to add a “counterweight to balance the tilted scale”
She stressed that Hutchison could not safely assume that other participants in the promotional process hadn’t also received the confidential questions ahead of time.
Asked if she believed the other members of her interview panel had shared the questions with their own preferred candidates during the 2021 promotional process, Clarke said: “I have no idea.”
“Did you ever see, or have direct knowledge, of any other superintendents being involved in cheating?” Hutchison asked.
“Just from hearing things,” Clarke said. “I don’t have direct knowledge … but it was conversation.”
Clarke has admitted she took photographs of confidential interview questions and texted them to six Black constables who were vying for a promotion to sergeant, a highly competitive process. The tribunal has heard Clarke, who is the highest-ranking Black woman in Toronto police history, committed what the prosecution calls “serious” misconduct in a desperate attempt to level the playing field for her racialized mentees.
On Thursday, her lawyer Joseph Markson called Clarke’s actions an attempt to add a “counterweight to balance the tilted scale.”
Clarke has also admitted to holding mock interviews with a candidate who was a “longtime family friend,” posing questions that had just been used in other interviews, sometimes word for word. She then participated in his real interview, failing to disclose her friendship or mentor-mentee relationship.
On the stand Thursday, Clarke conceded that she should have recused herself from being on his promotional panel. But she said it hadn’t occurred to her to do so at the time because she’d seen, on other occasions, senior officers participate in promotional interviews for candidates who were close professional or personal contacts.
“I could have most definitely recused myself, but I’m also trying to relay to you that that wasn’t an uncommon thing to see,” Clarke said.
Clarke was the final witness to be called at the much-watched sentencing hearing, unfolding inside a full Toronto police auditorium this week. After she stepped down from the witness stand, Markson, her lawyer, began his arguments for Clarke’s penalty before Robin McElary-Downer, a retired South Simcoe police deputy chief brought in as the hearing officer.
Clarke’s job is not at risk, although Hutchison has said her misconduct might well merit dismissal. Prosecutors are instead seeking a significant demotion: knocking Clarke down two ranks for a year, to staff sergeant, then down one rank for another year, to inspector. Clarke would then have to reapply for the superintendent rank.
Markson has argued that a fairer consequence is a lesser demotion, down one rank for one year or 18 months. In detailed submissions Thursday, he laid out the case for why Clarke’s misconduct must be viewed through the lens of antiBlack racism.
Stressing that Clarke feels apologetic and remorseful — and has taken accountability through pleading guilty — he nonetheless implored McElary-Downer to take into consideration the “good ends” Clarke sought to achieve.
“She risked everything for others,” he said, after experiencing the “crushing epiphany” that her advocacy for Black mentees through the official channels wouldn’t help them get promoted.
“There’s a virtuous purpose that runs through the misconduct,” he said. “Supt. Clarke sought to rectify the wrongs that she believed haunted the promotional process for Black candidates.
“The good end of fairness did not justify the employment of a wrong means: cheating. However, she committed the misconduct in a grossly misjudged and misbegotten effort to introduce a correcting measure of equality and fairness.”
The hearing continues Friday, when it’s expected Hutchison will give his submissions on penalty.