In Espanola court on July 15, GSPS Const. Melisa Rancourt had one of three charges against her dropped.
Rancourt is a GSPS constable who faced disciplinary action during the pandemic after being arrested due to her refusal to show proof of vaccination.
She had been accused of assaulting a 12-year-old hockey player on Feb. 11
While Rancourt is still charged with uttering threats and causing a disturbance, the assault charge has been withdrawn by Crown attorney David Kirk.
Both Kirk and Rancourt, as well as her attorney, Len Walker, appeared virtually for the trial confirmation hearing.
A trial confirmation hearing is undertaken to ensure that both attorneys, clients and witnesses are prepared for trial, as well as getting an idea if there will be any challenges or motions that need to be dealt with prior to the trial commencing.
Rancourt is scheduled to proceed with trial in Espanola court on Sept. 17 and 18.
The appearance also saw Kirk confirm that while OPP officers who will testify at trial have confirmed their attendance, “civilian witnesses,” have not yet been subpoenaed.
In order to update, Justice Dana Peterson, counsel and Rancourt will return to Espanola court on Aug. 6 to further confirm trial details.
In 2021, Rancourt was arrested and charged with resisting a peace officer and entering a premises when entry has been prohibited after 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.
These charges were dropped after Rancourt completed a diversion program, but she still faced a police disciplinary hearing. It was there that hearing judge, Superintendent Peter Lennox, determined Rancourt should be demoted from first-class constable to third-class constable for a period of one year, followed by one year in the rank of second-class constable, conditional on satisfactory performance of duty by the officer and the concurrence of her unit commander.
But Rancourt and her lawyer, David Butt, appealed Lennox’s decision. The appeal was heard April 20, 2023, and the decision handed down July 10, 2023.
Rancourt and Butt argued that the language of the decision, “conditional on satisfactory performance of duty by the officer and the concurrence of her unit commander,” gave too much power to the unit commander.
The panel hearing the appeal agreed, stating: “The penalty of demotion as worded is improper as it gives unfettered discretion to the unit commander.”
There are no other changes to the original decision, writes the panel. “The appeal is otherwise dismissed and the penalty confirmed.”
Rancourt will next appear in Espanola court on Aug. 6 for further trial confirmation.
Jenny Lamothe covers court for Sudbury.com.