Ontario police officer who gave preferential treatment to two GTA tow operators fired

An Ontario Provincial Police (OPP) patch is seen in Ottawa, on Sunday, Sept. 29, 2024. THE CANADIAN PRESS/Spencer Colby

An Ontario Provincial Police officer who pleaded guilty to criminal charges for giving preferential treatment to two tow truck companies in the Greater Toronto Area has been fired.

The Ontario Police Arbitration and Adjudication Commission (OPAAC) ordered the termination of Const. Roberto Visconti’s employment with the OPP following a hearing that found he “engaged in conduct that constitutes misconduct.”

OPAAC Adjudicator Leonard Favreau wrote in his decision that firing Visconti was the “only reasonable penalty proportionate to the misconduct.”

His misconduct and disciplinary hearings were held together “in absentia” or without Visconti. Favreau wrote that Visconti had repeatedly failed to engage in the proceedings.

“As noted in the Interlocutory Decision, Constable Visconti failed to take reasonable steps afforded to him to retain counsel or provide means to serve him with notices of hearings,” he wrote, adding that notices were also sent to the home address he provided, but they were refused or no efforts were made to respond.

According to the OPAAC decision, Visconti, who was charged by the OPP Professional Standards Unit in 2022, pleaded guilty to one count of breach of trust on June 12, 2024. He was handed a suspended sentence and 12 months of probation.

In the summary of the agreed statement of facts included in the OPAAC decision, Visconti admitted to giving preferential treatment to two tow truck operators and “took steps” to ensure the companies received almost all towing referrals from his traffic stops.

Visconti referred 700 of the 703 tickets he issued between Jan. 2018 and Jan. 2021 to the two companies despite there being 80 different towing operators in the area.

According to the summary of the facts, Visconti would inform the two operators when he was working and where he would set up his radar detection, prompting them to park their trucks near him.

As a result of his preferential treatment, the two companies received a combined financial benefit of $925,000 over the three-year period.

“In knowingly providing a significant financial benefit to the recipients of his preferential treatment, the Defendant’s conduct represented a serious and marked departure from the standards expected of a police officer for a purpose other than the public good,” according to the summary of the statement of facts.

The OPP, who was the prosecution, submitted that dismissal was the only appropriate punishment, “given the seriousness, prolonged nature, and public impact of the misconduct, as well as the lack of meaningful engagement or evidence of rehabilitation from the defendant.”

“Having been found guilty of a criminal offence in the performance of those duties and authorities, I find that Constable Visconti has greatly undermined public trust, in him and in policing in general,” Favreau wrote in his decision.

He noted that Visconti’s misconduct was not a “single aberrant act or isolated incident.”

Favreau wrote that while Visconti’s plea shows that he took some responsibility and could be recognized as evidence of remorse, his decision not to participate in the OPAAC hearings diminished that.

“I note that outside of his guilty plea in the criminal matter, there is no evidence before me that Constable Visconti has expressed remorse or has an understanding of the impact his actions have had on his colleagues and superiors within the Police Service, on the Service as an institution, and on the public,” the adjudicator wrote.

Visconti’s decision not to engage also undermined his willingness to engage in meaningful reform or rehabilitation.

“I note that he provided no explanation for his absence from these proceedings, nor did assert any medical limitations, disability, scheduling issue, or other conflict that would have prevented his participation,” Favreau wrote.

He added that Visconti was aware of the OPAAC hearings and “deliberately obstructed and delayed” them.

The Ontario Provincial Police Association said in a statement that it acknowledges the adjudicator’s decisions.

Scott Mills, the strategic communications coordinator of the OPPA, said that the officer did not request legal assistance from the union.

“The OPPA recognizes the importance of accountability in policing and its impact on the public. We also reaffirm the right of all of our officers to procedural fairness, representation, and careful adjudication in discipline hearings,” Mills said in a statement.

“This matter will be reviewed closely by our legal counsel for its implications under the CSPA and the evolving police discipline process in Ontario.”