Punishment for drunk-driving Vancouver cop too lenient, adjudicator finds

The Vancouver Police Department's Cambie Street headquarters is seen on Saturday, Jan. 9, 2021. (Darryl Dyck / THE CANADIAN PRESS)

The punishment handed down by the Vancouver Police Department for an officer involved in an impaired-driving crash was too lenient, an adjudicator has found.

Const. Samuel Cheung was initially given a five-day suspension, without pay, after an internal investigation found he engaged in “discreditable conduct” by drunkenly rear-ending a minivan while off duty on the night of July 2, 2022.

There were eight passengers in the minivan at the time, including several children, though no one was seriously injured.

B.C.’s Office of the Police Complaint Commissioner ordered a review of Cheung’s punishment, and adjudicator S. David Frankel, a retired judge, determined a longer suspension of 12 days was more appropriate under the circumstances.

“His actions were both reckless and dangerous,” Frankel wrote, in his decision. “They demonstrate a lack of judgment not in keeping with the expectations of someone sworn to uphold the law.”

Drinking at home, behind the wheel

Investigators determined Cheung drank “several beers” at his Vancouver home before getting behind the wheel that night, and took two more cans on the road with him.

After the collision – which happened past neighbouring Richmond, in Delta – police found one beer underneath Cheung’s vehicle, and another that the constable admitted to having thrown into the bushes.

“There was fresh beer spattered inside the vehicle, including on the windshield and dashboard in front of the driver’s seat,” Frankel wrote.

Cheung was given two breathalyzer tests, including one that showed his blood-alcohol content at 0.11, according to the decision. The legal limit is 0.08.

The Vancouver Police Department’s internal disciplinary process was initially put on hold, pending the outcome of a criminal case against Cheung for impaired driving. The officer ultimately pleaded guilty to a lesser charge of driving without due care and attention under the Motor Vehicle Act.

He was fined $1,150 and given a three-month driving ban, with an exception between the hours of 6 a.m. and 9 p.m. so he could work.

Officer’s conduct ‘more egregious’

The police superintendent who decided Cheung’s initial punishment cited several prior decisions for what he described as “similar misconduct,” each of which resulted in suspensions of between three and five days.

But Frankel found the constable’s behaviour “more egregious” than those cases – pointing out the other officers had failed breathalyzers after being pulled over, but had not crashed into anyone.

“Cheung not only drove after drinking several beers, he continued to drink while driving,” the adjudicator wrote. “It is fortunate no one was seriously injured as a result of his lack of judgment.”

Frankel noted that Cheung had no prior disciplinary record, and gave the constable credit for owning up to his behaviour. Cheung wrote a letter apologizing to the victims and taking full responsibility for the crash, and has already completed a responsible driving program.

Prior to the incident, the constable had been “under some stress related to a pending move to a new position, wondering how it would affect his career going forward,” according to Frankel’s decision.

Afterward, he was put on non-operational duties.

Cheung’s 12-day suspension was broken into two consecutive parts, for separate acts of discreditable conduct: 10 days for drunk driving, and two days for tossing away his beer can.

“Any action by a police officer to hide evidence of their own involvement in illegal activity is deserving of disapprobation,” Frankel wrote.

The constable was also ordered to attend counselling for help dealing with the stresses of his job.