Under its current Chief, Peel police continues disturbing discriminatory practices he vowed to eradicate
It’s March 7, 2022, just after midnight.
A vehicle slaloms down a wide street in Brampton, the driver clearly under the influence.
Someone calls the Peel Regional Police.
Officer Jessica Brisson and Detective John Drummond respond to the call. Brisson approaches the vehicle in the area of Queen Street and Dixie Road and watches as the driver struggles to keep the car from drifting outside its lane. Detective Drummond, a 24-year veteran of the force, watches the car accelerate, then slow down, unable to maintain a constant speed, a typical effect of driving while under the influence of alcohol or certain drugs.
The red and blue lights of the patrol car are switched on and the officers prepare to execute a tandem stop.
It’s 12:15 a.m.
This is when the routine policing that had been followed up till now is about to go terribly wrong.
What happens next is a frightening departure from the fundamental obligation of officers hired to serve and protect us.
Chief Nishan Duraiappah vowed to reform Peel police, but residents fear the commitment was only empty words as the region’s Black communities continue to suffer from disproportionate policing.
(Peel Regional Police)
October 1st marked the fifth year Nishan Duraiappah has been the Chief of Peel Regional Police.
When he joined the organization it was a force in turmoil. The senior leadership under controversial former chief Jennifer Evans had refused to acknowledge the foundational shift happening beneath their feet. As the demographics in Brampton and Mississauga rapidly changed, there was a refusal from police leaders to diversify the frontlines, a dangerous byproduct of a deep-rooted culture of systemic discrimination and racism that continued to isolate visible minority officers and put communities at risk in two cities whose population was not reflected by the police service that was supposed to serve them.
A successful human rights complaint drew national attention and included evidence of a force that was run more like a frat house than one of the country’s largest police departments (over a five-year period starting in 2010, 640 Peel police officers, almost a third of the force at the time, had to be disciplined for misconduct, a rate more than three times the next worst force in Ontario; Evans had claimed only 2 percent of her officers faced any discipline for misconduct over their career).
An audit found 79 percent of responding PRP employees had experienced harassment or discrimination; 90 percent had witnessed it.
The harm extended outside the organization into local neighbourhoods impacted by a police department that paid little attention to them, as described, shockingly, in the decision for the human rights case.
The case of Baljiwan (BJ) Sandhu exposed a force that had little interest in representing the communities it served and even less ability to police them effectively.
A report used in the human rights case “indicated that certain criminal elements had become significantly more sophisticated following the increase in the South Asian population within the region. [The authors] specifically identified a lack of knowledge within the [Police] Service of these changes, and as a result crimes within the community were often not being addressed,” the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario detailed in its findings.
This was particularly disturbing for a force that operated in two cities whose South-Asian Canadian communities represented about half the total population.
A small unit that was created but disbanded shortly after, was referred to by senior officers and others as the “Paki task force”.
The concerns highlighted in the report that had been submitted to senior leadership at Peel Police were largely ignored.
Policing in the “South Asian” community was “generally devalued in the Service” because it was “associated with the South Asian population”, the tribunal concluded.
Attitudes toward the Black community were similar. When young Black men filled community centres to attend a series of consultations around carding (called street checks by Peel Police) as part of the Ontario Liberal government’s move to eliminate the racist practice almost a decade ago, Evans said they only showed up because “free pizza” was served. She later told CBC Radio during an interview addressing carding data that showed Black residents in Brampton and Mississauga were stopped in carding encounters by Peel Police at almost four times the rate compared to white residents, that they were carded “because they weren’t in the area where they lived.”
The host and critics of the force pointed out that officers and Evans would have no way of knowing where individuals live before arbitrarily stopping them on the street.
Carding was eventually eliminated after intense pressure from advocates and the Liberal government.
But data suggested little had changed around other discriminatory practices.
Use of force statistics have shown Peel officers were harming Black citizens at a significantly higher rate, while reports of complex crimes in the South Asian-Canadian community raised concerns that many remained unsolved due to an unwillingness among police brass to take them seriously, and a glaring lack of investigative and cultural competency stemming from the discriminatory culture. Among the approximately 90 senior officers in the force less than two decades ago not one was a visible minority in a force that policed two cities where non-white residents made up more than half the population (they now make up close to 70 percent).
“The biggest obstacle to the Peel Regional Police addressing issues of diversity, equity and inclusion in the police service may be the mindset of leaders and service members, demonstrated by a lack of acknowledgement that there are real systemic problems to address,” the audit completed by the Canadian Centre for Diversity and Inclusion (CCDI) concluded.
The Peel Police Services board underwent a dramatic shift. Two strong, former Liberal politicians had won the mayor’s seat in Mississauga and Brampton giving Bonnie Crombie and Linda Jeffrey membership on the police board. Amrik Ahluwalia, a turban-wearing Sikh, became chair of the board.
They immediately confronted Evans over her unrelenting use of carding. She claimed there were clear benefits of these illegal stops which targeted Brampton’s and Mississauga’s Black communities despite data that showed it was a discriminatory practice involving white officers who harassed non-white residents, causing devastating harm to young Black men in particular and destroying the critically needed trust between police and community members.
When carding data was finally unearthed by the media, proving it had zero investigative or other policing benefits, and was used overwhelmingly to target young Black men in particular, embarrassing Evans, her days were numbered.
Disturbing use of force data also revealed the discriminatory culture of a force that targeted non-white residents in random or routine stops but had little interest or ability to properly keep their communities safe through investigative practices.
After making it clear that Evans’ time was over, the new board members sought a new chief who would finally bring the change that was so critically needed.
But after Jeffrey lost the 2018 election to Patrick Brown he took over her seat on the board and promoted a candidate for chief who had a relationship with the new Brampton mayor.
Chief Duraiappah was brought forward despite his obvious lack of experience, having never served as a chief before, then suddenly moving into the role with the third largest municipal police force in Canada.
In the Halton police department, where he came from, few of the complex crime dynamics Peel struggles with were part of the responsibilities he had. He was now overseeing a community more than double the size with rising problems around organized crime, including drug trafficking, human trafficking, gang activity and incredibly complicated public safety issues rooted in the unique demographics of Canada’s seventh and ninth largest cities.
He vowed to change the culture of policing in Mississauga and Brampton.
He admitted there was a problem. He said he would reshape the senior ranks, and brought two colleagues with him from Halton.
Under mounting pressure from the community and concerns at the Ontario Human Rights Commission, he committed to root out systemic racism through an agreement laid out by the organization, which warned it would take matters into its own hands if the new chief proved to be nothing more than a performative actor in his new role.
He promised to take a fresh look at the budget and its unsustainable increases, claiming to understand that hiring more officers was not the way to become a more efficient and effective police force.
He had no experience to show that he really understood how to accomplish what the police board was demanding. Meanwhile, his friend, Patrick Brown showed no interest in holding the new chief to the commitments the board had demanded prior to the new Brampton mayor’s election.
The Peel police force has been plagued by systemic officer misconduct and a culture of racism for more than a decade.
(The Pointer file photo)
“Change is coming,” he vowed in June 2020 after George Floyd’s murder, a refrain that was starting to grow tired among community members who were running out of patience with the new chief, who seemed more interested in good PR than good policing.
As the officers follow the vehicle swerving down the street, the driver, JD, pulls over.
(The name of the driver has been changed because he is no longer charged with a criminal offence.)
When he cracks open the window, officer Brisson immediately smells alcohol. Blood samples later showed his blood alcohol level was well above the legal limit.
Officer Noor Al-Jamal arrives on the scene. Less than two minutes have passed. JD is still in his vehicle. He has expressed confusion to Brisson about why he was pulled over. Nobody has asked for his driver’s licence, registration or insurance.
At 12:17 Officer Al-Jamal switches on her body-worn camera:
“Why am I pulled over?” JD asks.
“Get out of the car,” Officer Brisson says.
“Who called you?”
“It doesn’t matter. Get out of the car. I was the one that saw you swerving.”
The officers are joined by two more colleagues, Officers Robert Delmar and Zemancik (no first name is provided in court records).
“Sir, you are not going anywhere, you are blocked in from every angle, so you might as well cooperate,” Officer Al-Jamal says through the crack in JD’s window.
“What I’m saying is you pulled me over for no reason,” JD says. He grabs his cellphone and calls 911. When he connects with an operator he tells her he’s been pulled over for impaired driving, but he’s not impaired.
The officers attempt to open the driver’s door, but it’s locked.
“Guys, don’t do that,” JD says.
Delmar and Zemancik have joined their colleagues around the vehicle. JD continues to speak to the 911 operator.
“Buddy, we are going to have to break the window if you don’t get out of the car,” Zemancik warns. JD uses a racial slur while talking on the phone, seemingly in reference to one of the officers outside the car—court records do not specify what was said. One of the other officers bangs on the window. “Hey, we are going to break the window.”
Fifteen seconds after the first warning, Officer Delmar slams his baton through the driver’s side window, spraying glass across the interior of the front seat and directly into JD’s face. A small shard lodges in his eye.
“We warned you man,” Delmar states. He swipes glass away from the window with his baton. “Happy?” he asks.
Officer Delmar jabs the baton through the window again, it’s unclear whether he’s clearing more glass or attempting to prod JD into action.
“Get out of the car,” he yells.
JD responds with a racial slur, apparently directed at Delmar, who is white. JD is Black.
JD steps out of the vehicle. He has both of his hands in the air, one is clutching his cell phone.
Delmar has a taser in one hand, a baton in the other as officers surround him.
Delmar says: “You’re about to get fucking lit up.”
The September press release is celebratory. It’s Peel police patting themselves on the back for a job well done—the increasing use of de-escalation techniques in “use of force interactions” with Peel residents. It’s evidence of PRP’s ongoing effort to keep residents safe and “reduce disparity and improve outcomes for our community,” according to Chief Duraiappah.
When the Peel Regional Police signed the Memorandum of Understanding with the Ontario Human Rights Commission in 2020, meant to identify legally binding remedies to eliminate systemic racism within the force, it set out to “promote transparency and accountability”.
In fact, the goal of improving the information flow between PRP and the community is outlined in the very first sentence of the MOU.
The press release a month ago was far from transparent.
While celebrating the increase in the use of de-escalation techniques during these potential harmful interactions and the ongoing work to “reduce disparity”, the press release failed to mention that the use of force against Black residents, the very disparity the PRP are trying to reduce, continues to be incredibly disproportionate and has actually increased since 2020.
To date, PRP officers filed 835 use of force reports for 2023 (sources have told The Pointer these statistics are incomplete, with reports still being processed). Of these, 276 involved Black residents. This means 33 percent of use of force incidents involve a Black person while Black residents make up only 9.8 percent of Peel’s population. PRP only police Brampton and Mississauga, Caledon is overseen by the OPP.
This disparity, despite being a key component of the MOU, is not mentioned in the press release.
The new report shows the PRP have managed to reduce the number of these incidents that result in injury.
But unfortunately that was not the case for JD.
Clutching his cellphone in his hand, JD turns and places his other hand behind his back. Officers move in.
“No, you can’t take my phone,” JD tells one of the officers.
“Taser,” one of the officers says. It’s unclear who.
“Taser,” Detective Drummond states.
The handcuffs are around JD’s left wrist, but not his right. For some reason, these cuffs are removed, and are either repositioned, or another set is used. Now, both of JD’s hands are behind his back.
“To be clear, both of Mr. JD’s hands are behind his back and amenable to being handcuffed,” writes Justice Paul Monahan in a February ruling.
“Taser,” Drummond says again.
“Stop, stop,” another officer says.
“What is wrong with you man,” Delmar says. JD repeats his racial slur.
“I was not impaired,” he says.
“Don’t call me a fucking [racial slur],” Delmar states.
It’s 12:19. Footage from the body camera shows the handcuffs are around both of JD’s wrists, although the right wrist does not appear to be fully closed.
“Stop resisting,” Delmar yells, yanking on JD’s handcuffed hands. He delivers at least four knee strikes to JD’s thigh area.
“I am not resisting,” JD says.
“Put your hand behind your back,” Officer Al-Jamal orders.
The video shows both of his hands are already behind his back.
“My hand is behind me,” JD says.
“Get your hand behind your back,” Al-Jamal repeats.
“My hand is behind me. I am not resisting,” JD repeats.
Detective Drummond fires his taser, the electric prongs stabbing into JD’s abdomen.
He cries out in pain and falls to the ground. Delmar hits JD several times in the shoulder with his baton. While JD is on the ground Detective Drummond fires his taser a second time.
“Please I am not resisting, please I am not resisting, please my hand is behind me,” JD says. “I was not resisting."
A male police officer responds: “You were buddy.”
In the years since the signing of the agreement with the OHRC, community members have expressed growing doubt about the commitment of Peel police to achieving any real change as a result of the partnership.
It took years of community advocacy to see any sort of effective steps to fulfill the agreement, and harmful interactions with the community have only continued to widen the gap PRP leadership claim they are committed to closing.
November 9th will mark the one year anniversary of the day nearly 30 police officers descended on Cardinal Leger Secondary School in Brampton, responding to a rare call of an officer in danger.
According to police, a youth investigative officer was at the Catholic high school in a meeting with the principal. During that meeting, a fight broke out in the school cafeteria. When the officer, who was in plain-clothes, tried to intervene, two of the girls allegedly attacked her.
All three girls involved in the fight, two 15-year-olds, one 17-year-old, were arrested.
However, the narrative from police did not match many student witnesses to the incident. The police state the plain-clothed officer announced herself as a member of the Peel Regional Police before attempting to intervene in the fight. Students who were present say this did not happen. According to police it was the teen girls who initiated contact, assaulting the officer after she stepped in to stop the argument. Students say it was actually the officer who initiated contact, turning and pushing one of the students away from the altercation before they fought back—not knowing they were dealing with a police officer; they claim she did not identify herself.
Students from Cardinal Leger Secondary School in Brampton speak out about a misleading police narrative around an incident at the school.
(Joel Wittnebel/The Pointer Files)
The Peel police press release also stated no injuries were reported. But one girl detained by police was later taken to hospital and was reportedly throwing up blood. When she tried to leave the hospital later that day, she suffered a seizure.
It is another example of a police force bent on convincing residents it has changed, while its actions and results continue to suggest the opposite.
The disturbing incident left many residents in Peel’s Black communities shaken and with the feeling that not much had changed within the Peel police force. This is further reinforced by the new use of force data.
David Bosveld, a dedicated community activist who has been at the forefront of advocacy for Peel police reform, says the data clearly show PRP is failing in its effort to change.
“Police reform led by police themselves is not achievable. The racism embedded in the foundation of policing in this country is part of the culture and always has been,” he tells The Pointer.
From the moment JD was pulled over, to him being tasered, beaten and tasered again on the side of a Brampton roadway, only about three minutes had passed.
He was charged with impaired driving. The charge was eventually tossed out for excessive use of force with Justice Monahan finding JD’s Charter rights were significantly violated.
During testimony about the incident, PRP officers could not explain much of their behaviour that night, and at times, at best, misled the court about what happened, and at worst, lied under oath.
On the stand, both Detective Drummond and Officer Brisson testified that JD was being “assaultive” and flailing his arms. Drummond stated the reason he tasered JD, twice, was “in my opinion [JD] became assaultive.”
This was not the case. As Justice Monahan outlines, the body camera footage shows that within 12 seconds of stepping out of the car he kept both his hands behind his back.
“He could not have his hands behind his back and flail his arms at the same time,” Justice Monahan stated. “Let me be clear, I find as a fact that Mr. JD was not being assaultive in any way.”
Justice Monahan criticized the “inconsistent” evidence of Detective Drummond who claimed he fired the taser the second time because he had concerns that it didn’t work on the first fire, but then admitted later that he could hear the first shot “arcing”—meaning it was working. He also claimed JD was still standing after the first shot, which was not true.
“He was not still standing after the first deployment and that is confirmed by the body camera video as well as Detective Drummond’s other evidence that the first deployment took JD to the ground,” Justice Monahan wrote.
The ruling—which led to JD’s acquittal on the charges—is also highly critical of Officer Delmar’s actions, which started with him ignoring the de-escalation efforts of Zemancik and Brisson when he simply walked up to the window and smashed it into JD’s face without warning. This showed a “reckless indifference” to JD’s wellbeing.
His “you are about to get fucking lit up” threat suggested anger and “an intention to inflict punitive pain,” Monahan stated. “He was taking a leading role in the arrest of JD and his words set the tone for the arrest and the use of force.”
During his testimony, Delmar claimed hitting JD with his baton and his repeated knee strikes were necessary as JD was not giving up his hands to be cuffed.
Again, this is not true.
“The difficulty with this evidence is that it doesn’t actually accord with what happened as disclosed by the body camera evidence,” Justice Monahan stated. “JD was fully handcuffed on the left side and handcuffed but not closed on the right side within 19 seconds after he was out of the car.”
Later in his testimony, Delmar admitted it was possible he didn’t see that JD was already handcuffed, describing the situation as “very dynamic” and noting that the continued beating “doesn’t sound like something that I would do knowing that he was handcuffed.”
But that’s exactly what he did.
“Police allowed their anger and frustration to lead to a situation where force was used when very little or none was required or necessary in the circumstances. He certainly did not need to be the subject of multiple knee strikes, baton strikes and twice tasered,” Justice Monahan concluded. He stated that in the “long term interest of justice and the reputation of our justice system” the breath sample evidence that showed JD was impaired must be declared inadmissible, leading to his acquittal.
During his own testimony, JD claimed his treatment at the hands of police was because of his race. JD testified that the reason he called 911 after being pulled over was “he had seen fatal interactions between Black men and the police online and that he was frightened.”
“This fear is understandable,” Justice Monahan acknowledged. However, he disagreed any racial element played a role in the excessive use of force.
He noted that it is possible the immediate move to arrest him, instead of asking for his licence and registration may have been a function of racial bias.
“I do wish to note that I find it strange that JD was not even asked for a driver’s licence or insurance when he was first pulled over. Rather he was simply told that he was under arrest for impaired driving and to get out of the vehicle,” Monahan stated. “I find this odd and the police gave no explanation for it at trial. It may be that this was a function of racial bias, but on this record I am not prepared to make that finding.”
The Pointer sent several interview requests to the lawyer representing JD in the case, but no response was received.
Peel Regional Police did not respond to a list of questions about any disciplinary actions being taken against the officers involved in JD’s arrest, despite repeated attempts by The Pointer.
According to a PRP report detailing offences by officers under the Police Services Act, one officer was disciplined after “SIU provided video depicting officers unlawfully assaulting and tasering a male during an arrest.” While the details are similar, the PRP did not confirm if this was the case involving JD and which officer was disciplined.
The report notes the officer was reduced in rank from First Class Constable to Second Class for a period of 12 months, then returned to First Class “on the basis of satisfactory work performance”.
The same report refers to another officer dropped from First to Second Class Constable as a result of “allegations that the officer used excessive force on an impaired driver.” Again, it’s not clear if this is in reference to JD’s case.
The same report details a number of other disciplinary actions taken against Peel officers in 2023, including for:
-
Allegations of gang affiliation (dismissed unless resignation received)
-
Embarrassing a civilian by having them do physical exercises “in lieu of a ticket” (reduction in rank for six months and remedial training)
-
Filing nine fraudulent benefit claims (reduction in rank for three months)
-
Not wearing a mask and “hugging protestors” (reduction in rank for 12 months)
-
Getting into a single vehicle collision and arrested for impaired driving (reduction in rank for 18 months)
-
Failing to properly investigate historical intimate partner violence incidents (reduction in rank for 18 months)
-
Shoplifting at a Superstore while off duty (reduction in rank for 18 months)
-
Charged with domestic assault (reduction in rank for six months)
David Bosveld has been a tireless community advocate for much of the past decade, working to help reform Peel Police.
(The Pointer file photo)
In September 2019, the Peel Regional Police committed to seven guiding principles outlined in the OHRC’s policy on Eliminating Racial Profiling in Law Enforcement. The first of the seven states the organization must acknowledge the reality of racial profiling and its impact on trust in the community.
Since that time, incidents have continued to drive a wedge between the police and Peel’s Black communities.
On Mother’s Day 2020, Chantelle Krupka was shot in the back while laying on the lawn of her Mississauga home after being tasered by a PRP officer. The officer, Valerie Briffa, quickly resigned from the force and pleaded guilty to careless use of a firearm. She was given a conditional discharge in November 2021 and sentenced to 18 months probation.
“The overreaction can only be explained by the inference that because of implicit stereotypical associations that arose because of the applicant’s race, they saw her, as a Black child, being more of a threat, being bigger, stronger and older than she was and consequently, of being more in need of control than they would have seen a White child in the same circumstances,” tribunal adjudicator Brenda Bowlby stated in her ruling.
Expert reports dating back decades have highlighted the extent to which Black communities are disproportionately impacted by police actions compared to others. And yet in Peel, community members who have been tasked with all the heavy lifting for years to try and eliminate this harm, are met with press releases and police rhetoric that attempt to brush the problem under the carpet.
The disturbing treatment of JD, and the ongoing disparity in the use of force against Black residents have many concerned that the principles PRP agreed to, and the work with the OHRC to reform the force are being ignored.
Bosveld states: “This is not a public relations exercise and it’s disingenuous to treat it as such with messaging that doesn’t highlight the underlying truth that Black people are three times more likely to have force used against us than our representation in the population suggests, and that number hasn’t changed since the data was first released.”
Email: [email protected]
At a time when vital public information is needed by everyone, The Pointer has taken down our paywall on all stories to ensure every resident of Brampton, Mississauga and Niagara has access to the facts. For those who are able, we encourage you to consider a subscription. This will help us report on important public interest issues the community needs to know about now more than ever. You can register for a 30-day free trial HERE. Thereafter, The Pointer will charge $10 a month and you can cancel any time right on the website. Thank you
Submit a correction about this story
