## [File an Officer Complaint](/file-officer-complaint) Jurisdiction - None -Canada-Alberta-British Columbia-Manitoba-New Brunswick-Newfoundland & Labrador-Nova Scotia-Ontario-Prince Edward Island-Quebec-Saskatchewan-Territories--Northwest Territories--Nunavut--Yukon Employer Individual Date Location Use my location Type of Officer Misconduct On Duty-Abuse of Authority or Oppressive Conduct-Bias-Based Policing or Discriminatory Enforcement-Conflict of Interest or Favouritism-Corruption, Bribery, or Extortion-Custody or Prisoner Misconduct-Disclosure Suppression or Improper Non-Disclosure-Evidence Fabrication, Falsification, or Tampering-Evidence Mishandling, Loss, or Contamination-Excessive or Unreasonable Force-Failure to Intervene-Failure to Render Aid-False Report, Notes, Testimony, or Official Statement-Harassment, Bullying, or Abusive Conduct-Improper Charging, Ticketing, or Enforcement-Improper Information Access or Disclosure-Improper Interview or Interrogation-Insubordination or Disobedience of a Lawful Order-Neglect of Duty or Failure to Investigate-Obstruction of Justice or Investigation-On-Duty Substance Use or Impairment-Policy, Procedure, or Training Violation-Retaliation against a Complainant, Witness, or Whistleblower-Sexual Misconduct involving a Member of the Public-Supervisory or Command Failure-Theft, Fraud, or Misappropriation-Unauthorized or Improper Use of a Weapon-Unlawful Arrest or Detention-Unlawful Search or Seizure-Violation of Right to Counsel or Procedural Rights-Witness or Complainant IntimidationDuty Adjacent-Alcohol or Substance Misconduct at a Work-Related Event-Boundary Violation or Exploitative Professional Relationship-Breach of Confidentiality or Unauthorized Disclosure-Conduct at Court, Training, a Police Function, or While On Call-Conflict of Interest, Favouritism, or Nepotism-Failure to Report Misconduct, Discipline, Charge, or Conflict-Improper Association or Criminal Connection-Improper Political Activity or Endorsement-Improper Social Media or Public Communication-Interference with an Internal or External Investigation-Misuse of Badge, Credentials, Uniform, or Position-Misuse of Police Equipment, Weapon, or Vehicle-Retaliation Arising from Police Employment-Secondary Employment Misconduct-Training, Recruitment, Promotion, or Evaluation Misconduct-Unauthorized Access to Databases or Records Outside Duty-Unauthorized Outside Business or Employment Conflict-Workplace Harassment or Discrimination Outside an Active AssignmentOff Duty-Assault, Public Violence, or Disorderly Conduct-Breach of a Court, Release, Probation, or Protective Order-Conduct Unbecoming or Materially Damaging to Public Trust-Conflict of Interest or Undisclosed Private Enterprise-Criminal Conduct-Cyber Misconduct, Doxxing, or Unauthorized Surveillance-Domestic or Interpersonal Violence-Financial Impropriety or Corrupt Private Conduct-Fraud, Theft, or Dishonesty-Hate, Extremist, Bias, or Discriminatory Conduct-Illegal Drug Conduct-Impaired or Dangerous Driving-Improper Association or Organized-Crime Connection-Obstruction or Failure to Cooperate with Authorities-Off-Duty Social Media or Public Conduct-Sexual Assault, Exploitation, or Serious Sexual Misconduct-Stalking, Threats, or Harassment-Weapons Offence or Unsafe Firearm Conduct Statement Attachments One file only. 64 MB limit. Allowed types: gif jpg jpeg png bmp eps tif pict psd txt rtf html odf pdf doc docx ppt pptx xls xlsx xml avi mov mp3 mp4 ogg wav bz2 dmg gz jar rar sit svg tar zip. Name Company Email Phone Address Address 2 City/Town State/Province Province/TerritoryAlabamaAlaskaAmerican SamoaArizonaArkansasArmed Forces (Canada, Europe, Africa, or Middle East)Armed Forces AmericasArmed Forces PacificCaliforniaColoradoConnecticutDelawareDistrict of ColumbiaFederated States of MicronesiaFloridaGeorgiaGuamHawaiiIdahoIllinoisIndianaIowaKansasKentuckyLouisianaMaineMarshall IslandsMarylandMassachusettsMichiganMinnesotaMississippiMissouriMontanaNebraskaNevadaNew HampshireNew JerseyNew MexicoNew YorkNorth CarolinaNorth DakotaNorthern Mariana IslandsOhioOklahomaOregonPalauPennsylvaniaPuerto RicoRhode IslandSouth CarolinaSouth DakotaTennesseeTexasUtahVermontVirgin IslandsVirginiaWashingtonWest VirginiaWisconsinWyomingAlbertaBritish ColumbiaManitobaNew BrunswickNewfoundland and LabradorNova ScotiaNorthwest TerritoriesNunavutOntarioPrince Edward IslandQuebecSaskatchewanYukon ZIP/Postal Code On behalf of Name Company Email Phone Address Address 2 City/Town State/Province Province/TerritoryAlabamaAlaskaAmerican SamoaArizonaArkansasArmed Forces (Canada, Europe, Africa, or Middle East)Armed Forces AmericasArmed Forces PacificCaliforniaColoradoConnecticutDelawareDistrict of ColumbiaFederated States of MicronesiaFloridaGeorgiaGuamHawaiiIdahoIllinoisIndianaIowaKansasKentuckyLouisianaMaineMarshall IslandsMarylandMassachusettsMichiganMinnesotaMississippiMissouriMontanaNebraskaNevadaNew HampshireNew JerseyNew MexicoNew YorkNorth CarolinaNorth DakotaNorthern Mariana IslandsOhioOklahomaOregonPalauPennsylvaniaPuerto RicoRhode IslandSouth CarolinaSouth DakotaTennesseeTexasUtahVermontVirgin IslandsVirginiaWashingtonWest VirginiaWisconsinWyomingAlbertaBritish ColumbiaManitobaNew BrunswickNewfoundland and LabradorNova ScotiaNorthwest TerritoriesNunavutOntarioPrince Edward IslandQuebecSaskatchewanYukon ZIP/Postal Code Use this form to report conduct by a current or former law-enforcement officer that may affect the officer’s credibility, reliability, integrity, impartiality, evidentiary practices, or suitability to participate in a criminal investigation or prosecution. The Stinchcombe List documents potential disclosure and impeachment material concerning Canadian justice-system participants. Its purpose is to preserve, organize, and make accessible information that may be relevant when an officer provides evidence, prepares reports, conducts an investigation, handles exhibits, participates in disclosure, or appears as a witness. A complaint may be submitted before an employing agency, oversight body, prosecutor, court, or disciplinary tribunal has issued a final decision. The procedural status of the matter must be accurately identified. ## Who May Be the Subject of an Officer Complaint A complaint may concern a current or former: - RCMP member; - Provincial police officer; - Municipal or regional police officer; - Indigenous police officer; - Railway, transit, university, legislative, or specialized police officer; - Peace officer; - Special constable; - Conservation or natural-resources officer; - Border, customs, immigration, or enforcement officer; - Correctional officer; - Sheriff, deputy sheriff, bailiff, or court-security officer; - Military police member; - Police supervisor, investigator, intelligence officer, or commanding officer; - Civilian police employee who collects, manages, analyzes, stores, transmits, or discloses evidence; - Other public official exercising police or law-enforcement powers. The complaint should identify the officer as precisely as possible. Include the officer’s full name, rank, employing organization, province or territory, detachment or division, and badge, regimental, employee, or identification number when lawfully available. ## Disclosure Relevance In *R. v. Stinchcombe*, the Supreme Court of Canada established that the Crown must disclose relevant information in its possession, whether favourable or unfavourable to the accused, subject to recognized exceptions. The obligation exists to protect the accused’s ability to make full answer and defence. Police and other investigative agencies are integral to that disclosure process. The Department of Justice has summarized the relationship by stating that investigators must report all relevant information to the officer in charge or Crown counsel, including information favourable to the accused, so that the prosecution can satisfy its disclosure obligations. In *R. v. McNeil*, the Supreme Court of Canada addressed police disciplinary and criminal-investigation records concerning an officer who was a principal Crown witness. The Court recognized that relevant police misconduct material may fall within the disclosure process when it has a realistic bearing on the proceeding or the officer’s credibility or reliability. An officer complaint submitted to the Stinchcombe List should therefore explain how the reported conduct may relate to one or more of the following: - Credibility; - Honesty; - Reliability; - Bias; - Motive; - Perception; - Memory; - Evidence handling; - Investigative integrity; - Disclosure compliance; - Abuse of authority; - Witness treatment; - Report accuracy; - Testimonial reliability; - Compliance with court orders or legal duties. The submitter is not required to prove that a particular prosecutor or court has already classified the information as disclosable. The submission should identify why the information may reasonably warrant preservation, review, or consideration. ## A Complaint Is Not an Official Finding Filing this form does not establish that the officer committed misconduct. It creates a record of the allegation and supporting material for review. A complaint may be published when it is sufficiently specific, relevant, and supported. ## Official Complaints and Stinchcombe List Complaints A complaint submitted through this page is made to the Stinchcombe List. It is automatically transmitted to: - The officer’s employing police service; - The RCMP; - A provincial or territorial civilian police-oversight body; - A police commission or police board; - A professional-standards unit; - A Crown prosecution service; - A judicial or disciplinary tribunal; - A privacy commissioner; - A human-rights commission; - A provincial ombudsperson; - Any other government authority. A person seeking discipline, compensation, criminal investigation, judicial relief, preservation of evidence, or an official administrative determination needs to file separately with the appropriate authority. Submitting an official complaint elsewhere does not prevent submission to the Stinchcombe List. Include the official complaint number, date filed, receiving agency, and current status whenever available. ## Information Required Provide as much of the following information as possible. ### Officer Identification - Full name; - Rank or position; - Employing organization; - Detachment, division, unit, or assignment; - Province or territory; - Municipality or operational jurisdiction; - Badge, regimental, employee, or identification number; - Former agencies or positions; - Known aliases or alternate spellings. ### Incident Information - Date and approximate time; - Location; - Description of the incident; - Officer’s role; - Names or roles of other involved officers; - Related occurrence, incident, file, court, or complaint numbers; - Related criminal charges or court proceedings; - Whether the officer was acting on duty, duty-adjacent, or off duty; - Whether audio, video, photographs, body-camera footage, dispatch records, or surveillance records exist. ### Complaint Description State specifically: - What the officer did or failed to do; - What the officer said or represented; - Which statement, record, action, or omission is disputed; - Why the conduct may affect credibility, reliability, integrity, bias, or disclosure; - Whether the conduct was isolated or part of a pattern; - What evidence supports the complaint; - Whether another agency has reviewed the matter; - Whether the allegation remains pending, disputed, substantiated, dismissed, appealed, or otherwise resolved. Use factual language. Avoid relying solely on labels such as “corrupt,” “dishonest,” “abusive,” or “unprofessional.” Describe the underlying acts, statements, omissions, records, and consequences. ## Supporting Documentation Attach or link the strongest available supporting records. Useful materials may include: - Police reports; - Officer notes; - Occurrence reports; - Arrest or detention records; - Search-warrant materials; - Affidavits; - Court decisions; - Hearing transcripts; - Disclosure correspondence; - Body-camera, dash-camera, surveillance, or cellphone video; - Audio recordings; - Dispatch or emergency-call records; - Photographs; - Emails, letters, text messages, or official correspondence; - Civilian-oversight complaints; - Professional-standards complaints; - Disciplinary decisions; - Criminal charge or conviction records; - Civil pleadings, judgments, or settlement documents; - Access-to-information records; - News reports from identifiable publications; - Sworn affidavits or declarations; - Statements from witnesses; - Proof that an agency received or acknowledged a complaint. Original, complete records are preferred. Identify any document that has been excerpted, edited, redacted, translated, or reconstructed. Do not deceptively alter documents, recordings, screenshots, metadata, or images. ## Evidence Preservation Where relevant records may be lost, overwritten, deleted, or destroyed, consider making a timely written preservation request to the organization that controls them. Potentially relevant records may include: - Body-worn-camera footage; - Vehicle-camera footage; - Dispatch audio; - Emergency-call recordings; - Interview-room recordings; - Police-radio traffic; - Database-access logs; - Automated licence-plate-reader records; - Surveillance-system records; - Email and messaging records; - Officer notebooks; - Draft reports; - Evidence-room logs; - Digital audit records; - GPS or vehicle-location records; - Use-of-force records; - Training and qualification records. The Stinchcombe List cannot compel preservation or disclosure of evidence. Submission to the website does not replace a preservation request, disclosure motion, access-to-information request, subpoena, court application, or official complaint. ## Complaints Based on Personal Knowledge A person may submit a complaint based on direct personal knowledge. The complaint should explain: - The submitter’s relationship to the incident; - What the submitter personally observed; - What information came from another person; - What information came from a document, recording, or public source; - Whether the submitter was a complainant, accused person, witness, lawyer, journalist, official, or other participant; - Whether any part of the account is based on inference or belief. Personal knowledge may support a complaint, but unsupported conclusions should be distinguished from observed facts. ## Anonymous and Confidential Submissions Anonymous submissions may be reviewed. However, anonymity can limit the ability to verify the information, seek clarification, or assess authenticity. Submitters may provide contact information for verification while requesting that it not be published. Contact information will not ordinarily appear on a public profile unless the submitter authorizes publication or the information is already part of a public record. The Stinchcombe List cannot guarantee confidentiality against every legal demand, security incident, court order, or statutory obligation. Do not submit information that would expose a protected witness, confidential informant, young person, sexual-offence complainant, or other legally protected person. ## Prohibited Material Do not submit: - Knowingly false information; - Fabricated evidence; - Materially altered documents presented as originals; - Threats or encouragement of harassment; - Home addresses or private family information; - Personal telephone numbers unrelated to the complaint; - Financial account or identity-theft information; - Medical information without a clear and lawful public-interest basis; - Information prohibited by a publication ban; - Sealed or unlawfully obtained records; - Information identifying a protected young person, complainant, witness, or confidential informant; - Material obtained through unauthorized access to a restricted system; - Content whose publication would violate a court order; - Unrelated personal attacks or discriminatory content. Sensitive information should be lawfully redacted before submission. ## Multiple Officers When several officers are involved, identify the conduct attributed to each officer separately. Do not attribute one officer’s conduct to every officer present unless the evidence supports joint participation, authorization, ratification, concealment, supervisory responsibility, or another specific basis for responsibility. Separate profiles may be created where the conduct and supporting records differ materially among officers. ## Supervisory and Institutional Conduct A complaint may also identify supervisory conduct, including: - Ordering improper conduct; - Approving a false or incomplete report; - Failing to preserve evidence; - Directing the withholding of information; - Discouraging or obstructing a complaint; - Retaliating against a complainant or whistleblower; - Ignoring known credibility concerns; - Permitting an officer to continue providing evidence without appropriate review; - Failing to notify prosecutors of relevant misconduct; - Concealing a disciplinary or criminal investigation; - Ratifying misconduct after receiving notice of it. A supervisor should not be named solely because of rank. The complaint should describe the supervisor’s acts, omissions, knowledge, instructions, approval, or responsibility. ## Review Process After submission, the Stinchcombe List may: 1. Review the complaint for completeness; 2. Verify the officer’s identity and employment; 3. Determine whether an existing profile already concerns the same person; 4. Review the supporting records; 5. Search for corroborating public information; 6. Request additional information from the submitter; 7. Contact the officer or employing organization for comment; 8. Categorize the complaint by source and procedural status; 9. Redact protected or irrelevant information; 10. Publish, defer, consolidate, archive, or reject the submission. Publication is not guaranteed. The Stinchcombe List may decline material that is unverifiable, legally restricted, unrelated to disclosure or credibility, excessively speculative, duplicative, or unsupported by sufficient factual detail. ## Officer Response and Corrections An officer or authorized representative may submit: - A response; - A correction; - An official disposition; - An acquittal; - A dismissal; - A withdrawn complaint; - An overturned disciplinary finding; - An appeal decision; - Exculpatory documentation; - Relevant contextual information; - Proof of mistaken identity. A supported response may be added to the public record. Providing a response does not necessarily require removal of the original complaint, particularly when the complaint itself and its disposition remain matters of public or disclosure relevance. ## Requesting Removal An officer may separately request removal or modification of published information. Removal is not automatic merely because: - The officer disputes the complaint; - An agency declined to investigate; - A complaint was not substantiated; - No criminal charge was filed; - A disciplinary matter ended without a finding; - The officer retired, resigned, transferred, or changed employment; - An internal record was administratively removed; - The underlying matter is old. The review will consider accuracy, procedural status, source reliability, continuing public-interest value, disclosure relevance, legal restrictions, and any evidence of mistaken identity or material error. ## Not an Official Government Determination The Stinchcombe List is an independent public-interest platform. Publication does not mean that a Crown office, police service, civilian-oversight body, court, tribunal, regulator, or government agency has formally designated the officer as dishonest, unreliable, or subject to disclosure. The platform records potential disclosure and impeachment material so that the information may be found, evaluated, challenged, corrected, and considered by appropriate participants in the justice system. ## Submitter Certification By submitting this complaint, the submitter affirms that: - The complaint is made in good faith; - The factual statements are believed to be accurate; - Allegations, inferences, and opinions are identified as such; - The correct officer has been identified to the best of the submitter’s knowledge; - Supporting records have not been deceptively altered; - Known contrary information has not been intentionally concealed; - Any material conflict of interest has been disclosed; - Publication is not known to be prohibited by law or court order; - Protected personal information has been removed where required; - The submission is intended to document a matter of legitimate legal, institutional, or public concern. ## Before You Submit Confirm that you have: - Identified the correct officer; - Identified the employing organization; - Described specific conduct rather than relying on conclusions; - Included the incident date and location; - Explained the potential credibility or disclosure relevance; - Attached or linked available supporting evidence; - Identified any official complaint number; - Stated the current procedural status; - Distinguished allegations from findings; - Disclosed any known acquittal, reversal, dismissal, or correction; - Removed protected personal information; - Preserved copies of the original records. Submission places the complaint into the Stinchcombe List review process. It does not commence an official police, criminal, civil, disciplinary, or judicial proceeding.