Let me state this bluntly: OPP officer James Orser is a bastard.

A creep.

A slimy, untrustworthy jerk with zero respect for women and for the policing profession, unfit to wear the uniform. As, indeed, a tribunal found two years ago, when ordering Orser to quit or be fired within seven days after the sentencing hearing which followed his guilty plea to discreditable conduct in connection with a sex video.

That video, as described in an agreed statement of facts, was shot some time between February 2009 and June 2010 when Orser was a constable in Campbellford. It depicts an intimate act between Orser and his then girlfriend, a woman (known only as A.B. in documents, her identity protected by a publication ban) who, through her own job, had regular contact with the OPP, including members from the Campbellford detachment.

Orser had turned on his phone while the couple were having sexual intercourse, without A.B.’s consent. When she noticed what he was doing, she immediately covered her face and told Orser to switch the damn thing off. Orser told her he had, but he hadn’t. A.B. asked him to delete the recording. He said he had, but he hadn’t.

In June of 2010, Orser was assigned to assist with policing the G8 summit in Huntsville. On the bus to Huntsville, he showed the 15-second video clip to another officer. He showed it again to a group of summit officers whilst socializing in off-hours.

Here’s how one of them recalled it to the tribunal: “Orser said, look at this, and pulled his phone out and had a video of him having sex with his girlfriend at the time … I recognized her … The camera is focused on her laying there, you could just see it from like a bit here and then up, from about thigh level, like from the thigh, laying on her back to the top of her … pointing it down so you could see part of his genitalia and her genitalia area … It was like a second before I turned away, a couple of seconds, holy cow, it was like, what the hell are you showing? I think he just whipped it out.”

Why would a man do such a thing? The answer — whether the couple had broken up, whether Orser was being boastful or simply malicious — is not to be found in the hundreds of pages which now constitute the judicial record.

But one of the tribunal exhibits was a written victim impact statement from A.B., explaining why she brought the matter to professional standards upon discovering Orser’s betrayal.

“He exploited me and not just to individuals I don’t know but my peers and other professionals that I worked with and saw often. This isn’t just an embarrassing experience that you get over. I feel shame, distrust and fear, among other emotions. It makes me sick to my stomach when I recollect the events. There are no words to explain how it feels when someone tells you that they have seen a video of you naked. He took something intimate and personal that is supposed to mean something in a relationship and made it into a complete joke; a bragging tool …

“This is not something that I will get over. This is something that will haunt me forever.”

As the hearing officer noted: “Only he knows why he made the recording, why he kept it and why he showed it on two occasions … If just once over that time frame, PC Orser was guided by what could be considered an average conscience, reasonably integrity, ethics or morality, he simply would have deleted the recording. It causes me to question if these characteristics are non-existent.

“This conduct goes well beyond a simple one-off mistake or error in judgment; rather it is consistent with a flaw in PC Orser’s character.”

“Reprehensible” was only one from a number of damning descriptors. It rendered Orser “useless” as a law enforcement officer, his potential testimony in court cases related to his job “untrustworthy,” his continuing presence on the force bringing policing into disrepute with the public and with his colleagues. How could he possibly not have grasped the repercussions?

But it was not the first instance where Orser had tarnished the shield with inappropriate conduct involving women he fancied.

In another incident, from 2008, Orser hounded the 20-year-old daughter of friends, a woman whose younger sister had babysat Orser’s daughter, repeatedly asking her to go on a date with him. She wasn’t interested — too much of an age gap, for one thing. One day, when “M.D.” pulled into a Campbellford bank parking lot, driving her father’s truck, Orser drove up alongside, blocking her vehicle. Asked if she was supposed to be driving the truck. M.D. joked that maybe she’d forgotten her driver’s licence. To which Orser replied: “Oh, well that’s a ticket right there.” And proceeded to write out a note: “Looking to (sic) good to drive a motor vehicle, contrary to Section ‘69’ of the Highway Traffic Act.”

Ha-ha. But … creepy.

Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading...

When that resulted in a Police Act charge of discreditable conduct, Orser pleaded guilty (in 2015) and forfeited 80 hours’ pay.

From that hearing officer: “(I) find the exhibited behaviour of PC Orser goes beyond that of an ill-intended joke. It was unwanted, suggestive and repulsive. Others would have good reason to deem PC Orser’s behaviour as harassing in nature and it goes far below the expected professionalism of a police officer. I find the nature and seriousness of PC Orser’s misconduct troubling and an aggravating factor.”

A troubled man? Possibly. A deep delve into the second hearing documents show a sharp disagreement between psychiatric experts over whether Orser, during those years, suffered from post-traumatic stress disorder, brought on by the trauma of several on-the-job events: a high-risk takedown, a suicide call, a fatal vehicle collision and, most crucially, a house fire in which two children died. Orser and another officer were awarded a Medal of Bravery for twice trying to enter the blazing apartment in unsuccessful attempts to rescue the victims.

As well, in 2015, Orser was acquitted by a Superior Court judge on sex crime charges — two teenage girls who claimed he’d assaulted them at his home.

At the second tribunal hearing, Orser’s treating psychiatrist insisted the PTSD had a “causal” effect on the officer’s behaviour, leading to symptoms of aggression and hyper-arousal, which would account for him making and showing the sex video clip. “PTSD is written all over this,” she testified. But a forensic psychologist who reviewed the case for the tribunal testified that no causal link had been established; he was not satisfied that showing the cellphone video was specifically linked to Orser’s PTSD symptoms.

In any event, though the hearing adjudicator was dubious about the treating psychiatrist’s “tunnel vision,” he accepted that Orser has PTSD. He was “less than persuaded,” however, that PTSD had possibly played a role in Orser’s behaviour. That’s why he ordered the dismissal.

A week ago Friday, the Ontario Civilian Police Commission upheld Orser’s firing.

He has 30 days to file an appeal. Which would reinstate his pay in the interim.

Orser has been suspended with pay since 2012.

The creep.

Rosie DiManno is a columnist based in Toronto covering sports and current affairs. Follow her on Twitter: @rdimanno