The fact that Const. Kristina Neilson of the Ottawa Police Service was charged with “discreditable conduct” by her Police Service should send a dire warning to anyone in law enforcement.
The professional standards unit was alerted by a Chief’s complaint meaning that somehow the Chief was advised of her donation.
As with many Canadians who faced bank account seizures by the Government one should ask by what authority were these actions allowed to happen.
There are laws in place to protect banking information and procedures set out for authorities to obtain such information but only with proper court procedures.

On Feb. 4, Peter Sloly, then the Chief of the Ottawa Police Service, declared the demonstration “an unlawful occupation.”
Angela Steward, crown prosecutor, in Const. Neilson’s case stated, “The public expects officers to obey the law and not donate to an illegal protest.”
This again is a misrepresentation of the facts as this protest was not illegal.
On February 7th, Ontario Supreme Court Justice, The Honorable Mr. Justice McLean ruled the convoy was in fact legal and allowed to continue.

The fact the Freedom Convoy was deemed legal by a Court should therefore make donations legal as well, end of conversation. The fact that Const. Kristina Neilson works for a Police Service is irrelevant.
Are Police agencies now going to charge their members for donating to church organizations or other legal organizations that the police service does not agree with? This becomes a very slippery slope for police agencies especially when the source of their information is questionable at best.

The courts have always used a test referred to as “fruit of the poisonous tree” when it comes to admitting evidence. How the court in this case disregarded applying this rule of discernment is concerning.
Const. Neilson simply exercised her rights as set forth by the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and as such, did not discredit Ottawa Police Service.
If there has been any discredit in this case it was by the courts and those involved for failing to recognize it.