Investigation
SiRT Concludes Investigation into Allegations Involving Annapolis Royal Police Service Members
File Number: 2026-0067
Date Opened: 2026-05-15
Date Published: 2026-10-23
Province: Nouvelle-Écosse, Nova Scotia
Police Agency: Annapolis Royal Police Department
Status: Concluded
Decision: No charges laid
Summary
On May 15, 2026, SiRT received a referral from the Chief of Bridgewater Police Service, who was contacted by a member of the Annapolis Royal Police Service (ARPS) and a member of the Annapolis Royal Board of Police Commissioners. The Board member indicated that a Police Occurrence Report had
been generated that alleged:
- two members of the ARPS had conspired to commit murder; and
- a member of the ARPS had extorted another ARPS member.
Given the seriousness of the allegations, SiRT assumed jurisdiction over the investigation in the public interest. In combination with available information and the fact that the alleged conspiracy had occurred more than a year earlier, SiRT determined that there was no immediate risk to public
safety.
The allegations were that two ARPS members, Subject Officers #1 and #2 (SO1 and SO2), discussed harming a well-known offender in the area (the Affected Party/AP). The evidence indicates that, in May 2025, SO2 attended SO1’s home to continue an earlier discussion about harming the AP, although it is unclear who arranged the meeting. SO2 suggested leaving their phones in another room and stated that an associate could take care of the AP. SO2 allegedly asked SO1 for the AP’s address, and SO1 responded that he wanted to be present. The precise details of the discussion remain
uncertain, and no independent witnesses are available to verify either account.
SO2 stated that SO1 arranged the meeting and that he never intended to act on the discussion. However, other ARPS officers reported that SO1 told them SO2 had arranged the meeting and that SO1 participated only to gather evidence that SO2 was a corrupt officer.
It is alleged that, in May 2026, SO2 extorted SO1 by threatening to release a recording of their earlier conversation if SO1 did not do as he requested regarding a work matter.
SO1 reported these interactions to Witness Officer #1 (WO1), who prepared a Police Occurrence Report addressing both allegations.