First of two G20 police misconduct cases delayed after complainant axes lawyer

An appeal of one of two cases of police misconduct arising out of the turbulent Toronto G20 summit almost seven years ago has been delayed after a complainant opted to represent himself rather than have a lawyer do so.

• BabakAndalib-Goortaniback at work on Toronto police force

It was not immediately clear when the hearing involving Const. Babak Andalib-Goortani before the Ontario Civilian Police Commission might now take place.

The appeal, which had been slated for Wednesday, was launched by Adam Nobody.

Nobody asserts that Andalib-Goortani should be fired for beating him during the summit in June 2010.

Instead, a disciplinary tribunal docked the officer five days pay in November 2015 for discreditable conduct arising out of his criminal assault conviction.

In an interview Tuesday, Nobody said he had requested a 90-day adjournment after he decided he no longer needed a lawyer to help him.

"I feel like the case is sort of open and shut," Nobody said. "In the years I've been fighting the system, I feel like I've learned enough to represent myself."

Andalib-Goortani, who argues the pay loss was appropriate punishment, was the only officer criminally convicted for police actions at the G20.

Based partly on videotape evidence, he was found to have hit Nobody several times even though the protester was already on the ground and surrounded by other arresting officers.

Nobody believes the constable should not be allowed to keep his job and wants the commission to back him up.

"He is unfit to be a police officer that's the case I intend to bring," Nobody said. "Years of anxiety that he's been saying kept him out of jail ... those are the exact reasons he shouldn't be a police officer."

The second case the commission is still expected to hear it on April 4 involves Supt. Mark Fenton, who ordered mass arrests and detentions. He was the only senior officer to face misconduct charges for G20 actions.

In his appeal, the 28-year officer argues a tribunal wrongly convicted him of misconduct done "at the direction of, or with the full acquiescence of, senior police officers whom the officer reported to."

The complainants in the Fenton case representing hundreds of people arbitrarily detained or arrested in often deplorable conditions still want him fired.