The Office of the Police Complaint Commissioner (OPCC) has once again demonstrated why public trust in this body is at an all-time low. My recent complaint against Constable Moss provides a textbook example of how bias, manipulation, and duplicity undermine accountability.
What Happened
-
I submitted a complaint detailing how Constable Moss, acting on behalf of Ms. Hardy, engaged in intimidation, bullying, and threats.
-
The file was initially assigned to Alexis Leak, Admissibility Analyst. Leak was already aware of my history of exposing OPCC’s internal bias — especially how the Commission consistently shields white female officers and officials from scrutiny.
-
In a calculated move, Leak quietly transferred my file to Rahul Sharma, citing “file load adjustments.”
-
On September 19, 2025, I received a Notice of Inadmissibility. It did not even bear Sharma’s name. Instead, it was anonymized under “Intake Services.”
Why This Matters
This is not an isolated error; it is a systemic problem. The OPCC has a long record of discreditable conduct. Past employees, including investigative analyst Jake Kislock, have been publicly exposed for reprehensible behavior. These are not aberrations but part of a deeply entrenched culture of bias and corruption.
By strategically reassigning complaints and hiding behind faceless notices, OPCC staff protect their colleagues and allies while silencing legitimate concerns from the public. This is not oversight — it is cover-up.
Public Accountability
Because the OPCC refuses to operate transparently, the full report on this case is now available on CorruptionBC.com at:
This ensures that the misconduct of Alexis Leak, Rahul Sharma, and the leadership under Prabhu Rajan cannot simply be hidden behind bureaucratic jargon.
Conclusion
The OPCC exists to hold police accountable. Yet time and again, it functions instead as a shield for misconduct, bias, and intimidation. Until there is independent reform, the public should remain deeply skeptical of its so-called oversight role.