While a provincial court judge found that she made 'a terrible error in judgment,' Melisa Rancourt, a Greater Sudbury Police officer, was found not guilty of uttering threats, the only remaining charge she faced ESPANOLA, Ont. — While a provincial court judge did find that she made “a terrible error in judgment,” Melisa Rancourt was ultimately found not guilty of uttering threats in court on Tuesday, April 22 — the only charge she faced after three were initially laid. A Greater Sudbury Police officer and Espanola hockey coach, Rancourt has waited more than a year for an end to the proceedings and wept deeply after the verdict was read. Initial charges against Rancourt were laid on Feb. 11, 2024. “It was reported that after an earlier hockey game on that same day, a coach had threatened and assaulted a 12-year-old player from an opposing team,” OPP said as reported by Sudbury.com. “No injuries were reported.” Rancourt testified on March 27 and denied all the allegations against her. Initially, there were three charges laid against Rancourt: assault, uttering threats (causing death or bodily harm) and causing a disturbance (mischief). The assault charge was dropped in July 2024, and at trial, the then-12-year-old hockey player she is accused of grabbing by the collar admitted, after seeing video footage, that Rancourt did not physically connect with him. The charge of causing a disturbance was dropped during the trial on March 27. The only charge left was uttering threats, of which she was acquitted. The decision was read by Justice Dana Peterson. Rancourt was represented by Len Walker, facing off against David Kirk, regional Crown attorney. The trial came to a close on March 28 after four defence witnesses, including Rancourt — who denied all charges — and four Crown witnesses: a referee at the game, an off-duty police officer, Maverine Bain, the parent of the opposing team to Espanola who had an interaction with Rancourt at the game, and the child hockey player. Though she found the child witness’s testimony contained many inconsistencies, Justice Peterson said she did not believe the child intended to deceive the court. “I find that he tried to present honest evidence to the best of his memory while testifying,” she said. “The problem I have is not with his credibility, but with the accuracy of his memory, especially as it relates to the words uttered immediately after Ms. Rancourt spoke with the two Walden players.” A video of the interaction in question was entered into evidence in September and shows several parents having what appears to be a heated interaction. There is no audio on the tape. Rancourt is not shown, at any point, to place her hands on the child in question. “When this witness was shown the video, he realized that he made mistakes in his statement to the police,” said the judge. “This player was simply in the hallway looking for his coach after a heated game when Ms. Rancourt, the opposing Espanola coach, spoke directly to him and another teammate,” she said. “The situation quickly escalated with a crush of parents in the narrow hallway, loud, angry, adult voices and swear words were uttered. It is not surprising that this young witness may have confused who said what.” She did find that Bain, the Crown witness and parent from the opposing team, had “major inconsistencies” in her testimony. “I place no confirmatory weight on Ms. Bain’s evidence.” In fact, she found that most of the adult witnesses who were present, including Rancourt, “minimized their level of anger or agitation.” Of Rancourt, she said, “It is clear that she was upset when she walked purposely down the hallway” to the other team's change room. “She was determined to speak with the other coaches about the unsportsmanlike celebration, she made a terrible error in judgment in speaking directly to the Walden players.” But as there was no direct evidence as to what was said between players, coaches and parents in the hallway at the Espanola Recreation Centre, Peterson said she was “not satisfied beyond a reasonable doubt that Ms. Rancourt uttered a threat of bodily harm to the child. “So, Ms. Rancourt, I find you not guilty of the charge.” Rancourt will next face a police disciplinary hearing on May 13. It will not be her first time. During the COVID-19 pandemic, Rancourt was charged with causing a disturbance at another hockey game, also at the Espanola Rec Centre. In September 2021, she was charged with resisting a peace officer and two counts of entering a premises when entry has been prohibited, contrary to the Trespass to Property Act (TPA). Rancourt and her wife refused to provide proof of vaccination to attend their child’s hockey game at the Espanola Recreation Centre, and witnesses told Sudbury.com Rancourt screamed, called bystanders “nazis,” and kicked a door while arguing with an OPP officer called by rec centre staff. Those criminal charges were withdrawn after Rancourt completed the John Howard Society’s Direct Accountability program. In October 2022, Rancourt faced a disciplinary hearing, which determined she should be demoted from first-class constable to third-class constable for a period of one year, followed by one year in the rank of second-class constable, conditional on satisfactory performance of duty by the officer. She would also be required to perform 40 hours of volunteer work through the Friends of Simon Wiesenthal Centre for Holocaust Studies to better understand her use of the word “nazi.” Jenny Lamothe covers vulnerable and marginalized populations, as well as housing issues and the justice system for Sudbury.com.