Tunnel Vision and Other Failures in Work-Related Investigations: Lessons from the MPCC Report in Fortin

Kelly VanBuskirk, KC, PhD, C. Arb.

In workplace investigations, thoroughness, neutrality, and documentation still matter

Introduction

On November 27, 2025, the Military Police Complaints Commission (MPCC) released its Final Report in the MGen (Ret.) Dany Fortin Public Interest Investigation. The Report does not seek to re‑litigate guilt or innocence but, instead, it does something arguably more important: it dissects how a criminal investigation went wrong, and why investigative failures harm everyone involved — complainants, accused persons, prosecutors, and public confidence in the justice system.

Background

In 2021, Major‑General (retired) Dany Fortin was charged with a historical sexual assault dating back to the late 1980s.  In 2022, he was ultimately acquitted at trial. After that, he sued the Canadian Armed Forces and, although his lawsuit was settled, the MPCC was asked to assess whether the Canadian Forces National Investigation Service (CFNIS) conducted a thorough, impartial, and professional investigation.

The short answer is “no”.

The MPCC concluded that the CFNIS investigation that led to Fortin being charged was deeply flawed in its execution and marked by tunnel vision, poor documentation, weak supervision, and failures to test the evidence properly.  This week, our firm had an opportunity to review the MPCC Report with a roomful of seasoned retired police officers and military investigators from Canada and the USA, and its contents was affirmed as an important guideline for workplace investigators.

Core Investigative Errors Identified by the MPCC

The MPCC cited a number of significant mistakes in the conduct of the CFNIS investigation, including:

1. A Failure to Conduct a Reasonably Thorough Investigation

While Canadian law does not require corroboration for sexual assault allegation, investigators still have an obligation to investigate those claims thoroughly and objectively.

In the Fortin case, the MPCC found that investigators had:

• Failed to interview all identified potential witnesses, including individuals explicitly named early in the investigation.

• Failed to document why certain witnesses were not pursued at all.

• Reduced their 2.5‑hour interview of the complainant to a superficial one‑page summary.

• Allowed the lead investigator to proceed without reviewing the complainant’s full recorded statement.

2. Unrecorded Interviews and Poor Evidence Preservation

Several key witness interviews were conducted by telephone and not recorded (which was a CFNIS internal requirement), with no documented justification. This failure was found to have undermined the accuracy of the evidence and the transparency of the investigative process.

Equally troubling was the failure of the investigators to secure contemporaneous notes that were known to exist.  As examples:

• The complainant described having made personal notes of the alleged incidents, but these weren’t collected until a year after the complainant was interviewed.

• A senior officer took notes during early disclosures, and these weren’t collected.

In historical cases where physical evidence is absent, contemporaneous documentation can be critically important. Its absence mattered.

3. Tunnel Vision and Investigative Bias

The MPCC found that the CFNIS investigators were constrained by tunnel vision, or a premature commitment to a single theory of the case.  More about tunnel vision and its role in miscarriages of justice can be found at: https://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/rp-pr/cj-jp/ccr-rc/pmj-pej/p4.html#s43 .

In the Fortin case, the investigators’ tunnel vision was found to have resulted in acceptance of the complainant’s account largely at face value; failing to meaningfully pursue evidence that could challenge or contextualize the prevailing account; and treating inconsistencies as peripheral rather than central to reliability analysis.

4. Failure to Grapple with Inconsistencies

In Fortin’s criminal trial, the judge ultimately identified “important contradictions” in the complainant’s evidence. On review of the CFNIS investigation, the MPCC found those contradictions were visible long before trial but had not been meaningfully analyzed by investigators.  On this point, the MPCC emphasized the distinction between credibility and reliability: the former engages honesty; the latter references accuracy.  The MPCC discussed the importance of trauma-informed practices in the investigation of matters such as historic sexual assault allegations.

The Consequences of the CFNIS Failures

Obviously, the consequences of the CFNIS investigative failures in the Fortin case were real and significant.  Fortin was charged and prosecuted (for a crime he was later acquitted of) following a deficient investigation. The complainant was exposed to intensified credibility challenges that a better investigation might have mitigated. Public confidence in the investigation process was undermined. As the MPCC made clear, these failures did not serve anyone.

The MPCC Report has importance beyond the jurisdiction of the Canadian Armed Forces. It should be required reading for corporate security officials, workplace investigators, and employers conducting internal investigations.

Disclosure:  We’ve read the MPCC Report in full, we’ve presented its findings to an audience of professional investigators, and we’ve compared the Report’s findings to a series of workplace investigation-related court decisions from across Canada.  We’ve used AI functions to help us summarize some of the data contained in this article.