A 58-year-old retired dentist falsely accused of possessing child pornography is suing Toronto and York Region police, alleging that officers over a four-year period conspired to harm and harass him.

In a 27-page statement of claim served on both the Toronto and York police services boards early this month, Wayne Neville also alleges that officers breached his rights, assaulted him, and falsely imprisoned him. As a result, he claims he has suffered flashbacks, panic attacks, psychological distress, loss of enjoyment of life, and a loss of reputation.

Neville names seven York Region officers, including Chief of Police Armand La Barge, and three Toronto officers, including Chief Bill Blair and former chief Julian Fantino, as defendants. He also names both civilian police boards. He is seeking $6 million in damages.

Neither force is commenting on the details — common in cases before the courts — and they have yet to file statements of defence. A spokesperson for the Toronto force said it would fight the allegations.

Although unproven in court, the allegations raise serious questions about how police investigate child pornography cases, questions that have surfaced in other instances where police could not prove their case, but the accused had nonetheless been indelibly tainted by an accusation that could arguably leave a mark as odious as a sexual assault or murder charge.

Some so accused have been driven to suicide. In July 2004, a Toronto man who had been named by police and saddled with child pornography charges a year earlier took his life, even though the charges had been withdrawn.

It is a difficult charge for police to prove, as seen in recent case clearance rates. According to the Canadian Centre for Justice Statistics, in 2002-03, 303 charges involving possession of child pornography were laid in Canada, excluding Nunavut, Northwest Territories and Manitoba. A little less than half ended in convictions; 123 ended with charges either withdrawn or stayed.

In Neville's case, he was arrested on suspicion of possessing child porn but was never charged — or named in any news release. He says he has chosen to bring the case to light and sue police because, he alleges, police abused their power and failed to properly investigate before they arrived at his house with a warrant and battering ram.

"I think this is occurring to other people, and I think these people are so scared," Neville said in an interview at his lawyer's office. "I think when it comes to child pornography, they have to make sure, 110 per cent, that it is you, and you have done it. Then it's just a matter of we'll prove the amount, not whether you've done it or not.

"This was essentially a lynching — they hit me with the news of why they were there, at my door," said Neville.

It remains unclear why he was targeted. He's been denied access to the information used to obtain the search warrant. All he knows, through disclosure, is that he was number 11 of a group of people, total number unknown, being investigated.

One thing is certain: According to his statement of claim, police found no evidence to support their belief he possessed child pornography.

Neville believes police were acting on fraudulent transactions billed to his credit card, which he had reported to the card company. He was issued a new card, but credit card investigators left the old one active in an attempt to trace who was using it. He says he reported the problem and received a new card in September 2001.

There were six attempts to access child pornography websites with the old card, according to disclosure he has received.

The initial transaction that prompted him to call his credit card company — one he noticed on his bill because it involved converting Russian rubles to dollars — was indeed for pornography. The card company told him the billing company was in Russia, but couldn't say what kind of porn was bought.

In an interview, Neville said he's a consumer of adult pornography, which he buys locally, and is sickened by child pornography. Instead of verifying the information with the credit card company, Neville alleges police negligently pursued him. He also believes police incorrectly assumed he was downloading material off the Internet. Although he had paid for Internet access in a bundle deal, he used his computer primarily "as a typewriter," and hadn't even bothered to hook up his connection.

He alleges in his statement of claim that police conspired against him and thinks the police desire to see him charged was fuelled, primarily, by another factor.

He was the owner of perhaps one of the most extensive and valuable firearms collections in Canada — until police seized it all in a raid four years ago on his house. For four years he has fought in court with Toronto and York police to keep his guns.

Raid No. 1: A troubled housemate, and 150 guns

Wayne Neville's troubles with the police began in 2002 with a problem housemate whom he'd asked to leave. On Feb. 9, she attempted to kill herself with a kitchen knife, he says, and he called police. She was taken to hospital.

On Feb. 20, police swooped down on his York Region home with a search warrant just as he arrived home. He was cuffed and dragged into the house.

Neville says he assumed it had to do with the suicide attempt, and perhaps the housemate was telling police a different story. But the officers, from both Toronto and York, were interested in his firearms collection.

Police searched the home, seized more than 150 firearms and thousands of rounds of ammunition, and charged Neville with four firearms offences. He was released on bail and soon launched a Charter challenge of the search. He was convicted in June 2003 and sentenced to probation.

That same summer, according to his statement of claim, York police "erroneously" identified Neville as "one of a number of suspects in a child pornography investigation." He was placed under surveillance, which lasted until early 2004.

After Neville had his Charter hearing to have the 2002 firearms charges quashed, police were not confident the charges would stick. According to the statement of claim, which relies on information gathered from police through disclosure, a Toronto officer told a York cohort "it didn't look good." A police investigation was launched to determine whether Neville's firearms licence should be revoked.

On March 9, 2004, a judge ruled the search warrant was invalid, and any evidence gathered as a result was tossed. The police information used to justify the search, noted Justice Leslie Pringle, "revealed a largely personal and emotional approach to the issue of public safety, which in turn created an illusory sense of urgency."

The resulting search, the judge found, "amounted to a serious invasion of Mr. Neville's privacy. Neville was a lawful, registered gun owner with no criminal record and no history of violence. The objects of the search were licensed, legal firearms kept in the most private of places, his home."

Four days after that judgment, Neville received notice that his firearms licence was being revoked. A month later, on April 5, with the search tossed, the Crown attorney on the firearms case withdrew all charges. Neville immediately requested a review of the decision to revoke his licence.

Two days later, according to his statement of claim, officers involved in the firearms case informed an officer working on the child porn investigation that the case had collapsed. A Toronto officer who had been part of the 2002 search informed the York officer on the child porn probe that he had seen adult pornography in Neville's house.

Neville, in his statement of claim, alleges officers from the two forces then "conspired" to use the child porn investigation for the "improper purpose of harming" him — essentially, using it as a means to justify revoking his firearms licence and delaying or preventing the return of the guns and ammunition seized from his house in 2002.

On May 12, 2004, the York officer took a trip to the Newmarket courthouse, with sworn information seeking a warrant to search Neville's house for evidence he possessed child porn. Just what the officer swore out has not been revealed to Neville.

The officer got the warrant. The search would go down the next day.

Raid No. 2: A battering ram and a porn search

The sounds of splintering wood and shattering glass, followed by the wail of his home security system, woke Neville from a slumber. It was 6:20 a.m. Naked, he stumbled to his feet, disengaged the alarm, and heard whispering. Who's there? he asked. Police with a search warrant, he was told.

According to his statement of claim, he pulled on an unbelted bathrobe and headed for the stairs to the ground floor, where he was met by two members of the York police Emergency Response Unit dressed in body armour and masks, and toting loaded submachine guns. The guns were pointed at his chest. The police ordered him to put both hands behind his head.

With a gun fixed on him, he was handcuffed and led out the smashed front door, where, with the sun rising and morning traffic passing by, he was told he was under arrest for possession of child pornography.

At least nine police vehicles, 15 officers and one bomb-sniffing dog were waiting outside to search his home, he alleges. He sat in a cruiser for about an hour, as the dog searched the house. He says in his claim that he felt he'd been paraded in front of his neighbours, and was "thoroughly humiliated."

He was then allowed back in to get dressed, and assisted police in their search for about a half-hour. Around 8 a.m., he was taken to a police station.

Back at the house, as the morning turned to afternoon, police had found no child porn.

Neville was released unconditionally at about 4 p.m. According to his claim, he was told his front door would be fixed, but police never did get around to doing that.

From that day to Aug. 9, 2004, York police "exhaustively reviewed" the material taken from his home, according to his claim. They pored over photos, computer files and a videotape collection that included some X-rated films and many hours of NASCAR races and segments from the home shopping channel. They found nothing.

No evidence found:

On Aug. 10, police called with the good news that no evidence had been found, according to his statement of claim. They told him there would be no charges and that he would get the material back, but there was a hitch. He was being arrested for possessing knives seized in the child porn raid — a clear breach of conditions imposed following the 2003 conviction, which he would later successfully appeal. Neville turned himself in to be charged.

In late 2004, the 2003 conviction was quashed, and the breach of probation charge was withdrawn.

On Jan. 4, 2006, with Neville having no outstanding criminal charges and no criminal record, a judge cancelled the firearms revocation order. But he has yet to see his firearms returned. He plans to sell the bulk of them.

He is convinced all his troubles begin with the guns. So is his civil lawyer, Barry Swadron.

"The police have targeted this law-abiding man," said Swadron. "We can't stand by and let this happen."