On duty? Off duty? Part 2

OK, let's complicate the question a little. This follows Wednesday's article about a police officer injured while on duty at a crash scene.

Suppose on the City Board examining the "fact" are three police officers of that officer's department and two civilians appointed by the Mayor, with the advice and consent of the City Council.

If those officers were thinking about their own necks (financiallly), and if the facts were clear that the injured officer was on duty, wouldn't they be inclined to find that he was on duty, regardless of the difference in cost to the City for an on-duty injury versus an off-duty injury?