After a youtube video surfaced showing a student at Toronto’s Northern Secondary School being detained for resisting his detention, a protest was held last week regarding police presence in schools.

Check out the story.

In a wonderful piece of journalism, the National Post reported that the protest was a failure because only a fraction of students showed up to the protest, less than 10% of the 1800-student school, thereby indicating that the students support the police presence in their school.  They even interviewed a couple students to support this claim.  Look for the National Post to continue reporting on the end of student indifference with even more ironic use of statistical analyses in the coming days.

The Vancouver Police Union initiated a survey to purportedly test public claims that police officers support Insite, the safe-injection site operating in the Downtown Eastiside.  Results show that most officers don’t support the program.  53% believe it has contributed to the deterioration of the neighbourhood.

If there has been misrepresentation of police officers’ views, hats off to the union for clarifying this.  Police officers ought to be free to praise, criticise or remain silent about Insite.  But we need to ensure police officers are not attempting to influence public policy.  The police can inform public policy, but too often they attempt to dictate policy.  It is a fine line.

Bud Mercer, head of the Vancouver 2010 Integrated Security Unit and assistant commissioner of the RCMP, recently warned Vancouver City Council about the possibility of violence during the Olympics.  And that’s what 7,000 police officers, 5,000 private security officers and 4,500 Armed Forces personnel, all collectively packing $1,000,000,000, are for.

The spectre of violence, according to Mercer, not only justifies the epic security budget but also a program of relationship-building visitations with suspected protesters.  These visits are followed up by an interview with a suspected protester’s family, friends, neighbours and employer.  This deep level of contact, according to Mercer, is done so that the police can help suspected protesters plan a lawful and peaceful protest.

Public comments on the Vancouver Sun website yield an expected reference: the Montebello protest.  In 2007, the Surete du Quebec was accused of using agents provocateurs to instigate violence.  The three masked undercover officers, who raised the ire of protesters for wearing masks and carrying a rock, were reportedly in attendance to “spot and identify violent demonstrators“.

One can only hope that all this animosity and escalation will end in 16,500 well-paid but very boring temp jobs.

A little more than two months after Province photographer Jason Payne’s camera was seized by the police, the VPD have issued written policy to prevent such an incident from happening again.  The VPD should be applauded for their quick and decisive action in remedying this policy gap.  The BCCLA intends to withdraw its complaint regarding the incident.

Const. Lindsay Houghton says the policy “has always been there, but now we’re putting it in writing and making it official in our regulations manual”.  The newly written policy states that officers must have consent or a warrant to take a member of the public’s property, unless they reasonably (based on articulable facts) believe evidence will be lost or destroyed if they don’t seize the property, or the person is under arrest.

It’s unfortunate that Houghton states that obtaining a warrant could stall an investigation.  Due process is not an inconvenience for police officers, it is their duty.  As well, officers must also explain the details of when property will be returned in order to obtain proper consent.  RCMP officers originally told Paul Pritchard they would keep his video footage for a day or two, but once in their hands, the RCMP stated that they would keep the footage for 1.5 to 2.5 years.  Mr. Pritchard was forced to threaten to sue the RCMP to regain his property.  The BCCLA made a police complaint stating this was active suppression.

The Province reported the policy change today and check here and here for further background on the story.

The BC Civil Liberties Association and the Province expressed their satisfaction and thanks after VPD Chief Jim Chu offered an apology and policy changes to address the seizure of Province photographer Jason Payne’s camera.

On Tuesday morning, the BCCLA filed a policy complaint with the Vancouver Police Board citing incidents of alleged police interference with cameras and media. All three incidents were at the scenes of police-involved shootings. By the end of the day, the Province received a letter in which Chief Jim Chu apologized and outlined the reformed policy.

“As police officers we know, or should know, that media personnel have special protections in law, and that a search warrant is the appropriate legal mechanism to seize such evidence from a media person in these circumstances,” Chief Chu stated in the letter. “Unfortunately, the constable was not given the appropriate advice by a senior officer.”

In today’s Province, editor Wayne Moriarty stated “I am happy that Chief Chu has acknowledged that his officers breached their own policy in seizing Jason’s camera and I’m pleased that he has addressed this with his members.” Payne accepted Chu’s apology but rejected the chief’s claim that he “did not immediately identify himself as an employee of the Province newspaper.”

“I appreciate the explanation that Chief Chu has presented but I reject his claim that I did not identify myself immediately as a press photographer for the Province newspaper,” said Payne in the article. “The first thing I did when the police attention was drawn to me was to tell them that I was a press photographer for the Province newspaper. I was there in an official capacity as a journalist and I reject that claim that I did not announce who I was immediately.”

All in all, it was a quick victory for all involved. “I think that Chief Chu recognizes that the officer and the senior officer both acted without legal authority in what they did, and that the citizens need a media that is free from inappropriate interference by the police,” said David Eby, Executive Director of the BCCLA. “We congratulate the VPD in being able to recognize mistakes and moving quickly to correct policy. These are the hallmarks of a police department interested in accountability.” Eby also thanked the Province newspaper staff on behalf of the BCCLA for having the courage to report on the incident, noting that their actions in bringing the case forward have helped improve working conditions for all journalists in Vancouver.

The new VPD policy is described in a “Bulletin” which recognizes that police do not have a blanket ability to take cameras from either members of the public or the media. According to the new policy, police may only seize cameras in instances where there is an arrest, a warrant permitting seizure, or officers have a reasonable concern, grounded in evidence, that the person taking the pictures or video may not be locatable or will destroy the evidence. The BCCLA will be continuing with its policy complaint to ensure that the Vancouver Police include the bulletin as part of their formal policy manual on which all new recruits are trained.

Read VPD Chief Jim Chu’s letter to Wayne Moriarty, the clarification of standards for seizure of video equipment from citizens and media and the article in the Province.

The BCCLA managed to capture the front cover of the Province today after filing a complaint with the Vancouver Police Board asking them to clarify VPD policy on seizing cameras. The complaint was sparked when Province photographer Jason Payne alleged he was threatened with a criminal charge and assaulted after refusing to turn his camera over to police after taking pictures following a police shooting.

Police spokeswoman Const. Jana McGuinness echoed section 2.9.6 (i) (15) of the VPD Policy and Regulations Manual, stating “it’s not [VPD] policy to take video or cameras away from the media.” However, this is not an isolated incident:

Most disturbingly, all three incidents of seizure involve police shootings. In the latter, Adam Smolcic alleges the VPD officer who seized his cellphone camera deleted the footage. In light of this incident, the BCCLA demanded that the Vancouver Police Board clarify the rights of private citizens, not just the news media, to photograph or film police activity.

Read the BCCLA complaint and the article in the Province.