When elements of a death in police custody are caught on video, the RCMP consistently exploits the victim’s family in order to suppress the video. Releasing the video to the public, according to the RCMP, would upset the family. Below are a few examples where the family has had to fight the RCMP to have the video released.

After Robert Dziekanski died in the custody of the Richmond RCMP, the RCMP seized Paul Pritchard’s video. Cpl. Dale Carr publicly attacked Paul Pritchard’s motives to release the video to the public on the grounds that it would upset Mr. Dziekanski’s mother, Zofia Cisowski. Mr. Pritchard had to file a lawsuit to have his property returned. He released the video to the public with Ms. Cisowski’s permission.

A writer recently discovered the RCMP had video footage of Clayton Alvin Willey’s arrest in 2002. Mr. Willey died a few hours later. Despite a notarised release from the family, the RCMP refused to release footage citing privacy concerns. The RCMP backed down after the BCCLA and others demanded the family’s request to release the footage be honoured.

This week RCMP lawyer Ellen Roberts could not prevent the release of video footage of Robert Knipstrom’s arrest. Counsel for the coroner’s office argued for the release of the video on the grounds that the family was not opposed to its release. Once again, the only entity opposed to publication was the RCMP.

It is appaling that the RCMP resorts to such exploitation to avoid accountability. It is also appalling that the BCCLA needs to point this out to the RCMP. Yet, there is little that makes sense in a system where the agency responsible for the death of a person is also tasked to investigate its own culpability. The RCMP has recognised that they face a crisis of public confidence, yet one of the main arguments against the creation of an independent unit to investigate in-custody deaths is that only the police can investigate crimes. The RCMP ought to recognise that public confidence only comes when the RCMP show us they are doing a good job, not simply when they tell us they are doing a good job.

The public, like any good investigator, wants to view the evidence. Public servants should not need to be reminded who it is they serve.

The Braidwood inquiry was thrown into an uproar today after a Department of Justice lawyer representing the RCMP made a late disclosure of an email exchange between two senior RCMP officers just as closing submissions were about to begin. The BCCLA is a participant at the inquiry.

The email was an exchange between the two most senior officers in the “E Division” of the RCMP, and suggests that the four RCMP officers went into the airport planning to taser Mr. Dziekanski before they even saw him. At the inquiry, the four officers denied that they had discussed a plan in advance of arriving at the airport.

The email, however, suggests that one or more of the officers told their superiors around the time of the incident the exact opposite. Further, the email suggests that they contemplated using the taser not in accordance with RCMP policy and training.

The e-mail from Supt. Dick Bent to RCMP Assistant Commissioner Al Macintyre, dated Nov. 5, 2007, said: “Finally, spoke to Wayne [Rideout] and he indicated that the members did not articulate that they saw the symptoms of excited delirium, but instead had discussed the response en route and decided that if he did not comply that they would go to CEW (conducted energy weapon).”

The issues raised by the email are highly relevant and go to the very core of the inquiry’s mandate. The public deserves a full explanation of the email’s contents and its drafting, and significantly, why it wasn’t disclosed many months ago. Further, the public’s confidence in the RCMP has been shaken and we need assurances that the RCMP is disclosing all relevant materials.

Inquiry Commissioner Thomas Braidwood said that he was “appalled” that the RCMP had not disclosed the information months ago, and ordered that the inquiry be postponed so that the contents of the email could be investigated. He stated that further evidentiary hearings may be required.

Commission counsel Art Vertlieb, who outlined the e-mail suggested that it may be necessary to recall the four officers to testify again. The senior RCMP officers involved in the email exchange likely will have to testify as well. The e-mail, written on Nov. 5, 2007, was disclosed only this week by the federal Justice Department to commission counsel.

The late disclosure of this document has disrupted months of work. We’re shocked that the email wasn’t disclosed to the commission and participants months ago, and call upon the RCMP to provide the public with complete assurances that full disclosure has been made. The public has the right to know why the RCMP did not disclose the email until after the four officers testified.

greybar

Grace Pastine is the Litigation Director and is counsel for the BC Civil Liberties Association at the Braidwood Inquiry

 

The transcript of the email as read at the inquiry is below.
(more…)

Four of the RCMP officers under scrutiny at the public inquiry into the death of Robert Dziekanski have failed in their attempts to prevent retired judge Thomas Braidwood from releasing his report.  The officers alleged that Commissioner Braidwood did not have the authority to cast blame.

Arne Silverman, a judge of the B.C. Supreme Court, found that Justice Braidwood had treated the officers fairly during the proceedings and, according to the BC Public Inquiry Act, has the authority to make findings of misconduct.

Check out the article in the Vancouver Sun.

The four RCMP officers involved in the in-custody death of Robert Dziekanski are in BC Supreme Court in order to prevent Commissioner Braidwood from potentially making findings of professional misconduct.  Commissioner Braidwood has advised each of the officers of the allegations on which he will make a determination. For example, Gerry Rundel has been advised that the following will be assessed:

Check out the CBC story for more details.

Update: 10.06.2009

Check out the court documents the RCMP filed.

Police psychologist Mike Webster today sent an open letter to the mother of Robert Dziekanski, offering what he says “is probably as close as you will come to a genuine apology from the RCMP.”   Dr. Webster had his contract work cancelled by the RCMP after openly criticising the force last year with regard to the in-custody death of Robert Dziekanski. Zofia Cisowski responded to the letter by stating “nobody so far exposed the truth about the RCMP as Dr. Webster did.”

The letter is printed below in its entirety, and the discussion of slash gloves is particularly interesting. Below are  a few of the more scathing criticisms Dr. Webster leveled at the RCMP:

An inept, insular and archaic group of RCMP executives has let the Force fall out of step with 21st Century policing.

The idea of intimidating people is entirely consistent with the RCMP management’s way of managing conflict not only with the public but also with its own membership.

[The RCMP executive] view themselves as somehow apart from the rest of us, an elite group whose safety is more important than that of the most unfortunate among us.

We have become the `enemy’ and they go to `war’ with us each day, rather than collaborating with us to form a cohesive and consistent approach to policing our communities.

Unfortunately, the long history and rich tradition of the Force manifests itself today as arrogance and defensiveness.

The RCMP is in need of significant transformational change in order to genuinely reconnect with the public and its own membership.

(more…)

RCMP media spokespersons Cpl. Dale Carr and Sgt. Pierre Lemaitre will be testifying at the Braidwod Inquiry. The BCCLA filed a police complaint over public statements made by the two officers in the days following the in-custody death of Robert Dziekanski. The complaint alleges that the two RCMP officers misrepresented facts and engaged in character attacks against Robert Dziekanski and Paul Pritchard. The complaint also alleges that the RCMP attempted to suppress the video footage recorded by Mr. Pritchard.

The investigation of the complaint has already been completed, but the BCCLA has argued that the investigation is woefully inadequate and recently filed a Request for Review with the Commission for Public Complaints Against the RCMP. While we’re waiting to see if we can get an adequate investigation, let’s hope that Commissioner Braidwood can get some answers from the RCMP.

Check out the BCCLA original complaint, the investigation report, the request for review, and an article in the Vancouver Sun.

The BCCLA is represented by BCCLA Litigation Director Grace Pastine and BCCLA Articled Student Sara Dubinsky at the Braidwood Inquiry.