Wife of brain-injured man wants the truth after Crown declines to charge Mountie
There is an unholy alliance between many of the prosecutors in BC and the RCMP thugs.
VANCOUVER — On the night Robert Wright was arrested for suspected drunk driving, police at a northern British Columbia jail assured his wife the man was sleeping and not to come by until morning.
When Heather Prisk showed up, she was informed her husband was in the intensive care unit of a Terrace hospital and about to be airlifted to the Vancouver area for emergency brain surgery.
The 47-year-old First Nations man had suffered an aneurysm, leaving him with an irreparable condition that will require care for the remainder of his life.
Prisk was never told what went on in the cell overnight, and on Friday she again pleaded for answers.
A six-month police investigation into the incident that left Wright with permanent brain damage recommended a charge of assault against a Mountie, she said. But just under two weeks after the report was submitted, Crown lawyers decided against approving the charge.
“As far as I understand the officer is still on active duty,” Prisk said from Terrace.
“The public has a right to know the details of this case. I still have no answers about how my husband was injured and who was responsible for his injury.”
Hours after Prisk called on the Crown to explain its rationale for the decision — which eliminates any possibility the case will go to trial — the media received a detailed statement from the Criminal Justice Branch. Prisk still hadn’t received an explanation.
The woman, who was also urging various police departments to make surveillance footage from the incident available, had pushed for the information since Oct. 23.
The Criminal Justice Branch laid out the reasons the Crown concluded there was not a substantial likelihood of any conviction in a five-page statement, and said there was video and audio recordings to corroborate.
Police used force on several occasions during the arrest, but the available evidence did not establish it was unlawful, the Crown said. Further, a neurosurgeon could not conclude trauma the man suffered during the incident caused the bleeding in his brain — suggesting instead it was caused by a medical condition.
“Even if it had been the result of police action, it would not render those actions unlawful in the circumstances of this case,” the statement said.
Prisk has the support of the B.C. Civil Liberties Association and the Union of B.C. Indian Chiefs, who earlier in the day were demanding a special prosecutor be appointed to review the charge decision.
“I think this is everything that’s wrong with police accountability in B.C. and why the Independent Investigation Office was established,” David Eby, executive director of the civil liberties association, said later in the day referring to a new watchdog that has begun operating since the incident.
“I really do have a sense that the office is dealing with families differently. ... The fact that we had to call a press conference to get this document is inexcusable.”
He said the association will review the statement thoroughly, and focus further efforts on getting the recordings released to the family.
The incident occurred on April 21, 2012, before the opening of B.C.’s new police watchdog, the Independent Investigations Office.
At the time, four members of the New Westminster Police Department were tasked with investigating the case. The force said in a news release two days after the incident that Terrace RCMP responded to a complaint of a possible impaired driver at 6 p.m. that night.
“While in police custody, the male was non-compliant in cells and had to be physically restrained by the police,” the release said. “The male subsequently suffered a head injury.”
Wright was taken to the local hospital three times before being transported to Royal Columbian Hospital in New Westminster.
The Crown’s statement laid out a broader picture of what happened, describing a scenario in which police were led to believe Wright intended to harm himself or police by driving his car into a pole or police car when they pulled him over that night.
It says there were several struggles during which he was taken to the ground. On one occasion he struck the back of his head against the rear of a vehicle, and later inside the jail cell he hit the right side of his head on either the floor, a concrete bench or the toilet.
“The bleeding cannot be medically shown to be due to the physical altercations between Mr. Wright and police,” the statement said.
Further, the prosecution must demonstrate there were no grounds to apply force or that it was excessive, it said. That was not the case because his behaviour was “resistant, belligerent and unco-operative.”
“All three officers in his immediate vicinity at the time believed his action was intended in some way to engage in a physical confrontation or instigate something,” it said.
Diana McDaniel, public information officer with the New Westminster police, said both Prisk and the media would have to make a request through Freedom of Information protocol to get that force’s files into the incident.
Prisk told reporters she has been unable to do so because the force won’t release the officer’s name, and was told that’s how the case is catalogued.
The report to the Crown recommending the charge was submitted on Oct. 10, McDaniel said. She said the force would not release further details — including stating the charge itself — because it did not go forward.
The RCMP did not respond to a call for comment.
Prisk told reporters than on the night of the incident, she eventually learned her husband had a brain hemorrhage, but never received an explanation about what happened.
“I discovered this on my own when I saw the staples on his scalp. I also noticed that both legs had bandages on them,” she said.
Doctors have told the couple that Wright’s injury is permanent, and she has become his full-time caregiver.
“This injury has forever changed Robert’s and my life,” she said. “Rob needs 24-hour care and supervision. I was told by doctors that he may never regain the ability to care for himself and that most people in his condition end up in a nursing home.”
Chief Bob Chamberlain, UBCIC vice-president, called it “beyond belief” the Crown did not provide information to Prisk.
“At a time when the general public need to have confidence and security with the people that are deemed to look after our society, the RCMP, they cannot operate beyond reproach,” he said.
Judge shocked at handling of corpse by Prince George RCMP officers
Judge shocked at handling of corpse by Prince George RCMP officers
PRINCE GEORGE — B.C. Supreme Court Justice Glen Parrett says the Crown should consider if charges are warranted against the RCMP in Prince George after investigators left a dead body overnight at the scene of a killing.
“I am quite frankly shocked and astounded,” Parrett said, adding he had seen “no evidence whatsoever of a single forensic step being taken the next day with the exception of videotaping the scene.”
Parrett made his comments during closing arguments at the manslaughter trial of Patrick Mathewsie.
The man is accused of the killing of Sylvain Victor Roy, whose body was found in an empty, overgrown lot in central Prince George on July 29, 2010.
“I perfectly understand there are times and some situations where there is forensic necessity for doing things in a particular way,” Parrett said.
“I’ve seen some pretty complex investigations that actually went on for days.
“I (don’t see the) faintest evidence that happened here.”
Parrett has suggested Crown counsel look at sections of the Criminal Code related to indignities to a human body.
He also added he will assist Crown in raising concerns about why the body was left out overnight in the mid-summer heat when police had more than three hours of daylight to deal with it when they first responded to the call.
“What was the question that required him to be left out overnight in July 29 temperatures?” Parrett said.
The judge also said he had viewed the police videotape recorded in the first hours of the investigation and called the scene depicted on the tape “a disgrace.”
Roy had been found with a rope around his neck and Mathewsie passed out beside him with blood on his hands and forearms and one arm resting on a T-shirt covering Roy’s face, court was told.
The Crown alleges Mathewsie strangled the victim, then wandered around the site before returning.
However, witnesses testified the man seen wandering had different clothing and did not have the same colour hair as Mathewsie, who was described as a friend of Roy.
Court was told the two men shared a tent while camping in the lot and collected pop bottles together.
There was also testimony that a larger, younger man, who had been acting aggressively, had been seen in the area over the days previous to Roy’s death.
Defence lawyer Rob Climie questioned forensic evidence, saying no DNA evidence from Mathewsie was found on the rope or on Roy’s knuckles or fingernails.
Parrett also criticized evidence given by an RCMP officer who testified Mathewsie was pretending to be asleep when he was found next to the body.
The judge noted the testimony contradicted details from other officers and ambulance personnel, and ignored the blood alcohol levels of both men, which were in the nearly lethal .350 range.
“The (officer’s) evidence is patently wrong in my view and I have looked at that evidence very carefully,” Parrett said.
Parrett is scheduled to deliver a verdict on Tuesday morning.
PRINCE GEORGE — B.C. Supreme Court Justice Glen Parrett says the Crown should consider if charges are warranted against the RCMP in Prince George after investigators left a dead body overnight at the scene of a killing.
“I am quite frankly shocked and astounded,” Parrett said, adding he had seen “no evidence whatsoever of a single forensic step being taken the next day with the exception of videotaping the scene.”
Parrett made his comments during closing arguments at the manslaughter trial of Patrick Mathewsie.
The man is accused of the killing of Sylvain Victor Roy, whose body was found in an empty, overgrown lot in central Prince George on July 29, 2010.
“I perfectly understand there are times and some situations where there is forensic necessity for doing things in a particular way,” Parrett said.
“I’ve seen some pretty complex investigations that actually went on for days.
“I (don’t see the) faintest evidence that happened here.”
Parrett has suggested Crown counsel look at sections of the Criminal Code related to indignities to a human body.
He also added he will assist Crown in raising concerns about why the body was left out overnight in the mid-summer heat when police had more than three hours of daylight to deal with it when they first responded to the call.
“What was the question that required him to be left out overnight in July 29 temperatures?” Parrett said.
The judge also said he had viewed the police videotape recorded in the first hours of the investigation and called the scene depicted on the tape “a disgrace.”
Roy had been found with a rope around his neck and Mathewsie passed out beside him with blood on his hands and forearms and one arm resting on a T-shirt covering Roy’s face, court was told.
The Crown alleges Mathewsie strangled the victim, then wandered around the site before returning.
However, witnesses testified the man seen wandering had different clothing and did not have the same colour hair as Mathewsie, who was described as a friend of Roy.
Court was told the two men shared a tent while camping in the lot and collected pop bottles together.
There was also testimony that a larger, younger man, who had been acting aggressively, had been seen in the area over the days previous to Roy’s death.
Defence lawyer Rob Climie questioned forensic evidence, saying no DNA evidence from Mathewsie was found on the rope or on Roy’s knuckles or fingernails.
Parrett also criticized evidence given by an RCMP officer who testified Mathewsie was pretending to be asleep when he was found next to the body.
The judge noted the testimony contradicted details from other officers and ambulance personnel, and ignored the blood alcohol levels of both men, which were in the nearly lethal .350 range.
“The (officer’s) evidence is patently wrong in my view and I have looked at that evidence very carefully,” Parrett said.
Parrett is scheduled to deliver a verdict on Tuesday morning.
Have the RCMP Thugs Met their Match?
Richard Rosenthal says he's ready to make a mark as B.C.'s first independent police monitor by investigating serious incidents involving officers in a timely and transparent way that the province has not seen before.
After repeated scrutiny over police investigating themselves, the Independent Investigations Office (IIO) is set to take over criminal investigations into all on- and off-duty incidents involving police in B.C. that result in death and serious harm starting Sept. 10. Rosenthal heads the agency which is required to be led by a civilian who has never been a police officer.
The independent body was a major recommendation from the Braidwood Commission which probed the death of Robert Dziekanski who was Tasered by the RCMP at the Vancouver International Airport in 2007.
Rosenthal jumped at the chance to head the IIO but also to live in B.C. which he told The Huffington Post B.C. is “a great place to raise my kids. It’s a great place for everything, for work, for play.” He says he's even given his new chainsaw a spin already.
Rosenthal, who carried a gun while prosecuting gangsters in Los Angeles, created Portland’s first police oversight agency and then made a mark in Denver as its first independent police monitor. He left few fans within the force in Colorado with his no-holds-barred approach to investigating police brutality and calling for stiffer punishments for officers when he saw fit.
Unlike similar agencies in Alberta and Ontario, Rosenthal has ensured that only half of the B.C. office is made up of former police officers and the other half are civilians with investigative experience from places such as the coroner’s service.
Richard Rosenthal speaks during a news conference in Vancouver in December 2011. (THE CANADIAN PRESS/Jonathan Hayward)
Why is it so significant that you have investigators with diverse backgrounds in terms of ethnicity and experience?
It’s important to have diversity in all kinds of respects. We have to make sure we conduct competent investigations so we have to have investigators with experience to conduct serious investigations.
We need people who will look at these investigations from a fresh perspective and from a perspective of ensuring that the public will have faith and integrity in the investigation and a faith that the office will be independent of the police, not just structurally but also in the way we think and evaluate investigations.
Clearly the past practice of having the police conducting the investigations into these incidents was not resulting in the level of public confidence that’s necessary in order for the police to succeed.
That "level of public confidence" — that doesn’t necessarily mean that those internal police investigations were flawed or missing information; is it just about public perception?
It can be. Obviously there were instances where police investigations had indications of bias and that seemed to be the biggest problem as opposed to them not including all of the aspects that they should. But even there, there have been past criticisms of investigations and their quality. But the reality is that no matter how competent an investigation would be or how fair, as long as it’s conducted by the police, of the police there will be a certain lack of confidence or concern about the bias that the people conducting the investigations and reviewing the incidents may have.
The high profile investigations such as the one that lead to Braidwood — the Dziekanski case — and more recently Monty Robinson. How would the independent agency have handled those differently?
I don’t want to go in to the details of how those cases were specifically handled other than they would have fallen into our jurisdiction.
I can say the one thing we would be able to do under our new statute is we’re in a position to publicly report on those cases in a more robust fashion than has been done in the past. And so part of our mandate, part of our plans are, if a case does not result in a referral to Crown, and it’s a significant case involving deaths or what have you, we will publicly report and explain why. If a case does go to Crown -- obviously we can’t issue a public report there but what we do then is we provide the support to Crown that’s necessary.
What’s been the biggest challenge in setting up the office?
The biggest challenge is the geography of the province of trying to make sure that we are both capable of investigating urban and rural incidents. And be capable of getting out to the various locations in the province in a timely fashion.
A lot of the complaints is why do these investigations take so long? Is there a target in decreasing the time it takes to get results to the public?
Yes, that’s huge. Currently it can take well over a year, even two years before an officer or the public is aware of whether or not a case is going to be referred to Crown for a charging decision. And it doesn’t serve anyone well. The officer has the Sword of Damocles hanging over their head. The family members do not know what’s going to happen and are left in the dark for extended periods of time which will lead to frustration and frankly assumptions that there’s a cover-up going on.
This is not something solely suffered by B.C. This is an issue that’s suffered everywhere including the U.S. with the big agencies. Timeliness has repeatedly been a factor in interfering with public accountability.
It’s safe to say those goals will be sooner than the one to two years that you mentioned?
My hope is frankly that people may be shocked at how quickly in some cases we are able to get it done because they’re used to it taking so long.
Is there a different approach in the US to independent police oversight versus Canada?
In the U.S. there are several large civilian-led bodies ... but they are primarily responsible for the administrative investigations and the disciplinary aspect of it, not the criminal investigations. That’s something that’s different in Canada. So that’s something where Canada is further along than the U.S.
Who’s your favourite crime-fighting hero?
(Laughs) The problem is that when you’re in the business, you just don’t really something you pay a lot of attention to. (Sighs) Can I tell you my favourite book or movie instead? Bonfire of the Vanities, the book, not the movie. And then for movie, To Kill a Mockingbird.
This interview has been condensed and edited.
After repeated scrutiny over police investigating themselves, the Independent Investigations Office (IIO) is set to take over criminal investigations into all on- and off-duty incidents involving police in B.C. that result in death and serious harm starting Sept. 10. Rosenthal heads the agency which is required to be led by a civilian who has never been a police officer.
The independent body was a major recommendation from the Braidwood Commission which probed the death of Robert Dziekanski who was Tasered by the RCMP at the Vancouver International Airport in 2007.
Rosenthal jumped at the chance to head the IIO but also to live in B.C. which he told The Huffington Post B.C. is “a great place to raise my kids. It’s a great place for everything, for work, for play.” He says he's even given his new chainsaw a spin already.
Rosenthal, who carried a gun while prosecuting gangsters in Los Angeles, created Portland’s first police oversight agency and then made a mark in Denver as its first independent police monitor. He left few fans within the force in Colorado with his no-holds-barred approach to investigating police brutality and calling for stiffer punishments for officers when he saw fit.
Unlike similar agencies in Alberta and Ontario, Rosenthal has ensured that only half of the B.C. office is made up of former police officers and the other half are civilians with investigative experience from places such as the coroner’s service.
Richard Rosenthal speaks during a news conference in Vancouver in December 2011. (THE CANADIAN PRESS/Jonathan Hayward)
Why is it so significant that you have investigators with diverse backgrounds in terms of ethnicity and experience?
It’s important to have diversity in all kinds of respects. We have to make sure we conduct competent investigations so we have to have investigators with experience to conduct serious investigations.
We need people who will look at these investigations from a fresh perspective and from a perspective of ensuring that the public will have faith and integrity in the investigation and a faith that the office will be independent of the police, not just structurally but also in the way we think and evaluate investigations.
Clearly the past practice of having the police conducting the investigations into these incidents was not resulting in the level of public confidence that’s necessary in order for the police to succeed.
That "level of public confidence" — that doesn’t necessarily mean that those internal police investigations were flawed or missing information; is it just about public perception?
It can be. Obviously there were instances where police investigations had indications of bias and that seemed to be the biggest problem as opposed to them not including all of the aspects that they should. But even there, there have been past criticisms of investigations and their quality. But the reality is that no matter how competent an investigation would be or how fair, as long as it’s conducted by the police, of the police there will be a certain lack of confidence or concern about the bias that the people conducting the investigations and reviewing the incidents may have.
The high profile investigations such as the one that lead to Braidwood — the Dziekanski case — and more recently Monty Robinson. How would the independent agency have handled those differently?
I don’t want to go in to the details of how those cases were specifically handled other than they would have fallen into our jurisdiction.
I can say the one thing we would be able to do under our new statute is we’re in a position to publicly report on those cases in a more robust fashion than has been done in the past. And so part of our mandate, part of our plans are, if a case does not result in a referral to Crown, and it’s a significant case involving deaths or what have you, we will publicly report and explain why. If a case does go to Crown -- obviously we can’t issue a public report there but what we do then is we provide the support to Crown that’s necessary.
What’s been the biggest challenge in setting up the office?
The biggest challenge is the geography of the province of trying to make sure that we are both capable of investigating urban and rural incidents. And be capable of getting out to the various locations in the province in a timely fashion.
A lot of the complaints is why do these investigations take so long? Is there a target in decreasing the time it takes to get results to the public?
Yes, that’s huge. Currently it can take well over a year, even two years before an officer or the public is aware of whether or not a case is going to be referred to Crown for a charging decision. And it doesn’t serve anyone well. The officer has the Sword of Damocles hanging over their head. The family members do not know what’s going to happen and are left in the dark for extended periods of time which will lead to frustration and frankly assumptions that there’s a cover-up going on.
This is not something solely suffered by B.C. This is an issue that’s suffered everywhere including the U.S. with the big agencies. Timeliness has repeatedly been a factor in interfering with public accountability.
It’s safe to say those goals will be sooner than the one to two years that you mentioned?
My hope is frankly that people may be shocked at how quickly in some cases we are able to get it done because they’re used to it taking so long.
Is there a different approach in the US to independent police oversight versus Canada?
In the U.S. there are several large civilian-led bodies ... but they are primarily responsible for the administrative investigations and the disciplinary aspect of it, not the criminal investigations. That’s something that’s different in Canada. So that’s something where Canada is further along than the U.S.
Who’s your favourite crime-fighting hero?
(Laughs) The problem is that when you’re in the business, you just don’t really something you pay a lot of attention to. (Sighs) Can I tell you my favourite book or movie instead? Bonfire of the Vanities, the book, not the movie. And then for movie, To Kill a Mockingbird.
This interview has been condensed and edited.
Sister of man shot and killed by RCMP has questions
Sister of man shot and killed by RCMP has questions
Sister of man shot and killed by RCMP has questions
VANCOUVER/CKNW (AM980)
James Lewis
Email news tips to jlewis@cknw.com
9/13/2012
The sister of the man shot by the RCMP in Prince George says he was a decorated veteran, struggling with post-traumatic stress.
40-year old Greg Matters was killed Monday night, after a long stand-off with the mounties.
His sister Tracey says she has confidence in the investigation, but also has serious questions.
"Why was it necessary to use lethal force on a man, on his own property, who didn't have a firearm?
Why wasn't my brother allowed to talk to his doctor, his mother, or family friends during the stand-off... when this was requested?"
The new "Independent Investigation Office" remains on-scene.
Let us all hope the new Independent Investigation Office is not just a lot of noise like ther new commissioner.
Sister of man shot and killed by RCMP has questions
VANCOUVER/CKNW (AM980)
James Lewis
Email news tips to jlewis@cknw.com
9/13/2012
The sister of the man shot by the RCMP in Prince George says he was a decorated veteran, struggling with post-traumatic stress.
40-year old Greg Matters was killed Monday night, after a long stand-off with the mounties.
His sister Tracey says she has confidence in the investigation, but also has serious questions.
"Why was it necessary to use lethal force on a man, on his own property, who didn't have a firearm?
Why wasn't my brother allowed to talk to his doctor, his mother, or family friends during the stand-off... when this was requested?"
The new "Independent Investigation Office" remains on-scene.
Let us all hope the new Independent Investigation Office is not just a lot of noise like ther new commissioner.
BCCLA urges RCMP to 'get out of the editorial and media policy business'
BC
The B.C. Civil Liberties Association is calling on the RCMP to “get out of the editorial and media policy business” after recent media-related actions by a northern B.C. detachment.The B.C. Civil Liberties Association is calling on the RCMP to “get out of the editorial and media policy business” after recent media-related actions by a northern B.C. detachment.
“The RCMP has a job to police impartially and to share public safety information with media outlets impartially, even if those outlets may be critical of some aspects of their work,” said Lindsay Lyster, President of the BCCLA, in a release.
The Terrace RCMP allegedly advised the editor of Terrace Daily – a local news and blogging website – that an article “which lampooned the local mayor and RCMP Inspector had offended the force,” according to the release. The editor also alleged that the RCMP in Terrace told him “that TerraceDaily.ca would not receive news releases until they changed their editorial policies to give satirical stories that criticized the RCMP and local politicians lower prominence.”
The Terrace RCMP confirmed that they had stopped sending news releases, said Const. Angela Rabut, because “at this point, the Terrace Daily online is not a credible news source.”
The editor is “running more of a blog-site, where there’s a lot of opinion and fictional stories mixed in with credible news stories,” she said.
The detachment is also under fire by the BCCLA for a letter written by Insp. Dana Hart to the CRTC in support of a merger between Astral Media – a local TV station – and Bell Canada.
“The RCMP may well prefer the coverage of one media outlet to the other,” said BCCLA’s Lyster, “but retaliation for negative coverage by withholding public information is not acceptable, nor is using an impartial public platform to advocate for the private interests of media outlets that provide favourable coverage.”
Hart has since asked for the letter to be withdrawn, said Rabut, adding “it was not his intent to choose sides in this at all, it’s just to show support for a local [TV] station.”
“We have one TV station in town, and we work very closely with them,” she said, “and so we’ve always supported them [as] they support us.”
Read more: http://www.vancouversun.com/entertainment/BCCLA+urges+RCMP+editorial+media+policy+business/7168655/story.html#ixzz25XcP183ECLA urges RCMP to 'get out of the editorial and media policy business'
The B.C. Civil Liberties Association is calling on the RCMP to “get out of the editorial and media policy business” after recent media-related actions by a northern B.C. detachment.The B.C. Civil Liberties Association is calling on the RCMP to “get out of the editorial and media policy business” after recent media-related actions by a northern B.C. detachment.
“The RCMP has a job to police impartially and to share public safety information with media outlets impartially, even if those outlets may be critical of some aspects of their work,” said Lindsay Lyster, President of the BCCLA, in a release.
The Terrace RCMP allegedly advised the editor of Terrace Daily – a local news and blogging website – that an article “which lampooned the local mayor and RCMP Inspector had offended the force,” according to the release. The editor also alleged that the RCMP in Terrace told him “that TerraceDaily.ca would not receive news releases until they changed their editorial policies to give satirical stories that criticized the RCMP and local politicians lower prominence.”
The Terrace RCMP confirmed that they had stopped sending news releases, said Const. Angela Rabut, because “at this point, the Terrace Daily online is not a credible news source.”
The editor is “running more of a blog-site, where there’s a lot of opinion and fictional stories mixed in with credible news stories,” she said.
The detachment is also under fire by the BCCLA for a letter written by Insp. Dana Hart to the CRTC in support of a merger between Astral Media – a local TV station – and Bell Canada.
“The RCMP may well prefer the coverage of one media outlet to the other,” said BCCLA’s Lyster, “but retaliation for negative coverage by withholding public information is not acceptable, nor is using an impartial public platform to advocate for the private interests of media outlets that provide favourable coverage.”
Hart has since asked for the letter to be withdrawn, said Rabut, adding “it was not his intent to choose sides in this at all, it’s just to show support for a local [TV] station.”
“We have one TV station in town, and we work very closely with them,” she said, “and so we’ve always supported them [as] they support us.”
Read more: http://www.vancouversun.com/entertainment/BCCLA+urges+RCMP+editorial+media+policy+business/7168655/story.html#ixzz25XcP183ECLA urges RCMP to 'get out of the editorial and media policy business'
Sun News : Mounties can't retaliate for negative coverage, BCCLA says
Sun News : Mounties can't retaliate for negative coverage, BCCLA says
Credits: MARCO VIGLIOTTI/ HIGH RIVER TIMES/ QMI AGENCY
BYRON CHU
QMI AGENCY
VANCOUVER -- The RCMP are coming under more fire in B.C. over what critics say are ongoing attempts to squash media commentary that is critical of the force and its members.
The B.C. Civil Liberties Association (BCCLA) is demanding the Terrace RCMP detachment resume sending press releases to the Terrace Daily News, after delivery ceased in June.
Publisher Merv Ritchie said the media outlet was blacklisted after publishing a story and BCCLA letter critical of RCMP Inspector Dana Hart, and after two other articles critiqued and spoofed the Mounties.
Terrace RCMP spokesperson Angela Rabut wrote to Ritchie explaining, "The Terrace RCMP issues news releases to credible media outlets. The Terrace Daily does not fall in this category."
"She said we have to change the way we do our website," Ritchie said, adding she told him to take satirical pieces off the front home page.
"But that's the way we run our website. Everything goes on the front page. And that's not going to change."
Rabut did not return calls for comment on Friday. Calls to the provincial RCMP media relations department also went unreturned.
"Retaliation for negative coverage by withholding public information is not acceptable," BCCLA president Lindsay Lyster said in a media release.
Lyster also criticized Hart, a former member of Prime Minister Stephen Harper's security team, for writing a letter to the CRTC on official RCMP letterhead supporting Bell Communications acquisition of Astral Media.
In the letter dated July 27, Hart wrote, "Terrace RCMP rely on our local Astral Media extensively to inform the public about issues affecting public safety "¦ BCE's acquisition will "¦ also help to ensure the production of new Canadian content."
Lyster said it's unacceptable for Hart "to advocate for the private interests of media outlets that provide favourable coverage."
Controversy has dogged the RCMP in B.C. this year over its reactions and responses to critics.
A week ago, the force raided the home of a man connected to the Re-Sergeance Alliance blog, which aimed to publish stories of corruption inside the force. The BCCLA has criticized the RCMP for obtaining the search warrant using the rare charge of defamatory libel, which the rights group said has been struck down as unconstitutional in at least three provinces.
In February, Osoyoos Times editor Keith Lacey apologized for publishing a "slanderous" editorial about the behaviour of an RCMP officer when he was pulled over while driving, after the force threatened to release video of the incident.
Simon Fraser University criminal psychology professor Ehor Boyanowsky, who is also a member of the Canadian Constitution Federation, said it's important to protect the public's democratic right to criticize the police, "even if the criticism turns out ultimately not to be true."
Defamatory libel
Courts in several provinces have ruled that S.301 of the Criminal Code is unconstitutional as it says anyone who publishes defamatory material, whether truthful or not, is committing defamatory libel, an indictable offence with a maximum penalty of two years in jail.
In 1996, the Saskatchewan Court of Appeal upheld a ruling in the case of John and Johanna Lucas, who had carried placards and posted flyers criticizing a child sexual abuse investigation. The court ruled that S.301 was not a justified limit on the freedom of expression.
Also in 1996, the Ontario Court of Justice also struck down S.301, used to charge Bradley Waugh and Ravin Gill who put up wanted posters of six Kingston Penitentiary guards implicated in the suspicious death of an inmate. The Canadian Civil Liberties Association intervened, and the judge ruled S.301 of no force and effect in Ontario.
In 2008, the Newfoundland Supreme Court ruled S.301 unconstitutional when it was used to charge Byron Prior for distributing flyers alleging a public justice official raped and impregnated his 12-year-old sister some 40 years before. The court ruled S.301 could not stand because it prevents the publishing of material even if it is truthful.
In May of this year, prosecutors in New Brunswick dropped libel charges against Charles LeBlanc for posting comments on his blog about a police officer. Director of public prosecutions Luc Labonte said that with the previous rulings striking down S.301 in other jurisdictions, "we really didn't think that any court in this province would rule against those other cases." Fredericton police had obtained a warrant for defamatory libel to search LeBlanc's house and seize his computer.
Section 300 of the Criminal Code also addresses defamatory libel with a maximum penalty of up to five years' prison, but civil liberty groups say it is much more difficult for prosecutors to achieve a conviction under that charge. Prosecutors must prove that a suspect is fully aware his statement is false, and that he published his statement with the specific intent to defame.
Credits: MARCO VIGLIOTTI/ HIGH RIVER TIMES/ QMI AGENCY
BYRON CHU
QMI AGENCY
VANCOUVER -- The RCMP are coming under more fire in B.C. over what critics say are ongoing attempts to squash media commentary that is critical of the force and its members.
The B.C. Civil Liberties Association (BCCLA) is demanding the Terrace RCMP detachment resume sending press releases to the Terrace Daily News, after delivery ceased in June.
Publisher Merv Ritchie said the media outlet was blacklisted after publishing a story and BCCLA letter critical of RCMP Inspector Dana Hart, and after two other articles critiqued and spoofed the Mounties.
Terrace RCMP spokesperson Angela Rabut wrote to Ritchie explaining, "The Terrace RCMP issues news releases to credible media outlets. The Terrace Daily does not fall in this category."
"She said we have to change the way we do our website," Ritchie said, adding she told him to take satirical pieces off the front home page.
"But that's the way we run our website. Everything goes on the front page. And that's not going to change."
Rabut did not return calls for comment on Friday. Calls to the provincial RCMP media relations department also went unreturned.
"Retaliation for negative coverage by withholding public information is not acceptable," BCCLA president Lindsay Lyster said in a media release.
Lyster also criticized Hart, a former member of Prime Minister Stephen Harper's security team, for writing a letter to the CRTC on official RCMP letterhead supporting Bell Communications acquisition of Astral Media.
In the letter dated July 27, Hart wrote, "Terrace RCMP rely on our local Astral Media extensively to inform the public about issues affecting public safety "¦ BCE's acquisition will "¦ also help to ensure the production of new Canadian content."
Lyster said it's unacceptable for Hart "to advocate for the private interests of media outlets that provide favourable coverage."
Controversy has dogged the RCMP in B.C. this year over its reactions and responses to critics.
A week ago, the force raided the home of a man connected to the Re-Sergeance Alliance blog, which aimed to publish stories of corruption inside the force. The BCCLA has criticized the RCMP for obtaining the search warrant using the rare charge of defamatory libel, which the rights group said has been struck down as unconstitutional in at least three provinces.
In February, Osoyoos Times editor Keith Lacey apologized for publishing a "slanderous" editorial about the behaviour of an RCMP officer when he was pulled over while driving, after the force threatened to release video of the incident.
Simon Fraser University criminal psychology professor Ehor Boyanowsky, who is also a member of the Canadian Constitution Federation, said it's important to protect the public's democratic right to criticize the police, "even if the criticism turns out ultimately not to be true."
Defamatory libel
Courts in several provinces have ruled that S.301 of the Criminal Code is unconstitutional as it says anyone who publishes defamatory material, whether truthful or not, is committing defamatory libel, an indictable offence with a maximum penalty of two years in jail.
In 1996, the Saskatchewan Court of Appeal upheld a ruling in the case of John and Johanna Lucas, who had carried placards and posted flyers criticizing a child sexual abuse investigation. The court ruled that S.301 was not a justified limit on the freedom of expression.
Also in 1996, the Ontario Court of Justice also struck down S.301, used to charge Bradley Waugh and Ravin Gill who put up wanted posters of six Kingston Penitentiary guards implicated in the suspicious death of an inmate. The Canadian Civil Liberties Association intervened, and the judge ruled S.301 of no force and effect in Ontario.
In 2008, the Newfoundland Supreme Court ruled S.301 unconstitutional when it was used to charge Byron Prior for distributing flyers alleging a public justice official raped and impregnated his 12-year-old sister some 40 years before. The court ruled S.301 could not stand because it prevents the publishing of material even if it is truthful.
In May of this year, prosecutors in New Brunswick dropped libel charges against Charles LeBlanc for posting comments on his blog about a police officer. Director of public prosecutions Luc Labonte said that with the previous rulings striking down S.301 in other jurisdictions, "we really didn't think that any court in this province would rule against those other cases." Fredericton police had obtained a warrant for defamatory libel to search LeBlanc's house and seize his computer.
Section 300 of the Criminal Code also addresses defamatory libel with a maximum penalty of up to five years' prison, but civil liberty groups say it is much more difficult for prosecutors to achieve a conviction under that charge. Prosecutors must prove that a suspect is fully aware his statement is false, and that he published his statement with the specific intent to defame.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
