True and Fascinating Canadian History
A Mystery of the Mounties:
Will They Listen & Adapt?
by J. J. Healy
Adaptation to external forces is the single quality for assured success and indeed its very survival whether one speaks of the animal world, the church, the business world or the RCMP. Years ago, English author H. G. Wells captured the imperative phrase best when he said, “Adapt or perish”.
The survival rule grounded in continuous adaptation must be a top priority in the minds of corporate leaders wherever they work. "Listen, adapt or else flame out" is often overheard in corporate hallways. Listening to its clients, and adapting creative ideas into business plans both contribute to renewal and keep today's corporations alive. External advice from the courts, as one example, could be considered valuable to the RCMP as it is offered from a knowledgeable source and it would be advantageous for the general health and complexion of the Force.
In recent times, Canadian business leaders point to Sears as one example of an entity which fell victim to closure. It is a mystery why Sears did not act earlier, and adapt to creative technologies which would have allowed the company to integrate its old time catalogue shopping model into a fresh Amazon styled delivery model. One can only speculate that Sears might have survived if it had listened actively to its shareholders years ago. Adaptation would have meant a strong, vibrant pulse for Sears today.
At times, the pulse of the RCMP has been erratic, and observers claim this bouncy reading might be symptomatic of deeper problems. Going back in time, urgent and pressing criticism had been aimed at the RCMP, “ … horribly broken”, said Toronto lawyer David Brown referring to the RCMP under former Commissioner Giuliano Zaccardelli.
Not long afterwards, CBC news pointed to the RCMP's history of harassment, abuse and discrimination, The Globe and Mail alluded to a toxic police culture, Ottawa’s Auditor General Ms. Sheila Fraser reported the RCMP could do more for its members on the mental health front, and the Commission for Public Complaints Against the RCMP outlined steps to address workplace harassment.
One only hopes the RCMP was listening. The criticism has to sting, but surely it was also meant to be positive and constructive.
There can be no doubt that the RCMP set up committees to begin earnest work to fix these ailments, but whether or not the RCMP is now listening to the most meaningful and pertinent sources, and whether or not the RCMP is willing to listen, adapt and change -- these are vital questions which underlie a deep mystery. In the short story which follows titled, “The Mystery of the Mounties: Will They Listen & Adapt?” some ideas for a healthy lifestyle will be recommended for the patient -- somewhat ailing. Not all is lost. There is definitely hope and optimism for the RCMP -- the Force of today has a young, vibrant and promising membership. And a new Commissioner has been appointed with fresh ideas, a new approach and a firm commitment that, " ... no stone will be left unturned." (John Paul Tasker. CBC News. March 9, 2018).
Criticism about policing which originates from a bureaucracy or a government agency can be constructive, but sharp criticism from the judiciary has to be treated with a whole different urgency especially when it is aimed directly at the RCMP, it’s training methods or its policing policies.
Within the democratic framework, the court exists, firstly, as an independent body, but it is also tied into the same cluster of bodies within the criminal justice system; the courts, the police, probation and corrections. One has to listen to the other. All have to cooperate with the other for best and lasting results.
Secondly, due to the unity within the criminal justice system knot, the court has a legitimate right to act as overseer of police activities. The court is a legitimate teacher in matters of law much the same as parents are legitimate teachers in matters of schooling for their children. Here's a rich opportunity for the RCMP to listen and learn. And finally, it should be incumbent and a priority that the RCMP adapts to the wisdom or lessons which the court administers. For the RCMP to act otherwise at any time only means that mistakes are repeated to the sad and sorry detriment of the RCMP.
In 2010, an RCMP constable was sentenced to probation for attacking two men who were in custody. At trial, the judge said, "The constable violated his position of trust as an officer."
In 2011, a court convicted an RCMP member for sexually exploiting and forcibly confining a young girl on a reserve community. The constable was sent to jail, and afterwards, the court said, “You cannot conceive of a more egregious breach of trust.” The constable created undue mistrust in the community which will take years to repair.
Soon after, in an impaired case, a judge criticized a constable who violated a driver's charter rights by taking too long from the time of the car stop to the time of the blow. The constable testified that she didn't allow suspects to use a cell phone at roadside for safety reasons. However, that lag time rendered the detention illegal, the judge ruled, and she tossed the case.
in 2012, a man was arrested and then left in a cell for more than four hours after an encounter with an RCMP constable at the local hospital. At trial, the man was awarded $15,000 for wrongful arrest. The judge said, "the police officer was negligent and inattentive to the suspect's rights ..."
Later in 2012, an RCMP constable stopped a car for a search using the bogus pretext that the driver was speeding. The judge slammed the constable's “flip-flop” testimony and ruled there was no legitimate reason to stop the suspect. She tossed the evidence and the suspect walked. The Crown said, “If police lying is tolerated by the courts, they will soon lose the respect of the community.”
In 2016, an RCMP constable was charged for assault during the course of an arrest of an impaired driver. The whole thing was caught on video. It showed the constable jumping on the man's back, taking him to the floor and punching him three or four times. Although the court was lenient in its adjudication of the constable, the judge concluded that, “... the constable poured gasoline on the fire."
In a 2016 case, another constable was also charged with assault after arresting a person for impaired driving. The accused was refused an opportunity to go to the bathroom, and when he got up from a chair he was thrown to the ground. In the court’s decision, the judge said, "I am convinced by the evidence the constable’s purpose in doing so was to show who was in control and to exercise his authority over him ... In my view even if the constable thought that was necessary, he could have easily forced him (victim) to sit back down without throwing him on the ground." The judge continued, "Throwing him on the ground was an excessive use of force.”
In 2016, a couple found with two sawed-off guns and a small amount of drugs walked after a B.C. Supreme Court justice ruled an RCMP member who illegally searched them was “deceptive and manipulative” in his motivations.
In 2017, a judge in Nunavut criticized RCMP members for their poor conduct during an arrest. The judge said the constables broke the law and committed an assault on the person they had arrested. The RCMP members staked out the suspect’s home then entered the home illegally, without a warrant. The judge said, “The circumstances under which a police officer can enter a home to arrest a suspect is a matter of simple and “crystal clear” law, I cannot accept that any Canadian police officer does not understand the limits on their power to arrest. It is the simplest and most basic concept our police must learn.”
Negative criticism from the court is absolutely not necessary and is very preventable. The court has every right to criticize the RCMP in cases of assault, bullying and excessive force. The court's advice is urgent and has to be accepted and treated differently than words from every other external source. There are lessons to be learned.
Firstly, the court operates at the local level of every policing jurisdiction, and when a court criticizes the RCMP it is a direct reflection on certain RCMP members, their actions, and the way in which some RCMP treats people within its community; accused persons, suspects, intoxicated people, the mentally ill, the homeless, minorities and so on. Ordinarily, the RCMP is respected as the protector of people. People don't expect, require or want brute force. Why not try more talk and show more compassion?
Secondly, the court plays a pivotal role in the Canadian criminal justice system; the court has no other motive except to act in proxy for those who cannot speak out; the defenceless and weak in the community.
Thirdly, when a court finds fault with a particular RCMP member, the matter also transfers to a community issue -- it is the community which has to decide whether to tolerate the RCMP member’s behaviour, or force the constable to relocate, or else the community has to cry out and complain about police irregularity through active publicity and the press. There is little reason for the court having to address poor behaviour on the street by some RCMP members.
Every case outlined in the story holds a lesson. Essentially the cases can be summed up by members either committing an assault or using excessive force -- criminal offences all. The forceful, improper action and criminality by some RCMP members cannot be ignored by the court, nor can it be overlooked by police supervisors. These cases only paint the RCMP in a poor light.
If an RCMP member seeks contrition after being involved in an unruly incident and he or she has amended their methods then they well deserve a second chance. This is only understandable and fair.
Listen to the sage advice from the courts, adapt one's policing style, then move on to a rewarding and satisfying RCMP career. Or, risk the possibility of prosecution and conviction.
The RCMP must take an aggressive stand on unprofessional behaviour. The RCMP must adapt to advice from the court, otherwise the Force may experience a very public and agonizing demise in the eyes of the Canadian wide community.
The end.
Reporting from the Fort,
J. J. Healy
April 12, 2018
Listed below are the newspapers in which the sources were found along with its Google URL
Ex-Mountie jailed. "You cannot conceive of a more egregious breach of trust". James Turner.
CBC News: March 03, 2011.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/manitoba/ex-mountie-jailed-for-sex-crime-1.1117312
Judge criticizes cops in court. “I cannot accept that any Canadian police officer does not understand the limits on their power to arrest." Nunatsiaq News. February. 23. 2017
http://www.nunatsiaqonline.ca/stories/article/65674nunavut_judge_cops_didnt_explain_accused_
mans_right_to_remain_silent/
"Police who lie: How officers thwart justice with false testimony." the star.com.
2012. David Bruser and Jesse McLean.
https://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2012/04/26/police_who_lie_how_officers_thwart_justice_
with_false_testimony.html
Allegations of assault. CBC News. July 19, 2016. "The video showed the RCMP jumping on the
man's back, taking him to the floor and punching him three or four times."
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmonton/pomerleau-appeal-conviction-altercation-arrest-1.4170092
Assault. Stacey Lavallie. Stettler Independent. January 27, 2016. "The RCMP could have
easily forced him (victim) to sit back down without throwing him on the ground."
http://www.stettlerindependent.com/news/366720291.html
Assault. The judge said, "The RCMP violated his position of trust as an officer.". CBC News
June 24, 2010.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/north/nunavut-mountie-given-probation-for-assault-1.929186
Man awarded $15,000 for wrongful arrest. Jane Seyd. North Shore News. May 23, 2012.
http://www.nsnews.com/news/man-awarded-15-000-for-lgh-wrongful-arrest-1.360347
"BC Supreme Court justice ruled RCMP member who illegally searched couple was
deceptive and manipulative in his motivations..." Kamloops This Week. Cam Fortems. May 24, 2016.
http://www.kamloopsthisweek.com/weapons-and-drug-related-charges-dismissed-after-judge-rules-
rcmp-search-was-illegal/
