Chair's Final Report After Commissioner's Notice – Incident Related to Excessive Use of Force and Oppressive Conduct

RCMP Act Subsection 45.46(3)

Vetted version for posting

September 25, 2009

The Complaint

Shortly before midnight on November 18, 2007, Constable G. H. and Constable F. E. of the Kelowna RCMP Detachment in British Columbia intercepted a Honda Ridgeline, which had been reported stolen. All five occupants, including Mr. A, were arrested for possession of stolen property over $5,000. Mr. A, who was well known to the RCMP as an individual involved in drug trafficking, was brought to the RCMP detachment, where he was lodged in cells.

On September 17, 2008, Mr.  A complained to the Commission for Public Complaints Against the RCMP (the Commission) and alleged that Constables G. H., J. K. and F. E. assaulted him while he was at the detachment. He also alleged that since the arrest, Constable G. H. has been harassing and stalking him.

The RCMP's Final Report

Following its investigation, the RCMP provided Mr. A with a letter of disposition dated October 22, 2008 that did not support Mr. A's allegations. The Commission received Mr. A's request for review on November 18, 2008, and it received the material related to this complaint from the RCMP on December 18, 2008. On January 13, 2009, the Commission requested that the RCMP provide a copy of the cell block video, which it received from the RCMP on January 27, 2009.

The Commission's Review and Interim Report

On February 23, 2009, I concluded in my Interim Report that Constable G. H. used an improper level of force during Mr. A's incarceration. However, I found that there was insufficient evidence to determine whether Constable G. H. acted improperly as per the complainant's second allegation.

I recommended that Constable G. H. receive refresher training as to the principle of the RCMP's IM/IM and CAPRA problem-solving model as they specifically relate to the use of force.

The Commissioner's Notice

Pursuant to subsection 45.46(2) of the RCMP Act, the Commissioner is required to provide written notification of any further action that has been or will be taken in light of the findings and recommendations contained in my Interim Report.

On September 14, 2009, the Commission received the Acting Commissioner's Notice, in which the Acting Commissioner agreed with my findings pertaining to Mr. A's second allegation, and agreed in part with my findings pertaining to the allegation of excessive use of force. The Acting Commissioner did not conclude that Constable G. H.'s decision to use force was unreasonable and unnecessary; however, he did find that it is a best practice to "reinforce the need for calm professionalism, patience and the use of effective verbal intervention tactics when handling prisoners like Mr. [A]." The basis of the Acting Commissioner's finding was that Constable G. H. knew that he was dealing with a person with a criminal past, that he had reasonable suspicions that Mr. A had been taking drugs prior to his arrest, and that Mr. A's behaviour was "incrementally more aggressive and difficult." The Acting Commissioner further provides that it was possible that Constable G. H. saw Mr. A's aggressive behaviour as a precursor to commit a more serious assault on the member.

The Acting Commissioner directed the Officer in Charge of the Kelowna Detachment to reinforce the principles of calm professionalism, patience and the use of verbal intervention tactics with Constable G. H. "to ensure he considers the full spectrum of intervention options if faced with similar circumstances in the future."

In the course of its review of the disposition of a public complaint by the RCMP, the Commission must determine whether the members' actions were reasonable in the circumstances. In this case, the issue is whether the force used by Constable G. H. was reasonable. The Commission recognized that throughout his dealings with the RCMP, Mr. A spoke in a loud and aggressive voice and was intentionally offensive and disrespectful. However, given the circumstances outlined in my report, I find that it was unnecessary for Constable G. H. to use force in the manner in which he did. The aim of the Commission is to promote excellence in policing through accountability and I reiterate that RCMP members are trained to control their emotions, even when faced by the type of behaviour displayed by Mr. A. Further, the conduct of members should not be justified by after-the-fact rationalizations. As such, I reiterate my finding and recommendation.

The Commission's Findings and Recommendations

Finding: Constable  G. H.'s use of force was unnecessary in the circumstances.

Recommendation: That Constable G. H. receive refresher training as to the principle of the RCMP's IM/IM and CAPRA problem-solving model as they specifically relate to the use of force.

Pursuant to subsection 45.46(3) of the RCMP Act, I respectfully submit my Final Report and, accordingly, the Commission's mandate in this matter is ended.

_____________________
Paul E. Kennedy
Chair