Vice-Chair's Interim Report – Incident Related to Improper Attitude, Neglect of Duty and Service

RCMP Act Paragraph 45.42(3)(a)

Vetted version for posting

July 11, 2008

Overview

On November 28, 2006, Ms. B.J. travelled to Whitehorse, Yukon to visit her 16-year-old daughter, but before seeing her, she attended the Whitehorse RCMP Detachment. She spoke to Corporal D and provided him with a court order that prohibited contact between Ms. B.J. and Mr. C.J., her former husband. Ms. B.J. feared for her safety, given the history with her former husband, and wanted to ensure that the RCMP had a copy of the court order in the event anything should happen.

That evening, Ms. B.J.'s daughter was extremely upset that her boyfriend had left her. She had been drinking heavily and threatened to physically harm Ms. B.J., as well as herself. A call was placed to the RCMP, and Constable E took Ms. B.J.'s daughter into police custody and brought her to cells. She was released early the following morning.

On December 4, 2006, Ms. B.J.'s common-law partner, Mr. A, complained to the Commission for Public Complaints Against the RCMP (the Commission) and alleged that Corporal D did not take Ms. B.J.'s concerns seriously, that Special Constable F improperly released Ms. B.J.'s daughter from custody, and that civilian member G failed to properly respond to Ms. B.J.'s calls for assistance.

As required by the RCMP Act (the Act), the complaint was investigated by the RCMP. According to the Act, on completion of the investigation the RCMP Commissioner (or his delegate) shall send his Final Report to the complainant summarizing the results of the investigation and any action taken to resolve the complaint. In this case, the Commissioner's Final Report, dated April 16, 2007, did not substantiate the complainant's allegations.

Mr. A was not satisfied with the RCMP's disposition of his complaint. He requested a review by the Commission on June 1, 2007. The Commission received from the RCMP the investigation documents relating to this matter on June 17, 2008.

For the reasons outlined below, I am of the view that, given the aggravating circumstances of this case, the RCMP should have released the youth directly into someone's care rather than releasing her on her own.

Commission's Review of the Complaint

It is important to note that the Commission is an agency of the federal government, distinct and independent from the RCMP. When reviewing a complaint, the Commission does not act as an advocate for either the complainant or RCMP members. Rather, its role is to inquire into complaints independently and to reach conclusions after an objective examination of the information provided.

My conclusions and findings are based on the examination of the following materials: Mr. A's complaint and statement; interviews and notes of subject members; the prisoner log dated November 28, 2006; occurrence reports; the RCMP's Final Report; the investigator's notes; and the RCMP's investigation file.

First Allegation: Corporal D did not take Ms. B.J.'s concerns seriously when she attended the Whitehorse Detachment.

On November 23, 2006, Ms. B.J. attended the RCMP detachment where she lived (Stony Plain, Alberta) and completed a Family Violence Case Management Form with Constable H. In this report, Ms. B.J. reported the history of violence between herself and her estranged husband, and further reported that her daughters could be in danger. After the form was completed, a fax was sent to the Whitehorse RCMP Detachment, which advised the members of Ms. B.J.'s visit within the next few days.

When Ms. B.J. attended the Whitehorse Detachment, she wanted to ensure the RCMP had a copy of the court order in case something happened between herself and Mr. C.J. Ms. B.J. spoke with Corporal D about the order's content, and Corporal D explained the no-contact condition (it required that both parties stay away from each other at all times). Mr. A alleged Ms. B.J. pointed out to Corporal D an incident during which Mr. C.J. apparently acted contrary to the order. Ms. B.J. was concerned by Corporal D's lack of interest, and left the detachment feeling she was wasting the RCMP's time.

Corporal D noted Ms. B.J.'s visit to the detachment in his operational file. He corroborated Ms. B.J.'s statement, indicating he provided a copy of the court order to all Watch Commanders, in case any action was required during Ms. B.J.'s visit in Whitehorse. As Mr. A had reported in his complaint, Corporal D noted he received a call from the complainant that same day, who relayed to him Ms. B.J.'s concerns. Corporal D wrote that he tried to explain to Mr. A that the matter was taken seriously and that all detachment members were aware of the situation. However, he wrote that it appeared Mr. A failed to acknowledge this and said Mr. A told him another complaint was in order given the lack of service they were getting from the Whitehorse RCMP Detachment.

The evidence showed Ms. B.J. attended the detachment because she feared for her safety. She provided a court order that prohibited the former spouses from contacting each other. Corporal D ensured Ms. B.J. understood the court order's content, and he made it available to the Watch Commanders. Although there is conflicting evidence between Mr. A's and Corporal D's version of events, I am satisfied Corporal D took reasonable steps to ensure that all members of the detachment were made aware of Ms. B.J.'s situation. Given this, I am satisfied Corporal D acted appropriately when dealing with Ms. B.J.

Finding: Corporal D acted appropriately when dealing with Ms. B.J.

Second Allegation: Special Constable F improperly released Ms. B.J.'s daughter from custody.

Mr. A complained that Ms. B.J.'s daughter was improperly released while she was still intoxicated. He said she had been taken into police custody while her blood alcohol level was over 180 mg, and because she had threatened to kill herself. He said Constable E told him she would be released the following morning. Mr. A said Ms. B.J.'s daughter was released at approximately 7:30 a.m., at which point she called her mother. Mr. A said the daughter was distressed because she could not return to her boyfriend's residence (she had been living there for the last year), and that she told her mother she would kill herself by jumping off a bridge in the river. Mr. A said Ms. B.J. immediately called and requested the RCMP's assistance. Mr. A said the RCMP told her to go and find her daughter and then to call back if further assistance was required.

Constable E, the arresting member who brought Ms. B.J.'s daughter to the detachment the night before, wrote in great detail how he intervened when arresting the youth. He wrote that the daughter had a no-contact order with her father so she had been living at her boyfriend's residence for the past year. Earlier that night Constable E had contacted the boyfriend's parents, who informed him that their son had broken up with the youth. They also told him she had caused a scene in their residence and that she was no longer welcome to reside with them. Constable E also wrote that he was told by Ms. B.J. that her daughter had threatened to commit suicide, and when he intervened to arrest her, he observed an extremely intoxicated youngster in an agitated state. Constable E brought her to the detachment, where her alcohol level registered 187 mg.

Constable E contacted Family Social Services and advised the on-call worker of the situation. Constable E noted that the youngster was now homeless and that her well-being was at risk. The on-call worker told Constable E that they would look into the youngster's situation in the morning and that an action plan would be provided to the Watch Commander. At 12:45 a.m., Ms. B.J. called Constable E to discuss the situation, and Constable E noted that Ms. B.J. was concerned and unsure of what to do. Constable E told Ms. B.J. to call "and advise of wishes before the a.m. when member was off duty." Constable E then passed the file to the day shift.

Special Constable F released the youngster early the next morning after discussing the situation with Ms. K, a social worker, who told him she would contact Ms. B.J. He also spoke to the guards. At 7:30 a.m., when Mr. A contacted the detachment as per Constable E's direction, the youngster had already been released. Civilian member G, the dispatcher who subsequently answered Ms. B.J.'s call for assistance, was surprised when she learned that the youngster had been released from police custody.

There were a number of aggravating factors that should have alerted the RCMP to the reality that this 16-year-old girl was extremely vulnerable and needed to be cared for accordingly. She was not living with either parent because of the history of domestic violence in her family of origin. There was a court order prohibiting the parents from contacting each other. Even more noteworthy, there was a court order prohibiting the father from contacting his daughter. The girl lived in Whitehorse as did her father, but her mother lived in Alberta. When her mother came to visit her in Whitehorse, the mother's concern for her own personal safety was serious enough that she delivered a copy of the court order to the RCMP detachment shortly after arriving. Given the history of violence in this family, it is reasonable to conclude that this young girl was a victim of domestic violence and as such was at risk.

The youth had been living with her boyfriend's parents but he had just ended the relationship and she was no longer welcome at their home, as she had caused a scene at their residence. On the day in question she was very distraught because of the break-up. She had consumed a significant amount of alcohol and had threatened to kill herself. When taken into custody by the RCMP her blood alcohol level was 187 mg. The investigating member, Constable E, properly contacted Family Social Services indicating that the youth was homeless and at risk. The on-call worker told Constable E that an action plan would be provided to the Watch Commander.

Unfortunately, the young woman was released on her own before an action plan was in place. I note that the prisoner report indicates that the youth's state of mind was placid, which seems to contradict the evidence that she had threatened to kill herself and created a scene when she refused to leave a residence. In addition, according to Ms. B.J. her daughter again threatened to kill herself shortly after being released. In terms of conditions of release, the report states R.W.S. (release when sober). Although this is the normal practice when dealing with impaired persons, given the aggravating circumstances of this case, it would have been more appropriate to release the youth directly into someone's care when an action place was in place.

Finding: Given the aggravating risk factors in this case, the RCMP should have released the youth directly into someone's care.

Recommendation: The Commissioner or his delegate review the circumstances of this case and the relevant policies regarding the identification of and the release of at risk youth to determine what action, if any, needs to be taken.

Third Allegation: Civilian member G failed to properly respond to Ms. B.J.'s calls for assistance.

Finally, Mr. A alleged that the RCMP failed to dispatch a member when Ms. B.J. called for assistance the day of her daughter's release.

A review of the transcript of Ms. B.J.'s call¹ revealed that Ms. B.J. called the RCMP's non-emergency line and relayed to Ms. G her dealings with her daughter. She reported that her daughter had been drinking the previous night and that she had been taken to the detachment, where she spent the night. She told Ms. G that her daughter wanted her to come and pick her up, and to call her boyfriend to learn why he had left her. Ms. G asked if Ms. B.J. was going to pick up her daughter, to which she responded "yeah. Yeah... the car is running." Ms. B.J. indicated she was getting her coat and her shoes and then would leave. She added, "I'm just letting you know in case I get her back here" to the dispatcher. Ms. B.J. was asked to provide her name, and both she and Ms. G agreed that Ms. B.J. was in a better position to respond to the youngster's call for help.

The evidence showed Ms. B.J. called the detachment to inform the RCMP of the situation and, contrary to Mr. A's allegation, the facts revealed that she did not request the assistance of the RCMP. Because of this, I am satisfied Ms. G acted appropriately when dealing with Ms. B.J.

Finding: Ms. G acted appropriately when dealing with Ms. B.J.

Pursuant to paragraph 45.42(3)(a) of the RCMP Act, I respectfully submit my Interim Report.

_________________________________
Brooke McNabb
Vice-Chair

1 Transcript of OCC call, file no. 2007-16930.