Soc 327 - Quiz 2 Review

History of policing

• First full time police force created in London in 1829 by Sir Robert Peel, in response to an increasing fear of crime and disorder that was occurring during the Industrial revolution

• Policing was done by community members up until this point

Peel’s principles

1. Basic mission of police is to prevent crime and disorder

2. Ability of the police to perform their duties depends upon public approval of their actions

3. Police must secure the cooperation of the public in voluntary observance of the law in order to secure and maintain the respect of the public

4. Degree of public cooperation with the police diminished proportionately to the necessity of the use of physical force

5. Police maintain public favour by constantly demonstrating absolute impartial service, not by catering to public opinion

6. Police should use physical force only to the extent necessary to ensure compliance with the law or to restore order only after persuasion, advice, and warnings are insufficient

7. Police should maintain a relationship with the public that is based on the fact that the police are the public and the public are the police

   1. Not separate entities

   2. Everyone must work together to maintain order in society

8. Police should direct their actions toward their functions and not appear to usurp the powers of the judiciary

   1. Clear boundary between judiciary (judges) and police

   2. Police enforce the law and prevent crime, but have no role in determining guilt

9. The test of police efficiency is the absence of crime and disorder

Evolution of Canadian policing

• Premodern era: prior to 1820

• Political era: 1820-1940

• Professional era: 1940-1980

• Community policing era: 1980-present

Premodern era

• Prior to 1820

• Policing ties to local communities

• Maintain moral standards

• Focused on informal community resolution and protection

• Up to every community member to adhere to and enforce their laws

• As communities got larger, this became less effective in maintaining order

• Needed to create some official services

• First police constables in Quebec City in mid 1600s and in upper Canada in the late 1800s

• Shift from localized communities to somewhat of an official police force

3 part mandate of premodern era

1. Police (verb) conflicts between ethnic groups, and between labourers and their employers

   1. They were there to suppress strikes, breakup protests, and protect commercial and private property

   2. Maintain power of those who already had power

   3. Were not impartial

2. Maintain moral standards (by enforcing social norm laws)

   1. Focused on regulation of public morals

   2. Target what those in power determined to be immoral 

3. Apprehend criminals

   1. ID suspects, make arrests, etc

   2. Through patrols and surveillance, as well as word of mouth and complaints (a lot of reliance on these complaints)

Political era

• 1820-1940

• Police stations and forces were often controlled by a politician

• Police chiefs were at the will of the political leaders

• Sometimes were directed to ignore certain crimes committed by certain (powerful) people

  • If a police chief went against this, they were fired and replaced by someone who would follow the orders of the politicians

• Low morale and rapid turnover of police officers

• Ineffective and corrupt

• North West Mounted Police: established in 1873 to maintain law and order in, and to ensure the orderly settlement of, the previously unpoliced and sparsely settled NW territories

  • Official police force at this time

  • Made in response to perceived lawlessness in NW territories

  • Reinforce sovereignty

  • Gain social control over Indigenous populations

  • Became the RCMP in 1920

Political era - colonial rule

• 1874: NWMP deployed to Western Canada to assert sovereignty over Indigenous people and their land

• 1884: PM John A Macdonald states “the business of the Mounted Police is principally to keep peace between white men and Indians”

  • Enforcing colonial rule was more important than gaining public trust

• 1885-1940: the pass system is enforced, governed by the Indian Act

• 1933: The Indian Act appointed RCMP officers as truant officers

  • RCMP were responsible for finding Indigenous children who escaped residential schools and bringing them back

Professional era

Emphasizes a top-down style of police management with an emphasis on random patrols and rapid response, where citizens play a passive role in crime control

• Based on 3 Rs: random patrol, rapid response, and reactive investigation

• Limited use of analytics to inform police policy and operations

• Relied on science and free from political interference

• Police can patrol by car now (relatively new thing at the time)

• Police are ‘omnipresent’ and can quickly respond to crime

• Reactive investigation didn’t involve seeking out causes of crime and disorder

• Implemented formalized/standardized training

  • Trying to get consistent and impartial results

  • Important because prior models were based on nepotism and who was available

  • Increase quality of police officers

Community policing era

• Community policing: a philosophy of policing centred on police-community partnerships and problem solving

  • Based on 3 Ps: prevention, problem solving, and partnership

  • Proactive approach (find the signs and causes of crime and disorder and target those to prevent it from happening in the first place)

• In the 80s, there was a growing awareness that police needed to develop more productive relationships with the community

• Involve community in decision making and helping raise concerns about things not previously thought of

• Public wanted a play a larger role in police advising and oversight

• Rely on partnerships with community members and stakeholders with resources and knowledge

• Focuses most coherently on Peel’s principles

• Implemented police advisory boards

• Sought to improve trust, legitimacy, and participation in policing

Pillars of community policing

1. Citizen involvement 

   1. To understand issues of concern and prioritize community issues

2. Problem solving / problem-oriented approach

   1. Draw on insights from community members to develop strategies/solutions for the community-identified issues

3. Decentralization 

   1. Decision making moves closer to the people rather than the structure

   2. Moving decision making power to those on the front lines and those in the community

   3. Take some power away from police executives, commanding officers, and administrators

Expanding responsibilities of police

Center on 3 main categories:

1. Crime control

2. Order maintenance (bulk of police work, most often subjected to criticism)

   1. Controlling and preventing crime that disturbs the community

   2. Protecting the public peace

3. Crime prevention and service

-

Police services are increasingly being asked to address non-law enforcement issues, due to a lack of social services 

• This backlash falls upon the police to deal with 

• Leads to officer burnout

• Although training is getting better, it’s not perfect, and there are issues with how these cases are dealt with

Structure of Canadian policing

4 levels:

1. Federal

2. Provincial

3. Municipal

4. Indigenous

• There are private security services and parapolice services

  • Want to give reassurance policing in businesses and residential areas

• Other law enforcement and security agencies are:

  • Canada border services agency (CBSA)

  • Canadian security intelligence service (CSIS)

  • Communications security establishment (CSE)

Federal police - RCMP

• Organized into 15 divisions + RCMP headquarters in Ottawa

  • Each division is headed by a commanding officer (enforce federal statues)

  • Guided by the RCMP Act - federal legislation

  • All RCMP officers are trained at their academy in Regina

• Roughly 60% of RCMP personnel are involved in contract policing: an arrangement whereby the RCMP and provincial police forces provide provincial and municipal policing services

• Before 2015, the RCMP wasn’t allowed to unionize

RCMP act

• Includes qualifications, responsibilities, disciplinary procedures, etc

• (sections NOT important)

• Section 9.1(1): No person shall be appointed to be a member unless that person is a Canadian citizen, is of good character and has the necessary physical qualities

  • Exception if no Canadian citizen is found, then a permanent resident can be employed

• Section 37: It is the responsibility of every member:

1. To respect the rights of all persons

2. To maintain the integrity of the law, law enforcement and the administration of justice

3. To perform the member’s duties promptly, impartially and diligently, in accordance with the law and without abusing the member’s authority

4. To avoid any actual or potential conflict of interests

5. To ensure that any improper or unlawful conduct of any member is not concealed or permitted to continue

Provincial police

Responsible for policing rural areas and those outside of municipalities and cities 

• Enforce provincial laws and the criminal code

• 3 provincial forces: 

  • Ontario provincial police (OPP)

  • Sûreté du Québec (SQ)

  • Royal Newfoundland Constabulary (RNC)

• Possible for some municipalities to contract out to provincial police forces

Regional / municipal police

• A single police service is responsible for providing policing services to multiple municipalities or jurisdictions within a region

  • Two or more municipalities join together to create a police force responsible for that region

• Regional police services are common in Eastern Canada

  • Pros: less expensive and more effective at providing a broader range of services

  • Cons: too centralized and may not provide effective community policing, could weaken day-to-day relationships with community members

• Peel regional police is the largest regional police force in Canada

• Most police work is at the municipal level

• Municipalities with their own policing services generally assume the costs of those services (those who don’t contract out to other services), typically through taxes

  • Create their own police force (ex. EPS)

  • Contracting with RCMP or another provincial police service

  • Creating a regional police service

Indigenous police

• Indigenous communities, under the FNPP, have the option of developing an autonomous, reserve-based police force or using Indigenous officers from the RCMP (or OPP in Ontario)

  • The activities of autonomous Indigenous police forces are overseen by reserve-based police commissions or the local band council

• Indigenous police forces and officers have full powers to enforce the Criminal Code, federal and provincial statutes, and band by-laws

• While Indigenous police forces are funded by federal and provincial governments, it is chronically underfunded

Basic police qual

Minimum requirements for candidates applying for employment in policing 

• Canadian citizenship 

• 19 years or older (average age of recruits is 25)

• Physical fitness

• Grade 12 education

• Preferably no prior criminal convictions or charges (dependent on nature of the charge)

• Show common sense and good judgment

Preferred police qual

Requirements that increase the competitiveness of applicants seeking employment in policing

• Knowledge of a second language/culture

• Related volunteer experience

• Post secondary education

• Work-life experience 

Models of police training

• Municipal police recruits may be trained “in house” in residential or nonresidential units

• RCMP training depot is in Regina (training is 6 months long) + 6 months of in-field training

• Critiqued for possibly creating an “us vs them” mentality

Police shift work

• Differential considerations depending on day vs night shift (difference in clientele)

  • Morning is lots of property-related calls and you come across more people, which increases number and variety of calls, can create more havoc

  • Night involves parts of the community that are otherwise hidden, can get difficult when bars are closing, can be hard to stay awake and perform at your best at like 4am

• Need to exude a sense of confidence and resilience (have to stay calm and cool at all times, can be very difficult)

• Steep learning curve (especially for Metropolitan areas)

Police paperwork

• Potential safety concern (56% of officers said they spend 3 hours on paperwork and 71% said they’re doing that in their patrol car, 86% were concerned about how that contributes to their safety)

  • Increased risk of accidents and ambush

• Potential for speech recognition technology to lessen the load

Responding to victims

• They’re the first point of contact

• Balance between giving no hope and false hope

• Understand limits of what victims can comprehend

• Balance need for information with emotional needs and state

Court work

• Often appear as witnesses

• Very important to be confident and professional (don’t want to discredit judge and jury)

Police mental health

• Occupational stress injuries: physical and/or mental conditions in police officers caused by their organizational and operational experiences on the job

  • Affects the individual officer and their family

• The effects of stress range from minor annoyances to alcohol/drug addiction, suicide, and other mental health issues

  • 36.7% of municipal officers and 50.2% of RCMP officers report symptoms of mental health issues compared to the general population (~10%)

  • Cynicism, depression, exhaustion, and burnout are all quite common

  • Can vary based on location (rural = more burnout and emotional fatigue due to lack of supports)

• Increased focus on programs to support officer mental health, but there’s still stigma around accessing these resources

Police coping

Constructive: good, adaptive, healthy, good for long term stress management

• Speaking about what’s going on with a professional or loved one (can create stigma within policing community)

• Exercising

• Bringing humour to the situations appropriately

Destructive: bad, maladaptive, short term for type of pain they’ll relieve but long term for the harm they’ll bring

• Excessive alcohol or drug use

• Emotional suppression

• Aggression 

Racial profiling

Any action undertaken for reasons of safety, security, or public protection that relies on stereotypes about race, colour, ethnicity, ancestry, religion, or place of origin rather than on reasonable suspicion, to single out someone for greater scrutiny or different treatment 

• 72.5% of Black Canadians, 63.0% of Arab or West Asian Canadians, 57.4% of Indigenous Canadians, 52.4% of other racialized Canadians, compared to 11.0% of white Canadians report at least one incidence of racial profiling

• 25% of those who experienced one instance of racial profiling developed mental health issues as a result of that

• 44% of one incident compared to 74% of 3+ reported a decreased sense of belonging in society

Street check

AKA carding; a police officer asks someone for identifying information

• Person hasn’t been doing anything criminal but is stopped and questioned

• No reasonable or probable grounds to suspect a crime 

• ID is then entered into the police database

• Disproportionately targets racialized Canadians

• Relates to criminalization of these communities and increased contact

• Halifax has banned street checks

Reqs for street check

More rigid requirements introduced for conducting street checks, to limit racial profiling

• In addition, many police services have upgraded training for officers, including requiring a specific reason for stopping people (can’t be based on race, being in a high crime area, or because the person refused to answer a question or walked away)

• Ontario requires police to collect data on street checks they conduct, including demographic information of the people stopped so they can do audits on the street checks that occur

• Section 15 of the Charter is the requirement of equal treatment of citizens

  • Base decisions on reasonable and probable grounds

Use of force

• No laws or regulations about how exactly police should act in a given situation

• Discretion is key

  • The goal is to use the least violent option available to safely gain control of the situation

  • Variety of factors that affect officer discretion

  • One plus one standard: the police have the authority to use one higher level of force than what they’re being presented with by the confronting individual 

    • Intentionally vague 

  • Situational factors are the most important determinants (ex. weapons, prior history)

  • Continual risk assessment required

CC and UOF

Section 25 of the criminal code provides police the legal authority to use force (legal justification):

1. Officers exercising force must be performing a duty they’re required or authorized to do

• Ex. searching a home with a warrant

• Objective, justifiable reasons for using that level of force

• Minimum required to achieve goal of compliance

2. They must act on reasonable grounds

3. They may use only so much force as is necessary under the circumstances

4. They are responsible for any excessive use of force

• Can be civilly or criminally liable

• Peace officers are in this category as well

National UOF framework

The officer continuously assesses the situation and selects the most reasonable option

• Number of components:

  • The situation

  • The behaviour of the subject

  • The officer’s perception and tactical considerations

  • The officer’s use of force options

UOF: the situation

1. Environment: environmental conditions that may affect officer assessment: time of day, weather, light availability, temperature, residential or urban, indoor/outdoor, location

2. Number of subjects: subject to officer ratio; will affect risk to officer and public

3. Perception of subject’s abilities: based on officer’s perception, under influence of substances, size and perceived strength/skills, emotional state, close to weapons

4. Prior knowledge of the subject: do they know this person, history, reputation, prior contact, nature of person

5. Time and distance: conditions that will determine whether an officer has to respond immediately or if a delayed response is okay, pressing threat to public safety vs other conditions that can allow officer to delay response (ex. cover, imminent arrival of backup, able to increase distance from suspect in a way that lessens the threat of the situation), escape routes

6. Potential attack signs: what the subject’s clues are that they might react violently, their intentions, ignoring the officer, repetitive questions, aggressive verbalization, refusing to comply, invading personal space, aggressive stance, all precede a violent attack on the officer

UOF: subject behaviours

1. Cooperative: subject responds appropriately to the officer’s presence, direction, and control

• Compliant

• Respond relatively positively to verbal commands

• No profanity, screaming, or resisting

-

2. Resistant (passive): subject refuses with either no or little physical action to cooperate with officer’s direction

• Noncompliance to officer’s request

• Verbal refusal 

• Trying to leave the scene but not aggressively

• Physical resistance of not moving

-

3. Resistant (aggressive): actively resisting lawful direction, could be using non assaultive physical action

• Walking towards or away from officer

• Running away

• Trying to escape custody

• Anything to prevent or escape custody*

-

4. Assaultive: subject attempts to apply force to the officer or anyone involved

• Also just threatens force

• Kicking, punching, aggressive body language

-

5. Grievous bodily harm or death: any actions or behaviours that creates a reasonable belief that the person is intending to or likely to cause grievous bodily harm or death

• Ex. waving around a weapon

-

• Can be difficult to differentiate; lots of overlap

• Can see multiple behaviours in the same case

• Where subject falls is based on officer’s perception

UOF: perception and tactical considerations

• Officer perception is partially influenced by personal characteristics, impacting beliefs on ability to handle the situation, such as:

  • Overall fitness relative to the subject

  • Fatigue / injuries

  • Gender or cultural background

  • Varies between officers and agencies 

• The assessment of the situation can lead to a variety of tactical considerations, such as:

  • Number of officers (+ amount of protection)

  • Availability of backup or cover

  • Geographic considerations (ex. terrain) 

UOF: force options

1. Officer presence: not a strict use of force in and of itself, idea is the presence of an officer can change a subject’s behaviour and/or the situation

2. Communication: how we can use verbal and nonverbal communication to control and resolve the situation

• Can be direct commands, explaining consequences where appropriate, nonverbal stances, postures and facial expressions

3. Physical control: any physical technique that’s used to control the subject that does NOT involve a weapon

• Soft techniques: control-oriented, but have a low probability of causing injury

  • Ex. nonresistant handcuffing, joint locks

• Hard techniques: control-oriented, to stop a subject’s behaviour, have a higher probability of injury

  • Empty hand strikes, punches, kicks, etc

4. Intermediate weapons: use of force with a less-lethal weapon (those not intended to cause serious bodily harm or death) 

• Ex. police batons, tasers, or aerosols 

• May cause death but are not intended to

5. Lethal force: intended to/reasonably likely to cause serious bodily harm or death

• Ex. firearm

-

• Can use several of these categories in the same situation

• Respond with amount of force that’s necessary and reasonable given the circumstances

Investigative interview

• Key factor for cases in the CJS

• Get evidence, narrow suspect list, fact check witness accounts

• Noncustodial and custodial

Noncustodial interview

A police interview that occurs when a person is not in police custody and attends an interview voluntarily; the person is provided the police caution (right to silence) and is told that they are free to leave at any time during the interview

• Suspect someone has committed a crime but don’t have enough evidence for an arrest

• You’re still a suspect though

• Is required that the suspect is made aware of their rights

• While they’re not arrested yet, anything said in the interview can be used against you moving forward

• If the police then decide they have enough evidence to make an arrest, they have to seize questioning in time to start the process of charter rights and arrest

Custodial interview

Formal questioning by police of criminal suspects after a person has been formally taken into custody

• Not a law that dictates mandatory recording, but it’s becoming more common

  • Helps with evidentiary record

  • Helps protect accused person’s rights

  • Protects officers from false allegations of misconduct

Legal framework for interviewing suspects

1. Voluntary confessions rule

2. Right to silence

3. Right to counsel

Voluntary confessions rule

A statement by an accused to any person in authority is inadmissible at trial unless the crown proves beyond a reasonable doubt that the statement was made voluntarily

• Safeguard against unreliable and false confessions and to deter coercive practices

• Four factors in considering admissibility of out of court statements:

1. Presence of threats/promises: threatening harm, harsher treatment, etc or promising better outcomes like leniency (explicit or implicit)

• Question is whether statements are strong enough to sway the accused

2. Police oppression: excessively long interrogations, deprivation of food, water, sleep, medical treatment, intimidation, etc, all undermines voluntariness (focused on the environment)

3. Operating mind: accused has to be shown to have an operating mind (they understand what they’re saying and the outcomes of those statements)

• Don’t have to understand full legal sophistication

• Judge will consider intoxication, mental illness, extreme fatigue, age

4. Police trickery: some deception is permitted, but judge will look for statements that shock the community and undermines fairness of the justice system

• Ex. fabricated evidence to facilitate a confession

Right to remain silent

• Section 7: everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of the person and the right not to be deprived thereof except in accordance with the principles of fundamental justice

  • Within this section is the right to remain silent: a free choice of whether to speak to authorities or remain silent

  • An accused’s silence cannot be used as evidence of guilt and failure to testify cannot be used as any form of guilt either (overlaps with section 11c)

  • You don’t have a right not to be spoken to though (but still a threshold if they’re becoming too persuasive)

• Police must inform suspects of this right and that any statements made during the interview can be used as evidence

• If you’re not a suspect, police don’t have to inform you of this right, but they do when/if you become a suspect

Accusatorial ii

Guilt presumptive and confrontational, going to use psychological manipulation to establish control over the suspect, uses close-ended questions

• Ex. the Reid Technique: uses a variety of psych tactics including isolation, confrontation, giving false/exaggerated evidence, minimization of the crime, etc to elicit a confession from the person (used to be most commonly used tactic) TECHNIQUE NOT TESTABLE

• Increased likelihood of false confessions

Information gathering ii

Rapport building, truth seeking, and active listening, using non-accusatory, open-ended questions that really elicits the person’s account of the information first

• Ex. the PEACE model: plan and review the case, engage in rapport building and explain purpose of interview, account of interviewee, closure summarize interview inconsistencies, evaluation of next steps TECHNIQUE NOT TESTABLE

• Now police blend the two techniques

• Decreased likelihood of false confessions

Entrapment

A person ends up committing an offence that they would not otherwise have committed, largely as a result of pressure or cunning on part of the police

• A police officer provokes, entices, or coerces a person into committing an offence they otherwise probably would not 

• Entrapment is not legally permitted in Canada

  • Accused people can use entrapment as a defence, and if successful, a stay of proceedings may occur

Opportunity based entrapment

Police provide the opportunity to commit crime without reasonable suspicion that the person is engaging in crime or not operating within a bona fide inquiry 

• Ex. putting a parked car in a high crime area and leaving keys in the ignition, inviting anyone to take the car but you don’t have reasonable suspicion of any one person

Inducement based entrapment

Police have reasonable suspicion that someone is engaging in crime or are acting within a bona fide inquiry but still influence an individual into committing a crime

• Influencing the person to commit a crime

• Created an opportunity for someone of reasonable suspicion to commit a crime and are now persuading them to do it

• Ex. suspecting a drug dealer and repeatedly begging them to sell me drugs as an unmarked officer

Mr big operations

An investigative strategy designed to secure confessions from crime suspects through the creation of an elaborate scenario 

• Elicit confessions from people who are suspected of serious crimes (usually murder)

• High success rate: 75% confession 95% conviction

• Some are critical of false confessions and the fact that your rights aren’t in place since you don’t know you’re talking to police

• Courts have ruled that police can use deception and Mr Big operation is 100% legal

• Have existed since early 1900s but became popular in the early 90s

• Typically used with unsolved homicide cases

• Due to R v Hart, SCC placed restrictions on the admissibility of evidence gained through Mr. Big operations

Process of mr big

• Make suspect believe they’re being recruited into criminal investigation

• Police posing as organized crime people working under Mr Big (crime boss)

• Police initiate contact with target to recruit them, make friends, get confidence and trust, and get them to do tasks for the organization

• Eventually, they say their trust needs to be proven and Mr Big is concerned, so to stay in organization, tell Mr Big your criminal record 

• Once a confession is obtained, target is arrested and charged with that crime

R v Hart

Identified 3 issues with Mr Big operations:

1. Risk of false confessions and subsequent wrongful convictions (made to believe violent behaviour is rewarded in the fake criminal organization)

2. Prejudice to the accused (operations really put an accused in situations where they willingly participate in ‘crimes’, so juries are more likely to convict them)

3. Potential for police misconduct (since it supersedes any charter limits on police power, police can abuse their power)

-

Court established a 2 pronged approach to Mr Big operations:

1. A confession made by an accused during the course of a Mr Big operation should be presumed to be inadmissible into evidence

• To make it admissible, crown must prove value of confession outweighs any prejudice to the accused and prove that police didn’t act coercively 

2. When conducting these operations, police must be very careful that their behaviour does not approach coercion

• Ex. by threatening the accused or taking advantage of their vulnerabilities

• If police get a confession using coercive practices, confession will be excluded

• Mostly up to the defence to prove that Mr Big operation resulted in an abuse of police power

Overpol - sexual minorities

• Used to raid bathhouses in Toronto and arrest gay men

• Creates fear and distrust of police, which then makes people more reluctant to report crimes to the police

Underprotection

• 6/10 sexual minorities reported having been assaulted in some way since the age of 15 compared to 4/10 heterosexual Canadians

• Less likely to report physical assaults to police

Police and unhoused

• Toronto issues ~16,000 by law tickets to the houseless per year

• Houseless people suffer disproportionately from crime, with 73% reporting being victimized by crime

• Only 20% of people reported this crime to the police

• Engage in self-policing

Fundamental policing changes***

• Now have after-the-fact accountability measures, however they’re quite expensive and have not prevented repetitive misconduct

• Undergovernance of police conduct has also contributed to this issue

• Policing needs to cause less harm (re-evaluate use of force)

• Identify and focus on core police competencies

• Work with and defer to other agencies when they have better tools/expertise

Revising UOF policies

• Most visible policing reform in the last 30 years was the creation of Special Investigations Units (SIUs)

  • Provide independent investigation into police-involved deaths and serious injuries

  • Built on the implicit assumption that the criminal law can deter unwarranted police violence

• Deterrent approach to police shootings was not effective

• The supreme court of Canada basically says policing is dangerous and in the moment, if they feel the need to shoot someone, it’s fine

• Some are concerned that use-of-force policies may encourage officers to interpret symptoms of crisis and fear as signs of aggression and noncompliance

• We shoot fewer people than Americans, but that’s not a huge victory

• Australia and England have it figured out a bit more, as they focus on de-escalation when the civilian doesn’t have a gun

• Lives could be saved if more emphasis was placed on de-escalation

  • May also help police rebuild trust in the communities that are overpoliced and underprotected

Decriminalization

• Police mostly supported decriminalizing weed because it would allow them to focus on the harder drugs, saying that they could develop healthcare and social supports for people who use, while also reducing property crime and repeat offences surrounding drug use

• In 2014, a law was passed that criminalized purchasing sex from a consenting adult

  • Some say the police crackdown on this might displace sex workers to more dangerous areas of town, many of whom are from poor and marginalized communities

De-tasking police

• We ask the police to do too much apparently

• If budget cuts continue, governments need to shift tasks from the police to non-policing agencies

• Public police should hire more civilians and do more evidence-based policing

• If crime or public fear of crime increase, people may be less inclined to fund non-policing public and community agencies

• Such policing innovations have previously been confined to pilot projects that may not be renewed

Broader community and officer wellbeing

• Community safety and wellbeing plans are a good idea and are spreading across Canada

• Fundamental mismatch between multidisciplinary community safety plans and paramilitary police training

• Police need to be educated differently

• Right now, they’re not subject to provincial adequacy standards and accountability mechanisms

• Police officers charged criminally loses their job and their freedom, and are often placed in solitary confinement 

• Building concerns for the health and wellbeing of all first responders into community safety plans may allow police unions to support rather than resist change

  • Could inspire less confrontational and legalistic approaches to managing valuable human resources within the police

• Policing reforms need to have multiple rationales that appeal to different constituencies

Democratic policing

• Community safety plans are meant to depend on the particular problems in each community

  • Also depend on resources available 

• Police are often blamed for being both too tough and too soft

• Governance failures lead to policing failures

• Police are allowed to use their discretion in terms of arrests and charges, which works for and against them

• Democratically responsible authorities should be able to direct the police about the goals, priorities, policies, and styles of policing, and they should be required to do so in writing

• Those who govern the police should also be accountable for certain directives

• Communities should be able to hold those who govern the police accountable through:

  • Elections 

  • Criticisms

  • Complaints

Civilian oversight of police

• Some believe police services should have multiple representatives 

• Instead of appointing people to provincial boards to oversee police, some think it would be better if provinces enforce police adequacy standards

• Indigenous police should be considered an essential service to stop being underfunded

  • How are they not already?

• Policing isn’t going to change without broad-based reform coalitions that can produce the necessary political will

Change for benefit of all

• Police are set up by their use-of-force policies for traumatic episodes when people in crisis refuse to drop knives, which are then followed by multiple accountability measures

• Taxpayers can’t continue to fund ever-increasing police budgets either

• Elected and responsible officials need to be less deferential to the police on operational and day-to-day matters and actually take responsibility for decisions, even if it’ll cost them some votes

• Failures of all levels of government to provide clear directions to the police don’t inspire public confidence

Vicious circle

• This “vicious circle” keeps expanding to cover more disadvantaged groups

• Police don’t make their jobs easier by overpolicing

• Police may also miss out on knowledge and expertise of overpoliced groups

RCMP overview

• North West Mounted Police - May 1873

• Current # of employees:

  • ~31,000

  • 20,000 regular members

  • 11,000 civilian members / public servants

• Made up of 16 divisions
  

Core responsibilities of RCMP

1. Contract and Indigenous policing

2. Federal policing

• Border integrity, national security, protective policing, cybercrime, witness protection, serious and organized crime, sensitive and international investigations 

3. Specialized support services

• Forensic science, technical operations, air services, CPIC, DNA databank, ViCLAS, forensic lab, national sex offender registry

Enforcement duties

RCMP can enforce any valid law

• Members are required to perform all duties that are assigned to peace officers in relation to:

  • The preservation of the peace

  • The prevention of crime and of offences against the laws of Canada

  • The preservation of life, safety, and property

  • Investigation of offences

  • Subsidiary duties

RCMP and CC

• Authority to arrest: section 495 of the criminal code

• Authority to use force: section 25 of the criminal code

RCMP core values

• Act with integrity

• Show respect

• Demonstrate compassion

• Take responsibility

• Serve with excellence

• Formal ethics training at the beginning of RCMP training at the Depot

RCMP code of conduct

• Primary purpose of discipline is to correct improper conduct, rehabilitate the Member, and ensure public trust

• Ranges of measures from conduct authority:

  • Remedial (ex. Training, treatment, reprimand, 8 hours)

  • Corrective (ex. Up to 80hrs pay and/or annual leave, suspension without pay, ineligibility for promotion)

  • Serious (ex. demotion, transfer, suspension, up to 160 hours pay and/or annual leave)

  • Dismissal 

How code of conduct works

• Conduct authority is made aware of a situation, determines whether it's a performance (unaware of responsibilities) or conduct item (knowledgeable of expectations)

• If it’s a conduct issue, engage RCMP professional responsibility unit (PRU)

• Duty status matrix: is the behaviour bad enough that we need to change their actions and keep them away from the public?

• Identify an investigator, so optically they don’t have a conflict (find someone unaware of people involved)

• Send out a mandate letter to the investigator, telling them important details and monitoring their progress

• Advise the RCMP member that they’re under investigation, including telling them that they’re supported (mentally and otherwise)

• Investigation is delivered to the conduct authority, they review it, and then make a determination of whether or not it met the necessary threshold of conduct

  • Subject member submits information

  • Conduct meeting to go over it

  • Decision is made

  • Measures are determined (wide range)

    • Subject to McNeil disclosure: if you’re found guilty in the conduct lane, you have to advise the courts that you’ve contravened an internal policy and the crown council will weigh whether it gets advised to the defense or not (can be career-altering)

Financial authority act

• Corporate accountability

• On the financial side, the RCMP are accountable to public funds (delegated financial authority)

• National master standing offers (NMSO) are called up through procurement 

• Only certain people can sign for overtime, meal expenses, equipment, and investigations

• Unit commander authority is $10,000 

  • Must engage procurement if it exceeds this limit

  • Can have flexibility up to $25,000

Consequences of exceeding financial authority

• Written warning

• Increased scrutiny

• Regular reports from unit on all procurement activities

• Mandatory training

• Limitation of financial authorities 

• Revocation of financial authorities

Policing environment

• In the US, they have different perspectives on law where legislators are trying to prevent police from stopping vehicles (they can see what’s going on inside a vehicle to check for criminal behaviour and they can’t do that anymore cuz this got taken away)

• Eroding police’s ability to interact with the public, but WE aren’t doing that 

• Police over there aren’t happy about it

RCMP oversight agencies

• External bodies government and police have lobbied for for years

• If use of force leads to injury, external boards investigate, not the police

• Contracted by provincial and territorial governments

ASIRT

Alberta Serious Incident Response Team

• Investigate Alberta police officers whose conduct:

  • May have caused serious injuries

  • May have caused death

  • Has led to serious or sensitive allegations of police misconduct

    • Breach of trust

    • Obstruction of justice

    • Sexual assault

    • Perjury

    • Theft 

    • Fraud 

Section 46.1 AB police act

Allows for consultations and ASIRT to take investigations

• Serious incidents and complaints

• The chief of police services shall as soon as practicable notify the commission or the oversight board, as the case may be, and the Minister where 

  • An incident occurs involving serious injury to or the death of any person that may have resulted from the actions of a police officer or

  • A complaint is made alleging that:

    • Serious injury to or the death of any person may have resulted from teh actions of a police officer or

    • There is any matter of a serious or sensitive nature related to the actions of a police officer 

Section 46.1 how to

• Police incident occurs

• Alberta director of law enforcement is notified

• Director of law enforcement renders decision:

  • In scope, ASIRT engaged (big deal)

  • Not in scope (not a big deal)

  • In scope, matter to remain with RCMP (mid-level deal)

• In scope:

  • Investigators assigned

  • Determine if immediate scene attendance is required

  • Available investigative materials delivered to ASIRT

    • Discussion is required concerning order of operations relative to evidence collection and preservation (since they’re taking over investigation relative to police actions, the original investigation still needs to continue; inherently competing “who gets in there first”)

      • Need to figure out whose responsible for what

  • Designation of members

    • Subject officer: if you applied use of force

    • Witness officer: if you didn’t apply use of force but have info on the event

  • Investigation ensues

• Not in scope:

  • RCMP maintains carriage of investigation

  • RCMP investigator is identified and assigned

  • Carry on

  • ASIRT still determines this

• In scope - remain with RCMP

  • Meets the threshold for 46.1(1) notification

  • RCMP maintains carriage of investigation (told by ASIRT)

  • ASIRT may provide oversight, review, or assist

CRCC for RCMP

(Civilian Review and Complaints Commission)

• Anyone can complain whenever about an RCMP officer

• Can be online, fax, and by mail, or by going into an RCMP detachment

• 1 year statute of limitations (to make the complaint) but depending on the nature of the complaint, CRCC may accept complaints after that limit

• Complaints come into PRU, and they have oversight of public complaints

  • Complaint delivered to line officer

  • Provides guidance and support to detachments

  • If assessment is required, there’s an additional process

    • Ex. if complaint is serious in nature

  • Investigator is ID’d and assigned

  • Subject member is advised of complaint about them

  • Investigation is initiated

Complaint disposition

• Informal resolution: person chills out and gets an apology or something, both members sign off on it MOST COMMON

• Complaint withdrawn: if facts don’t line up with evidence, they back off

• Letter of decision: once investigation is concluded, line officer decides what to do (founded or unfounded)

• Once that’s done, complaint is reviewed by CRCC

  • Complainant not satisfied, can request review 

  • Request for review is filed with 60 days

  • CRCC reviews all materials

    • Submission to RCMP commissioners office

Privacy commissioner

Mission is to protect and promote privacy rights

• Complaints - all federal institutions

• Privacy impact assessment: risk management process that helps institutions ensure they meet legislative requirements and identify the impacts their programs and activities will have on people’s privacy

• USB data drives (if they contain court materials) going from police to crown, if the USB falls out, it can be a significant data breach, police must contact privacy commission 

  • Can have significant consequences

• Coroner’s inquest - initiated by chief coroner

  • Not for determining fault

  • Public judicial proceeding to determine the circumstances surrounding a death

  • Goal is to fact find

  • Verdict and jury recommendations

• Public inquiries - initiated by government

  • Identify facts and causes, not fault

  • Resultant recommendations

  • NS mass casualty commission - turning the tide 

    • 130 recommendations

Incident management intervention model

What police use to help articulate UOF in a court setting or in their reports to make sure they’ve used it appropriately

• Subject behaviour officer response

  • Data form to be populated when UOF occurs

  • National RCMP standard, consistent data collection

  • Provides supervisor oversight for UOF incidents

  • Trend analysis, statistic, training

Independent centre of harassment and resolution

Centralized, independent unit that facilitates the resolution of harassment and violence occurrences for RCMP employees

• Employee makes a submission

• Determines if separation of parties is necessary

• Investigation is completed by an independent unit

• Founded or unfounded

• Recommendations: accept or reject, then implement

Occupational health and safety

• Make sure RCMP following safety protocols

• Assist with the development, implementation and maintenance of OSO

• OSO is responsible to manage and monitor compliance of the hazard prevention program, and the hazardous occurrence reporting and investigation program, compliance to the Canada labour code part II, and the Canada occupational health and safety regulations, in accordance with the federal regulator, employment and social development in Canada

HOIT

(Hazardous occurrence investigation team)

• Multiple layers of oversight and governance

AV tech

• Holds all people accountable

• Detachment video systems

  • Interview rooms

  • Cell block video

• In car cameras

• Remotely piloted aircraft systems (drones, RPAS)

• Body-worn cameras

• Cell phone videos

Why O and G important

Oversight and governance are important for public trust and confidence, ensuring accountability, quality of police force, and maintaining confidence in the CJS

Police governance and oversight

• Principle of accountability: the actions of policing individuals or agencies are subject to review; people can use formal channels to lodge complaints against policing bodies

  • Provincial police acts and codes of ethics also govern police behaviour

  • A lot of legislative bodies to hold police accountable

  • Investigative reviews and formal complaints commissions are also a thing

  • System largely relies on an after-the-fact process

• Police being fired is only likely if they’ve committed a serious criminal offence

Police review boards

• Internal: disciplinary channels and complaints mechanisms within police organizations (police investigating police)

• External: review boards and complaints mechanisms independent of police organizations (elected individuals and civilians)

-

Some have argued that review boards need to be:

• Entirely civilian-led: there shouldn’t be any internal mechanisms and any alleged misconduct should be investigated externally (possibility of cover-ups if internal)

• Universal in jurisdiction at the provincial level: have jurisdiction over RCMP and provincial police

• Given full powers of investigation: ASIRT is the anomaly because they are given full powers to investigate, but some review bodies are dependent on what the police give them, meaning they don’t have the same investigate powers as the internal mechanisms

Code of conduct

Outlines certain basic rules for members within the police service or police commission

• Each province is additionally guided by its own provincial code of ethics

• Fundamental principles of policing, guiding ethical values (ex. integrity), etc

Police ethics

Ethical difficulties emerge when officers act when there are no legal/ethical grounds

• Outcomes/consequences do more harm than good?

• Who is being harmed? 

• Can the activity be justified legally and/or ethically? 

EPC

EPS is governed by the Edmonton Police Commission (EPC), an elected-civilian agency that does not investigate complaints, but ensures allocation of resources and makes sure that EPS provides effective and responsive service, etc

• Used to be responsible for investigating complaints (before Dec 2025)

• Now are purely there for big picture oversight, policy, budgeting, etc 

Police review commission

An independent civilian agency responsible for addressing complaints about police misconduct in Alberta (AKA PRC)

• Criminal allegations, professional conduct, organizational structure, etc

• ASIRT is part of our police review commission

• Complaint levels apply when officers are on or off duty

• Goal is to get complaint resolved within 180 days

• PRC won’t handle complaints outside of Alberta police, or level 3 complaints about RCMP

• Don’t handle employment-related issues

PRC complaint levels

1. Death, serious injury, or sensitive nature

• Ex. a life-altering injury, that a someone sustains during an arrest

• ASIRT is responsible for this level

• Includes provincial and municipal and RCMP complaints

-

2. Statutory offences

• Allegations of criminal offences or violations of other laws that don’t fall under level 1 criteria

• Ex. alleged assault on a suspect but no serious injury was sustained

• Deals with RCMP, provincial, and municipal 

• Dealt with by ASIRT

-

3. Misconduct

• Potential breaches of police conduct and oversight

• Also includes police chiefs 

• Ex. unlawful use of authority, deceit, neglect of duty, threats without legal jurisdiction, etc

• Dealt with by PRC

• Only applies to municipal and Indigenous police

-

4. Job performance

• Related to officers’ professional performance (failing to meet professional standards)

• Ex. mishandling evidence, arriving late to a non-urgent call without good reason, etc

• Sent to the officer’s employer for resolution through internal processes

-

5. Police service policy 

• Not relating to officers themselves, rather about policies and procedures of police service itself

• Ex. complaint of not enough patrol coverage, data concerns, etc

• Complaints are referred to the specific police service and dealt with through internal mechanisms

AB police misconduct database

• The first in Canada, includes incidents of police misconduct within AB for the last 30 years (up to 2022)

• Searchable directory of police misconduct cases

• ~404 individual incidents and 517 officers

• ~13.5 incidents per year across Alberta

• Includes both substantiated and unsubstantiated claims (founded and unfounded)

• Has publicly-available information 

• Fact-check everything

• Disciplinary hearing is the most common incident outcome, with an internal mechanism that decides what outcome is appropriate

• Complaints are typically made about younger officers (<5 years on the job)

Comparing complaints across agencies

• In Edmonton, the number of public complaints is decreasing

• EPS doesn't give us info on type of complaints, just number

• Compared to Manitoba and NS, ASIRT investigates more complaints, but we have significantly fewer than BC

McNeil disclosure

As part of first party disclosure to the Crown, police officers involved in an investigation are required to disclose any misconduct related or relevant to the accused’s case

• Necessary to protect section 7 in the charter (right to make a full and complete defence)

• First party disclosure: anything relevant in crown’s possession must be revealed to defence; now also applies to police as well

  • Police are required to tell the crown (who then goes to defence) about any police misconduct by way of the officers involved in the investigation (conduct can be related to investigation or relevant to accused’s case)

• R v McNeil set new requirements for the disclosure of disciplinary outcomes among police officers

  • Prior to this case, police misconduct was not part of first party disclosure

  • Case made all the way to the Supreme Court of Canada

IMPORTANT

If a police is found guilty or misconduct, they are subject to a McNeil disclosure for the remainder of their career

Bona fide inquiry

Authorized investigation in a targeted area (ex. high crime area for stealing cars), includes reasonable suspicion of prevalent criminal activity

• Police can approach anyone in the area and provide an opportunity to commit a crime

• Online spaces for the purpose of creating an opportunity for crime is a bona fide inquiry (ex. posing as someone on the internet to lure sex predators or child predators) NOT considered entrapment