Clear Full Forecast

Former Vice Chair of RCMP Complants Commission Calls for Change in System

By 250 News

Friday, November 27, 2009 09:11 AM

Former Vice Chair of the CPC Brooke McNabb and  CPC Media  relations person Nelson Khalil, across the desk  from Ben  Meisner

Prince George, B.C.-  Brooke McNabb is in his final days as Vice Chair of the Commission for  Public Complaints Agianst the RCMP.   Although he has  stepped down from  the post, he is  visiting communities where he feels  there is a need to tie up some loose  ends. 

McNabb says the big issue of police investigationg police is  not always the  quality of the investigation, rather, public perception.  Speaking on the Meisner program on CFISFM this morning, McNabb says investigators are in a no win situation when  the case is serious "In serious cases, the optics are so bad , it really doesn't matter what we  (the CPC) say, people say you're only working  with what the police gave you."

McNabb says the current look at the Clay Willey 2003 tasering case  came as a result of the  Solicitor General of B.C. requesting  a deeper look at the incident "It is a very old case, there had already been a Coroner's inquest, but the Solicitor General has said  this is not going away, there are still questions, and we need a deeper look at it."   At issue is a video which shows a hog tied Willey being tasered.  There  are calls for the full video to be made public.  This investigation will focus on:

  • whether the RCMP members involved in the investigation of Willey's arrest and subsequent death conducted an investigation that was adequate, and free of actual or perceived conflict of interest; and 
  • whether any other video evidence (other than the compilation video referred to above) exists and whether any RCMP member concealed, tampered with or otherwise inappropriately modified in any way, any evidence, in particular any video evidence, relating to the arrest of Willey.
  •  

    "In a case like this, we are going to do our own investigation and we have put together our own team of investigators, non RCMP,  but we have to make sure we are able to see everything.  We  have to be sure we have access to everything.  Then we make our findings, and once we  reach a decision, that should be the end of it.  Under the  current system,  the Comissioner (for the RCMP) can look at it and say, thank you very much, but I disagree."

    McNabb says there needs to be a system   that  has  recommendations made and if there is a disagreement, a review process,  but  once  the review process is complete,  the final decision is  the final  decision which must be acted upon.

    A  survey  conducted by the  CPC indicates 60%  of the public do not feel comfortable with making a complaint to the  RCMP. Some people feel  there will be retribution if they make a  complaint. There have been efforts to work with community to let people know they do have a voice if they want to speak out against the RCMP, that  they can contact the  Complaints Commission  where complaints don't have to be in writing  "We're doing what we can to make it accessible" says McNabb.

    McNabb says  70% of the complaints received  by the CPC are  what he would consider "small claims court style complaints".  In New Zealand,  the model is that  most of the complaints go back to the detachment for investigation and if the citizen is still not  satisfied,  then it goes back to the Complaints Commission. 

    "When  we make a decision , then that decision is the decision. That is fundamental in all of this,  but when you really think about it, how can you have legitimate oversight when the police are allowed to make the final decision?" asks  McNabb.

    "Policing is tough work and most of the complaints I have looked at, the conduct of the officers has been fine, but that's not the issue, we need a process in place that is transparent and accountable"

     


    Previous Story - Next Story



    Return to Home
    NetBistro

    Comments

    "* whether the RCMP members involved in the investigation of Willey's arrest and subsequent death conducted an investigation that was adequate, and free of actual or perceived conflict of interest; and
    * whether any other video evidence (other than the compilation video referred to above) exists and whether any RCMP member concealed, tampered with or otherwise inappropriately modified in any way, any evidence, in particular any video evidence, relating to the arrest of Willey."

    We need an investigation into these aspects in the case of Ian Bush as well.
    What do you think happended to Ian Bush in the Houston Detachment? Do you think that the member brought him back to teh detachment with the intention of killing him? I guess what he did was walk him into that interview room put the gun to his head and pulled the trigger!! Does that sound reasonable???? Did you ever listen to the 911 call the member made after the shooting??? I bet it worked out just the way he wanted it to. He got to murder an "innocent" young man, ruin his career and family life. What happended in that detachment was completely justified and that's why no charges were sworn. Bring on the independent bodies, a new public complaints boss, nothing will change, 99% of these shooting are justified, just like the BUSH case.
    Where on earth did you get all that nonsense from? I made the point because a buddy boy RCMP officer of the one who shot Bush failed in his duty to question him immediately and waited for a few weeks before submitting a list of questions to his lawyer to get permission to ask them.

    What the officer's intention was with Bush I have no idea, do you???????????? (more quwstion marks make it more valid I guess).

    What happened between Bush and the officer who shot him in the back of the head I have no idea, do you?

    Why the CCTV wasn't working I have no idea, do you?

    Was the investigation adequate?

    Was it free of perceived conflict of interest? I would say not! I have the perception there was a conflict of interest in a fellow officer not questioning him immediately.

    How do you know what happened was completely justified, were you personally present? Did you see it?

    All I suggested was that the Bush case was a prime case for investigation based on the criteria laid down by McNabb. Why does that make you so intensely angry?
    uppercanadian, your thinking process is really messed up. You, and the people that think like you, are the major problem in correcting this issue. By what you say in your post, it would sound like you were indeed there. Are you the RCMP a.k.a. "uppercanadian" that shot Mr. Ian Bush in the BACK OF THE HEAD, all in the name of self defence???

    Please "uppercanadian", tell us who you really are!!
    Samiam,where did you obtain your opinion from? The media? You are out to lunch if you rely on them for an objective analysis of anything.