Clear Full Forecast

Inquiry Into Death Of Robert Dziekanski Announced

By 250 News

Monday, February 18, 2008 01:16 PM

     


VICTORIA - Attorney General Wally Oppal has released terms of reference  for a public inquiry into the October 2007 death of Robert Dziekanski at Vancouver International Airport.

Two commissions of inquiry will be headed by Thomas R. Braidwood, QC. A study commission of inquiry will be established first to report on the use of conducted energy weapons (Tasers) in British Columbia. A second hearing and study commission of inquiry will be convened to provide Dziekanski’s family and the public with a complete record of the circumstances of his death.

"Given the overlapping reviews and investigations now being conducted, combined with the jurisdictional complexity of this tragic incident, we felt it prudent to adopt a two-phased approach," said Oppal. "The federal government has indicated that it will co-operate."

Braidwood is the sole commissioner of both inquiries. He will complete the study commission on conducted energy weapons by this June 30. The commissioner will determine when the inquiry into Dziekanski’s death can begin. An important factor in his decision will be the status of the coroner’s inquest, scheduled for May 5 to 16, and the criminal investigation. Section 15 of the Public Inquiry Act provides that a hearing commission must not unduly prejudice the rights and interests of
a participant against whom a finding of misconduct, or a report alleging misconduct, may be made.

Government’s commitment to hold a commission of inquiry into this incident was announced in November 2007 by Solicitor General John Les and is established under the Public Inquiry Act. Under the act, a hearing commission can compel attendance by witnesses and make findings of misconduct against individuals. A study commission does not have these powers. 

Here  are excerpts from the Order in Council:

THOMAS R. BRAIDWOOD, QC, COMMISSIONS OF INQUIRY PURPOSE AND TERMS OF REFERENCE

The commissioner is appointed and terms of reference set out by an order-in-council (OIC) under the Public Inquiry Act. The text below is taken from the OIC. Unless otherwise noted, section numbers refer to the numbered points under "establishment of two commissions."

Establishment of two commissions

1.  A study commission, called the Thomas R. Braidwood, Q.C., Study Commission, is established under section 2 of the Public Inquiry Act to inquire into and report on the use of conducted energy weapons by the following in the performance of their duties and the exercise of their powers:
(a) constables of police forces of British Columbia, other than the RCMP;
(b) sheriffs under the Sheriff Act;
(c) authorized persons under the Correction Act.

2.  A hearing and study commission, called the Thomas R. Braidwood, Q.C., Hearing and Study Commission, is established under section 2 of
the Public Inquiry Act to inquire into and report on the death of Mr.Dziekanski.

3.  Thomas R. Braidwood, Q.C., is the sole commissioner of each of the commissions established under this section.

Purposes of the commissions
1.  The purpose of the study commission established under section 2 (1) is to make  recommendations respecting the appropriate use of conducted
energy weapons by constables, sheriffs and authorized persons referred to in section 2 (1), in the performance of their duties and the exercise
of their powers.
2.  The purposes of the hearing and study commission established under section 2 (2) are as follows:
(a) to provide Mr. Dziekanski's family and the public with a complete record of the circumstances of and relating to Mr. Dziekanski's death;
(b) to make recommendations referred to in section 4 (2) (c).

Terms of reference
1.  The terms of reference of the inquiries to be conducted by the study commission established under section 2 (1) are as follows:
(a) to review current rules, policies and procedures applicable to constables, sheriffs and authorized persons referred to in section 2 (1) in respect of their use of conducted energy weapons and their training and re-training in that use:
(b) to review research, studies, reports and evaluations respecting the safety and effectiveness of conducted energy weapons when used in policing and law enforcement in British Columbia and in other jurisdictions;
(c) to make recommendations respecting
(i) the appropriate use of conducted energy weapons by constables, sheriffs and authorized persons referred to in section 2 (1) in the performance of their duties and the exercise of their powers, and
(ii) the appropriate training or re-training of those constables, sheriffs and authorized persons in that use of conducted energy weapons.
(d) to submit a report to the Attorney General on or before June 30, 2008.

2.  The terms of reference of the inquiries to be conducted by the hearing and study commission under section 2 (2) are as follows:
(a) to conduct hearings, in or near the City of Vancouver, into the circumstances of and relating to Mr. Dziekanski's death;
(b) to make a complete report of the events and circumstances of and relating to Mr. Dziekanski's death, not limited to the actual cause of
death;
(c) to make recommendations the commissioner considers necessary and appropriate;
(d) to submit a report to the Attorney General on or before a date to be determined by the Attorney General in consultation with the Commissioner.


Previous Story - Next Story



Return to Home
NetBistro

Comments

Paint it white.
"Under the act, a hearing commission can compel attendance by witnesses and make findings of misconduct against individuals. A study commission does not have these powers."

What is the point of an inquiry if it can't make people give evidence and isn't allowed to determine whether anybody broke the law and should be charged with an offense?
In my opinion, in this incident, a picture (a privately taken video in this case) speaks more than thousands of words of an inquiry.

The reasonableman has the answer already.
Your right diplomat,it does speak louder than a thousand words,but my guess is that the video will have very little,if any impact on the outcome.
I believe this inquiry is to shut people up and they are handing out the whitewash brushes as we speak!
They already know what the events and circimstances were, but I am betting we will find out that,gee... we didn't REALLY see what we and the rest of the world THOUGHT we saw!
I know what I saw. An out of control big dude busting up stuff in the vancouver airport.
Maybe the inquiry can make a recommendation that the decision to taser someone should take more than 34 seconds (according to the video) it took from encountering the situation to the tasering happening. IMO it sounded to me like that the taser was like a new remote control car someone got under the Xmas tree and they were like little kids who couldn't wait to try it out.
Funny how people see things differently,because what I saw was a guy who obviously in serious distress for reasons unknown.
I also saw a guy who according to the video and witnesses,made no move to harm anything that was alive and breathing.
And the cops never bothered to find out what the problem was and why, did they?
They just zapped him,and they didn't exactly waste much time thinking about it.(how many seconds?)
Hopefully, there will be more thought given to this "inquiry" by all concerned than Robert Dziekanski was ever given.
Just for one minute i'd love to get inside their brains to see what an officer shouldn't be. Better screening would be nice.
There would not even be an 'inquiry' if a concerned citizen had not recorded the incident for the rest of us, and for justice. It's lucky for all of us that he had the cojones to force the fuzz to give back the video, or we would all be commenting on a far different version of events, the one the police establishment wanted us to know about. I am all for law and order, but aren't those guys and dolls in red serge supposed to be on our side?
I hope I have the foresight to do what the video guy did, if I get into a situation like that. Strictly an opinion.
metalman.
Some truth in what you say Heidi1555 but IMO there should be better training as well.
You are stereotyping heidi1555
This is a farce, calculated to defeat justice. Any applicable penalties would reflect Police Act contraventions. Those are meaningless.

Cynicism alert: last week a judge produced her second acquittal of Coquitlam RCMP cop, Russ Hannibal, re a 2002 taser incident. Hannibal received over $400,000 in unearned wages since he was charged with Assault, after he inflicted six 50,000 volt, 5 second charges against a prostrate man. The timing is obvious. Oppal wanted that case out of the way, so that it was out of the media. His plan is to delay the YVR case beyond the 2010 Olympic Games.
The_grandinquisitor, change your name please, your 2 line sentences of opinion aren't reflective of Grand.
I've missed you troll. Oh i'm doing it again.....

stereotyping? I hardly doubt that. It is what it is. Like many other people on this planet, I have Roberts death stamped on my brain forever and the thoughts of many other needless deaths.

"Over half of RCMP in-custody deaths occurred in B.C.: report"

http://www.nationalpost.com/news/canada/story.html?id=311919
Now those of you who might remember my posts regarding this matter will recognize that I was absolutely abhorred by this incident. Although any findings by any Commissions Of Inquiry will not reverse the event or provide justice, perhaps it will engage preventative measures to prevent a repeat offence. Hopefully this Commission will also investigate YVR's and Immigration Canada's role in the events that led to Mr. Dziekanski's death before the RCMP arrived. Procedures need to be put in place regarding CED devices and as Heidi says, training is required. Now as for Truth's comment " Oppal wanted that case out of the way, so that it was out of the media. His plan is to delay the YVR case beyond the 2010 Olympic Games." It would serve BC and the 2010 Olympic Games much better if the incident was acknowledged and remedial action taken than to pretend it never happened. For You Tube doesn't lie, knowing this the Commission can't sway too far off course. IMO in the video it seems as if one of the Officers appears to be somewhat dismayed and uncertain of his role in the situation. Mistake? ABSOLUTELY!! Cover it up, No Chance!!
Pisspuller, sometimes a lot more is said in one or two lines than a whole paragraph of drivel. I saw the whole incident on youtube and I still believe the man was out of control...call it a temper tantrum if you will....the only thing is that this baby was 6' 6" 280 pounds!
Let's see...didn't somebody already diagnose this man with "Excited Delirium" ?

I expect this will be part of the spin.

A cop with a grade 12 education, can make a 30 second psychoanalysis, on the run, looking at the guy through glass. He then decides that the guy needs to be tasered to be brought down, due to his "psychotic state".

There really are many easy ways to gain control of anybody and put them into submission without injuring them. There is no reason for in-custody deaths whatsoever.

I have taken down many people of all shapes and sizes without injury, quickly and effectively. Clay Wiley was one of them.

One of the biggest problems is the rationale of thought that police sometimes have. Some members take the "parent" approach. They feel it is their duty to stop the behaviour and punish for it. In fact it is their duty only to bring the person before the courts to seek justice, if necessary. Some people take the opportunity to inflict punishment while taking the person into custody. That is the problem.
I would say the grandinquisitor has a point. And reasonableman, where and in what capacity have you taken down many people of all shapes and sizes? Enlighten us! Clayton Wiley unless freaking out on some drug, was for the most part a cowardly punk theif who fainted at the first sign that someone was going to stand up to him. ON the fatefull day he left this world, he was on a cocaine frenzy that took 6 cops to get him under control...so if you're such a superman, teach the men in blue how to go about it without somebody getting black and blue.
I knew you were a great man thereasonableman but when I read this
"I have taken down many people of all shapes and sizes without injury, quickly and effectively. Clay Wiley was one of them." it just gave me a whole new greater respect for you.

Clay Willey was tasered but that's pretty much all that was said in the article I found back in Jan. 2007. Why was this death not talked about more in your opinion thereasonableman?

The opportunity to inflict punishment while taking the person into custody sounds like some sort of imbalance in their brain. Reminds me of the schoolyard bully we used to raise our eyebrows to. What makes actions like that ok in the abuser's mind? Abusers should never work to keep the peace.
Me thinks reasonable man is referring to taking down people quickly, effectively and without injury to himself. When your arresting someone who is fighting, there are no marquis of queensbury rules, police are there to win the fight and make the arrest. Unless you've mastered the vulcan neck pinch, it doesn't seem plausible that anyone can quickly "take somebody down" without doing something that injures them in some way or another.
Me thinks Imorg would relentlessly argue anything that doesn't fit his schema of how the world should go 'round.

Hey, why don't you try intelligent debate instead of the endless "Who are you, How would you know ? What did you do ?"

What do you think I did, genius ?

I was a security guard at the bus depot, of course !
Is the policeman who is responsible for tasering the gent gonna be at this inquest? Maybe he can ask someone there how to get to sleep at night with this on his mind?
Reasonableman , what you imply in your comments makes it clear to everyone that you do not have any experience in dealing with violent individuals. If you worked as a security guard at the bus depot then your physical altercations would likely have consisted of removing a few of the harmless drunks from the property. For anything else I can safely assume that you would have quickly called 911. With the types of violent, intoxicated people the police deal with on a daily basis, in- custody deaths unfortunately will occur. If you are going to post an opinion why not at the very least avail yourself of the numerous articles and studies floating around about the inherent dangers of policing? At least your opinion would be an informed one and would positively influence some of the other dullards that post here on a daily basis.
There is certainly a difference in regards to how much force is required to take down a violent, combative, drug or alcohol crazed individual, and in those incidents, with correct judgement all is fair. Now it seems the police defenders posting appear to be very biased in their opinion of what transpired in Mr. Dziekanski's case and claim the his size was an issue, and busting stuff up is an immediate death sentence. If you'd actually viewed the video without bias, you'd realize that he actually harmed nobody and probably was never his intent, and I'm positive that the ED excuse is merely an afterthought. I'll share a true story that also meritted ED behavior, some will perhaps just not conceptualize the similarity. While my fiancee and I were travelling in a foreign country, we encountered a border crossing, and turns out my fiancee's passport was not valid as the country technically no longer existed. She was pulled from the car by the police and escorted away for questioning, I was ordered to remain at the vehicle. After what seemed forever, I had become very frustrated and agitated and so began searching the building which I presumed she was being held captive in. The language barrier became an obstacle, and my paramounting fears of what she may be enduring accelerated my likelyhood of an ED episode, nonetheless I returned to the car. A policeman finally arrived with an offer of a payment plan, after a brief hesitatation :) I agreed to pay. There's much more to the story, but i'll refrain. Merely, the lack of communication and feeling very alone at that moment could have sent me on a different path. I would only hazard a guess that the assault weapons they had slung over their shoulders would be almost effective as a CED. Fortunately being only 5'6" and 170 Lbs of Mr. Atlas built ass, my lifesan was prolonged and I was renuited with my now wife. We laugh at it now, wish Mr. Dziekanski was around to have a beer and enjoy the same. We were't far from his home at the time. Sorry, I drivel so!!
It's not drivel. Of course me of all people would think that :)
It's like the fear of the unknown gets the worse of some officers in a lot of these cases. If size is such an issue then these officers better start pumping more iron.

I'm tired and easily confused right now but I took the security guard comment as a sarcastic joke. Sorry thereasonableman if it wasn't a joke!!!! Nothing wrong with being a security guard. I wish we could all come clean on who we were as i'm snoopy but also it would make things easier...

:)
It was meant to be taken as a sarcastic joke. I knew the fish would come biting sooner or later.

I have to laugh at this though:

"If you worked as a security guard at the bus depot then...a few of the harmless drunks from the property."

"With the types of violent, intoxicated people the police deal with...in- custody deaths unfortunately will occur."

Apparently, intoxicated people are harmless as long as they are at the bus depot. If they encounter the police though, the intoxicated people immediately become violent and risk in-custody death.

Also, I assume this means that you could take a violent intoxicated person directly down to the bus depot in order to render them harmless, at which point, the security guard could easily escort them from the property, problem solved.

Therefore, in-custody deaths could be prevented by having more bus depots.

My question, however, remains:

"How many in-custody deaths occur in the various prison systems, where the officials are mostly unarmed ?"
BTW... interesting story, pulper.
Once again you are giving us a real insight into your ignorance on the subject. In-custody deaths do occur in the correctional system. There are less due to the controlled environment. Once again I would encourage you to peruse some of the material on these subjects before your next silly question. There is not enough time in the day to waste responding to your foolish posts.
Seems as if you have time, 2 posts in just over 12 hours :-
Speaking of the correctional system....a large percentage of these people are mentally ill. Thrown in jail instead of receiving the proper help they need, then back to the streets.
That's true Heidi, although they do receive proper medication in jail and are seen by a physician. They do fairly well there, but do they need to be there in the first place ?
Sorry Pete, you didn't need to respond, I wasn't addressing you. I apologize for your confusion.