I have always been a big fan of setting goals. I tend to have many goals on the go at any given time. I have goals for things I want to accomplish today; goals for things I want to accomplish this week, this month, this year, and in my lifetime. I find goals useful for focusing my activities, as I’m a person who tends to go off on random tangents at times. It can be helpful to go back to my goals and see if the activities I’m involved in are actually useful and related to furthering my objectives. It is generally a good feeling when I accomplish my goals.
I was recently reading the Canadian Police Executive Research Agenda Summary from the CACP (Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police) Research Foundation and I noted “policing persons with mental illness” made the Top 10 (No. 2 actually). I have been involved with this issue for about 15 or 20 years now. So on the one hand, I am always gratified to know that people are thinking about this. On the other hand, I got to wondering what it is that we still need to research.
There’s nothing more annoying than running into a bunch of information that contradicts something you always believed, you always knew, you were sure about.1 Fortunately (or not... ) it appears that most of us are quite capable of avoiding information if we think it is not going to tell us what we want to hear. How can otherwise sensible people believe that cutting taxes creates new jobs or that autism is caused by vaccinations?
It was not so long ago that the whole idea of mental illness was something we kept locked away in a closet (or an institution).
I was having a shower this morning and suddenly the solution to a problem I had been wrestling with for a few days came to me. It was an “ah-ha” moment.
One of the hot trends in psychology these days is the concept of “mindfulness.”
Despite the reasonable manner in which a strip search was conducted, its location nevertheless rendered it a s. 8 Charter breach. In R. v. Pilon, 2018 ONCA 959 the police obtained a warrant under the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act to search a motel room. When police entered the room, they arrested all three of its occupants, including Pilon.
The police were justified in conducting a clearance search of a residence following a 911, despite the likely possibility the call was actually false. In R. v. Serban, 2018 BCCA 382, the police received a 911 call made from a payphone about a possible break-and-enter in progress at the accused’s residence. The caller claimed to be the homeowner and said he had received a telephone call from his 80-year-old father who was alone in the residence. The caller said his father was frightened because someone was attempting to break into the basement. The caller gave his father’s name and provided a telephone number for his father, but the caller hung up when he was asked to provide his own name. The 911 call-taker phoned the father’s number but received no answer.
Just because a vehicle is not “impounded,” but rather towed under provincial legislation, does not mean the police cannot safeguard its contents by conducting an inventory search.
An officer who believed, but failed to confirm, a warrant existed made an unlawful arrest the Saskatchewan Court of Appeal has ruled in tossing out drug charges.
Officers need to pay attention to detail on the face of their search warrants or risk possible invalidation on review.
A vague safety concern about a child welfare matter did not justify police entry into a dwelling to conduct a spot check, so says the Saskatchewan Court of Appeal. In R. v. McMahon, 2018 SKCA 26, the police received information from a Mobile Crisis Unit (MCU) about an anonymous tip it had concerning the well-being of McMahon’s children. The tipster stated that the children were not being properly fed and the home had poor living conditions. The MCU requested the RCMP to “go and just take a look, find out what things were like and report back.” A corporal and a constable attended McMahon’s home. When they pulled into the yard, McMahon exited her house and greeted the officers. The corporal told McMahon about the anonymous tip and the purpose for the police visit. McMahon asked for a few moments to “clean up” her home before police entered. This request was denied, the corporal explaining it would be inconsistent with the purpose of a spot check. When the officers followed McMahon inside, they detected the odour of burnt marijuana. The officers walked up the entrance stairs to an open living room and kitchen area where they encountered two other adults and three young children. Police noticed a mason jar containing marijuana bud on top of a microwave stand. The adults, including McMahon, were immediately arrested for possessing a controlled substance and the children taken into care. In the course of retrieving a pair of socks for one of the children, police noticed a number of marijuana plants in a separate room in the basement. The residence was secured and a search warrant was then obtained and executed on McMahon’s home and out-buildings. Police seized 191 marijuana plants. McMahon was charged with unlawfully producing marijuana, possessing it for the purpose of trafficking and unlawful storage of a firearm.Saskatchewan Provincial CourtThe officer testified the reason for entering McMahon’s house was to check on the welfare of the children and the conditions of the house. It was also revealed that the occurrence report generated by police dispatch had referenced possible “drug use” in relation to McMahon but this “drug use” allegation had not found its way into the search warrant’s information to obtain (ITO).The judge went on to the find that the police breached McMahon’s s. 8 Charter rights. In his view, the police were present at McMahon’s home merely to inquire into the well-being of the children and the anonymous tip to MCU did not constitute reasonable grounds to enter the home. Although the police were entitled to approach the house under the implied licence doctrine and ask McMahon questions, the police exceeded its scope when they entered the home. Since the entry was warrantless, it was presumptively unreasonable, a presumption the Crown failed to rebut. First, the judge found McMahon had not consented to the entry into her home. Second, the police were not acting under their common law duty to protect life and safety — the police did not believe the lives of the children were in danger or their safety jeopardized. Rather, the corporal was only acting on a vague and anonymous tip. The officer’s observations made in the course of police entry were excised from the ITO and, without them, the warrant should not have been issued. The warrantless, non-consensual, non-urgent search of McMahon’s residence was unreasonable. The judge went on to exclude the evidence under s. 24(2) and dismissed all charges. Saskatchewan Court of AppealThe Crown appealed the trial judge’s ruling, arguing he erred in his analysis of the police officers’ authority to enter McMahon’s home. In the Crown’s view, there were three legitimate bases for police entry: 1. Manitoba’s Child and Family Services Act (CFSA) 2. consent 3. the common law police duty to preserve peace, prevent crime and protect life and safetyManitoba’s Child and Family Services ActThe Crown submitted that the duty to investigate imposed on police under the CFSA implicitly authorized entry into a private dwelling, without judicial authorization, in order to investigate whether the children in the home were in need of protection. In the Crown’s view, a warrantless entry in a non-emergency situation is an implied and necessary offshoot of the “duty to investigate” imposed by s. 13. Or, in the alternative, the Crown suggested s. 13.1 implicitly authorized police entry when a parent does not expressly refuse entry. Under s. 13 of the CFSA, an officer is obligated to investigate information they receive if, in the opinion of the officer, a reasonable ground exists to believe that a child is in need of protection. Apprehension of a child by police is an interim, highly-intrusive measure that is disruptive to the parent/child relationship and considered a remedy of last resort. Section 13.1 authorizes entry into a private dwelling with a warrant provided, among other things, an officer has reasonable grounds to believe that a child may be in need of protection and a person refuses to give the peace officer access to the child. Section 17 authorizes a warrantless intervention on an exigent basis provided the officer has reasonable and probable grounds to believe that a child is both in need of protection and at risk of serious harm. But there is nothing in the CFSA that expressly authorizes an officer to enter a private dwelling for the purpose of conducting an investigation. Even if the Crown’s argument that the s. 13 duty on officers to investigate a child protection concern implicitly authorizes entry, the officer would first need to be of the opinion that there were reasonable grounds to believe that a child was in need of protection. Here, however, the corporal did not subjectively believe McMahon’s children were in need of protection. “At no place in her testimony did [the corporal] identify the basis or foundation for her belief that Ms. McMahon’s children were in need of protection, apart from reference to the anonymous tip (which incidentally alluded to the presence of drugs),” said Justice Schwann, authoring the Court of Appeal’s opinion. “In her mind, the ‘check’ was required to firstly determine if the children were in need of protection. At no point did [she] articulate any discernible fact(s) that she relied on to support a basis to believe the children were in need of protection, apart from the anonymous tip.” Further, even if the corporal possessed a subjective belief, it was not objectively reasonable. “There was simply no evidence of any confirmatory investigation having been done by Mobile Crisis or, for that matter, [the corporal] to substantiate the reliability of the information provided by the anonymous source,” said Schwann. The trial judge did not err in concluding that the officer did not subjectively believe McMahon’s children were in need of protection or that any subjective belief would not have been objectively reasonable. Without reasonable grounds, s. 13 was not engaged and therefore no corresponding statutory duty was imposed on police to investigate. This undermined any “implied power of entry” and no need for the Court of Appeal to determine whether the duty to investigate under s. 13 impliedly authorized entry into a private dwelling without warrant. ConsentThe Crown contended that McMahon’s actions indicated that she waived her right to privacy and consented to police entry. First, the Crown suggested that since McMahon did not actually refuse police entry, the police had an implied right to enter her home in pursuit of its child protection mandate. Second, the Crown opined that the criminal law informational components for consent did not apply in child protection cases. In its view, a less robust consent standard was warranted in child protection investigations. But the Court of Appeal disagreed. “Criminal protections for an accused person must [not] be watered down or eschewed entirely simply because the impugned police action arose in a broad, unsubstantiated child protection context,” Schwann said, describing a valid consent as follows:[F]or consent to be valid, at a minimum, two requirements are necessary: the consent must be voluntary and it must be informed. To be informed, individuals must have the requisite informational foundation to make their choice meaningful. This has been interpreted to mean that an individual must be made aware of his or her right to refuse consent, otherwise the consent is not voluntary. To be voluntary, the person must have a choice. [para. 83]In this case, the trial judge found no evidence of a valid consent and the evidence amply supported this conclusion. The police did not take any steps to inform McMahon of her right to refuse police entry or of their ability to get a warrant under s. 13.1 of the CFSA if she refused. Although McMahon was informed about the anonymous tip and the reason for police presence (to conduct a spot check on her house and children), the police made no effort to explain their authority under the CFSA, or to identify McMahon’s right to refuse police entry without a warrant. Neither was she made aware of the potential consequences of her choice. “The onus was on the Crown to demonstrate that Ms. McMahon’s consent was both voluntary and informed,” Schwann said. “Knowledge of the options open to her and an appreciation of the consequences are essential components for a valid consent.” The Crown had failed to meet this onus. Common law dutyThe Crown maintained that the common law police duty to preserve peace, prevent crime and protect life and safety authorized a forced entry. A warrantless entry can sometimes be authorized under the police common law duty to protect life and property provided the entry amounts to a justifiable use of police powers. This analysis requires a consideration of whether the entry was necessary in the circumstances and there were no less intrusive means available. After reviewing the case law concerning the power to enter a residence where the police are acting under their common law duty to protect a person’s life or safety, the Court of Appeal noted two important points. “First, the police duty to protect life is only engaged when it can be inferred that someone is or may be in some distress,” Schwann said. “Second, the duty to protect life only justifies warrantless entry where the police reasonably believe the life or safety of someone in the home is in danger and the exercise of the power is both reasonable and necessary.” In this case, the Court of Appeal agreed with the trial judge that the forced entry was not justified. There was no evidence the children were in distress, nor did the corporal personally think the children were in danger. Rather, the police were on a fact-finding mission (investigating) for MCU to determine whether there was any validity to the anonymous tip. Since they did not have reasonable grounds to believe the children were in distress, entry into the home was not necessary. Furthermore, there were other less intrusive measures other than entry available to the police, such as reporting back to the MCU or seeking a warrant.The trial judge’s decision to exclude the evidence was upheld and the Crown’s appeal was dismissed.Mike Novakowski is Blue Line’s case law columnist. He can be contacted at
Back in 1989 when Blue Line was first published, technology in law enforcement was a fairly primitive affair, and much of the daily work centred around paper — lots of it. Most patrol officers carried a briefcase filled with numerous five- or six-part reports, which used thin carbon-paper inserts to transfer the hand-written word through to the parts below.
On March 7, 2018, Canada’s Minister of Safety and Emergency Preparedness Ralph Goodale hosted a Summit on Gun and Gang Violence. The conference brought together a range of experts and decision-makers from law enforcement, government and academia to address the growing threat of gang violence.
Our digitally connected world has created enormous benefits for our business and personal lives. That being said, the advancements in technology have not been wholly positive. The development of technologies such as encryption, the dark web and cryptocurrencies have created a situation where criminals who are abusing children, trafficking human beings, committing fraud online or enabling terrorism almost have an unlimited right to digital privacy, shielding them from investigation and prosecution through technological means.
First responders are among those whose lives depend on body armour — and the ballistics fibers inside of them.
In our series of blogs about security in the smart city, we’ve stressed that cities must be safe before they can become smart—and stay safe as they become smarter. Getting policing basics right and building trusted relationships between police and the communities they serve is the vital first step, one that lays the foundation for introducing new technologies that can transform how police services and citizens collaborate to improve public safety.
A new approach to find unmarked gravesites could help narrow the scope and potentially speed up the search for clues during crime scene investigations.
As we enter the new year, we often come up with a fresh look at what we would like to change in our lives. As I look around at the people in this world and how they go about achieving their goals, I notice there are two approaches typically taken:
It happens in every service in a variety of ways; our brothers and sisters sometimes end up in circumstances that take them away from the family in blue.
It is your last night shift and the queue is full. You had court between your nights and your four-month old is trying to figure out that night time is for sleeping not crying. To top it off, your spouse snaps about the lack of financial means to look after the overflow of bills. Your anxiety levels are high and the coffee and $5 Chinese food special is churning in your gut as you try to fit yet another paid duty in to bring financial relief. A recent call you attended haunts you; voices echo in your mind and visions replay over and over. You contemplate going home sick so you can have a few drinks to take the edge off but you know you will have to listen to your spouse go on about how you are doing nothing to help with the house and kids.
When we ponder the significant events that have occurred nationwide in our policing family —from the shooting of our members in Onanole, Man. and Fredericton, N.B., to our Ontario Provincial Police officers who have died by suicide — we have to ask ourselves what we are doing as a society to support the surviving members.
“It takes a village to raise a child.”
How often does life deal us a real challenge and we think: How will I ever get through this? I am just not sure I can.
Blue Line is kicking off 2019 in party mode: there’s 30 big candles on our cake to celebrate this month!
As Public Safety Minister Ralph Goodale and Border Security and Organized Crime Reduction Minister Bill Blair announced federal funding to target gun violence and illegal firearms last month, I went back to thinking of the 3D firearm printing debacle in the U.S. this summer.
Selecting stories for this issue — traditionally our clothing and duty gear edition — proved to be quite the challenge.
It doesn’t occur that often, but every now and then, when we have our booth set up at a trade show, someone will exclaim, “when did two women become the face of Blue Line?”
Firefighter Barry Dawson, paramedic Andreanne Leblanc, former RCMP officer Krista Carle: three first responders with different lived experiences and their own versions of “PTSD demons,” but who have one thing in common: within the past year, they decided to end their own lives.
By the time this reaches your mailbox, the Senate will have cast its final vote to usher in Bill C-45, also known as the Cannabis Act. And my guess is we all draw in a sharp breath yet again.
Some of the most renowned nitpickers to frequent a police training venue would be the drill instructors, closely followed by equitation personnel.
It has probably gone unnoticed by many, but here in my agency, we are currently in what I believe is the closest we may get to a lull when it comes to “controversy over police officers.”
Const. Mark Simms and Const. Jordan Long, two B.C. police officers, face a situation of grave injustice in Cuba. Detained in mid-March after criminal accusations were made against them by a Canadian woman, they are still there. They have not been allowed to leave the country.
Silos! This has been the common complaint relating to information and intelligence not being shared between agencies and, in some cases, within agencies themselves. The Ontario Gang Investigators Association (ONGIA) actively seeks to reduce information silos by bringing law enforcers together.
Federal legislation and the decision of the Supreme Court of Canada recognizing the right of RCMP officers to unionize will have a profound effect on labour relations between RCMP members, the government and the organization. It may also alter how police services are delivered across the country.
Proactive policing should be a big part of what officers do. It shouldn’t simply be responding to radio calls. Conducting high visibility patrols, checking out suspicious people in suspicious circumstances, interacting with vulnerable people and preventing crime and victimization — these are all critical roles for police officers.
Armor Your Self: How to Survive a Career in Law EnforcementBy John Marx; 2017, 433 pagesISBN: 978-1544661810
You Can’t Make This Sh#t Up: Policing Through StoriesBy Randy Ward; 2018, 128 pagesISBN: 978-1775289302
Crisis Ready: Building an Invincible Brand in an Uncertain WorldBy Melissa Agnes; 2018, 288 pagesISBN: 978-1684014132
The North-West Mounted Police: 1873-1885By Jack F. Dunn; 2017, 812 pagesISBN: 9780969859611
Taking Care of Business: Police Detectives, Drug Law Enforcement and Proactive InvestigationBy Matthew Bacon; 2016, 352 pagesISBN: 9780199687381
No Time to Bury ThemBy Mark C. Eddy; 2017, 166 pagesISBN: 978-1771802222
I recall my number ONE Breathalyzer test. This is “the biggy” that every breath tech worries about because you can imagine what the defence lawyer could do when they found out that this is — THE FIRST.
I recall my number ONE Breathalyzer test. This is “the biggy” that every breath tech worries about because you can imagine what the defence lawyer could do when they found out that this is — THE FIRST.
Poor management skills are nothing new and the management style which prevailed when I was a young officer had me mystified. My first days as a station duty operator at a glistening new district headquarters building is an example.
Silence is a peculiar and multi-faceted concept. Studies demonstrate silence in its purest form is beneficial for the brain. We all need periods of silence to relax, rest, or reflect on things. Silence is linked to a number of virtues, such as respect, decorum and modesty. We hold a minute of silence out of deep respect for our fallen officers and troops. It is also an extremely powerful tool capable of conveying a strong message without a single word being spoken. Silence offers many positive effects but it can also have a dark side. This negative counterpart will be explored in this article.
Taking control, conflict resolution and problem solving are key skills of law enforcement officers. When a community member’s problems exceed their ability to cope, no matter the breadth of the issue, the instinct and common practice is to call the police for a resolution. In the mind of many, the police have all the answers and the ability to meet their expectations.
A career in law enforcement is undoubtedly highly stressful with an elevated risk of experiencing life-threatening situations, traumatic incidents involving violence, fatal accidents and other death scenes.
Water is life. Over 60 per cent of the human body is composed of water. In fact, proper fluid replenishment is an essential part of health, proper body functioning and preventing dehydration.
We likely have all come across a disgruntled and jaded co-worker, someone overly preoccupied with spreading negativity. We may even have been in those shoes ourselves.
Vegan diets, blood type diets, liquid diets, lunar diets, werewolf diets, grapefruit diets — one cannot avoid being bombarded by the hype for the latest “revolutionary” and transformative diet proposal. The overwhelming number of fad diets emerging with “pseudo” scientific demonstrations can easily be confused with proven nutritional facts.
Anyone who has ever been employed by a correctional employer anywhere in the world knows gang and other criminal activity does not stop when the offenders are arrested and brought into custody. Offenders and gang leaders find various creative ways to continue their criminal enterprise from behind the walls of correctional institutions. Three-way calling to arrange business transactions, using a third party to traffic contraband and arrange for outside deals, and even human trafficking are only a few ways that offenders and gang leaders continue to communicate and run their criminal enterprise from behind the prison walls.
I found myself aimlessly scrolling through Facebook recently – you know those types of days – when I came across a post of a book with a front cover that looked a whole lot like the inside of the old “Don Jail” in Toronto.
It was mid-afternoon on another usually busy day at my office. My phone rang a few times — it was one of my old co-workers from the Toronto Jail, most widely known as the Don Jail. I knew he was now retired and hasn’t been well for a while, so I was happy to hear from him.
“Employee loyalty begins with employer loyalty. Your employees should know that if they do the job they were hired to do with a reasonable amount of competence and efficiency, you will support them.”- Harvey Mackay
It’s Tuesday morning, about 9:00 a.m. and I just made it in to work at my office downtown Toronto.
Once upon a time alcohol was banned in Canada. Initially the decision to ban alcoholic beverages was done by individual communities in the late 19th century. In the early 20th century, it was done by some provinces, and then there was a nation-wide prohibition from 1918 to 1920.
We would like to introduce Blue Line’s newest column, Behavioural Sciences, by Peter Collins, the operational forensic psychiatrist with the Ontario Provincial Police’s Criminal Behaviour Analysis Unit. Collins has an extensive background in violent crime and has worked with, as well as instructed, numerous criminal justice agencies in North America and beyond. This column will tackle modern behavioural issues in relation to law enforcement and seek to provide solutions through the latest research and tools, as well as stimulate discussion. Special thanks to Niagara Regional Police officer Robin Bleich for making the introduction.
Subscription CentreNew Subscription Already a Subscriber Customer Service View Digital Magazine Renew
12th National Symposium on Tech Crime and Electronic Evidence
January 25, 2019
B.C. First Responders’ Mental Health Conference
January 31-1, 2019
Counter Fraud 2019
February 13, 2019