RCMP "sorry" for inaccuracies of Dziekanski's death

[Sir Bandelot]

Excerpts from an article today-

RCMP sorry for inaccurate account of Dziekanski death

VANCOUVER -- The RCMP apologized Tuesday for what it says was inaccurate information that misled the public about the circumstances of Robert Dziekanski's death.

The force has been under fire for almost two years since Dziekanski died after being stunned several times by a Taser at Vancouver International Airport.

The Mounties' media strategy now is being dissected at the Braidwood Commission inquiry into Dziekanski's death.

"In this case, during the course of the investigation we found that there was some information that was provided and made public that was not accurate," Shields said. "And for those inaccuracies we apologize and we are sorry."

The apology came as the Mounties' chief spokesman during the initial phase of incident insisted he never intentionally misled reporters about what happened to Dziekanski. Sgt. Pierre Lemaitre testified he saw a crucial part of the video that recorded Dziekanski's fatal confrontation with RCMP before he met reporters.

After the video was released publicly, Lemaitre came under fire from critics who allege he misled the media and the public about what prompted RCMP to stun Dziekanski with a Taser.

The video shows Dziekanski being shocked just seconds after four Mounties surrounded the agitated man at Vancouver airport's international arrivals area. Dziekanski died Oct. 14, 2007, after being stunned several times. Just hours later, Lemaitre gave interviews that suggested Dziekanski was combative with officers who struggled with him.

But the video, shot by traveller Paul Pritchard, shows Dziekanski seeming to back away from the Mounties and holding an open stapler just before being stunned. He then staggers, flails his arms and falls to the ground, with the Taser repeatedly used on him until he is handcuffed.

Lemaitre insisted Dziekanski was stunned twice while the video -- backed by a woman who witnessed the incident -- indicated he was shocked more than twice. Evidence would reveal it was five times.

Lemaitre said he learned months later it was more than twice after investigators analyzed the Taser used on Dziekanski.

He clung to the incorrect figure despite reporters' questions regarding what the woman witnessed.

Lemaitre, who now works in the RCMP's traffic division, admitted the furor over Dziekanski besmirched his reputation. But he had no way to publicly correct the inaccuracies.

"You know what," he told Kosteckyj, "being a police officer -- and I believe that you were at one time -- you grow a thicker skin.

--------------------------

Five times? Seems like the whole gang wanted to try out using their toys on this man. And what, no officer would admit to using their taser more than once or twice? And Lemaitre testifies that he witnessed the video PRIOR to speaking to the media, but then gave them a different account of what took place?

So either they are incompetent, or lying. Which one is it? Because either way, charges should be laid.

[kimmy]

Five times? Seems like the whole gang wanted to try out using their toys on this man. And what, no officer would admit to using their taser more than once or twice? And Lemaitre testifies that he witnessed the video PRIOR to speaking to the media, but then gave them a different account of what took place?

So either they are incompetent, or lying. Which one is it? Because either way, charges should be laid.

There was only one officer (Millington) who employed a taser.

But other than that, I completely agree.

Here's what I find troubling:

Rosenbloom pointed to numerous inaccuracies Millington and other officers wrote in their notebooks, recorded in internal police reports, told investigators and wrote in the days and weeks after Dziekanski's death.

Millington, for example, initially said Dziekanski was yelling when police approached and was waving a stapler "wildly" just before the first stun of the Taser.

He also said in statements and notes that Dziekanski was still standing after three jolts of the 50,000-volt weapon and continued to walk towards the officers.

Millington said on numerous occasions that the four officers had to wrestle Dziekanski to the ground.

But after being shown a bystander's video of the event, Millington conceded at the inquiry that those facts were incorrect.

Rosenbloom also noted that some of those same errors – for example, that Dziekanski had to be wrestled to the ground – were consistent among the three officers to testify so far.

He asked Millington to explain how three RCMP officers who are trained to be observant could all report seeing something that didn't happen.

"Why are there similar mistakes made by you and your fellow officers?" asked Rosenbloom.

"I don't know, we dealt with the same incident, but I don't know why," said Millington.

http://www.thestar.com/comment/columnists/article/596526

Their reports all contain consistent description of events that never happened. Riiiiight.

I heard Sgt Shields on an interview this morning. The host said that many people tell her that without the video tape, this event would have been brushed under the rug. He insisted that even without the video tape, the truth would have come out. An investigation is mandatory for a death in police custody, he said, and the witnesses would have exposed the RCMP officers. The truth always comes out, he said.

I say, bull. Without the video tape, it would have been the word of these officers, and their police reports that are all so consistent in describing events that never even happened, against the word of a couple of tired travellers who watched stuff unfold from a different room. We're not stupid, we all know how that would have turned out.

Without the video, these guys are laughing about this over beers by now.

How can we trust the RCMP version of events in situations when there *isn't* a video made to make sure the truth-- the real truth-- comes out? When we've seen officer Millington and his buddies get together to cook up false police reports, and repeat their lies about it to the Braidwood inquiry?! It's disgusting, and it makes me furious. These imbeciles simply can't be allowed to escape criminal charges. I don't know if lying to a public inquiry is technically perjury, but at the minimum there has to be some kind of disciplinary action for police officers who lie in their reports. That's the other aspect of this that's appalling: the speed with which the RCMP decided these chumps would not receive any disciplinary action.

-k

[eyeball]

There was only one officer (Millington) who employed a taser.

But other than that, I completely agree.

Here's what I find troubling:

http://www.thestar.com/comment/columnists/article/596526

Their reports all contain consistent description of events that never happened. Riiiiight.

I heard Sgt Shields on an interview this morning. The host said that many people tell her that without the video tape, this event would have been brushed under the rug. He insisted that even without the video tape, the truth would have come out. An investigation is mandatory for a death in police custody, he said, and the witnesses would have exposed the RCMP officers. The truth always comes out, he said.

I say, bull. Without the video tape, it would have been the word of these officers, and their police reports that are all so consistent in describing events that never even happened, against the word of a couple of tired travellers who watched stuff unfold from a different room. We're not stupid, we all know how that would have turned out.

Without the video, these guys are laughing about this over beers by now.

How can we trust the RCMP version of events in situations when there *isn't* a video made to make sure the truth-- the real truth-- comes out? When we've seen officer Millington and his buddies get together to cook up false police reports, and repeat their lies about it to the Braidwood inquiry?! It's disgusting, and it makes me furious. These imbeciles simply can't be allowed to escape criminal charges. I don't know if lying to a public inquiry is technically perjury, but at the minimum there has to be some kind of disciplinary action for police officers who lie in their reports. That's the other aspect of this that's appalling: the speed with which the RCMP decided these chumps would not receive any disciplinary action.

-k

Perhaps Sgt Shield's notion about how truth can come out in the absence of video evidence will prove more true if charges are laid on the chumps in question. Perhaps they'll squeal like pigs on the stand and reveal the names of the senior officers who conspired to cover this up from above.

As for disciplinary action against the RCMP...I'd like to see them disbanded.

[kuzadd]

they are lying, and this is nothing new.

They are only sorry they were caught

And they conspired to cover-up.

They created an official story, and they stuck to it.

Despite the evidence of an outsider.

It isn't the first time and it won't be the last.

self-preservation is a strong instinct.

especially when a number of individuals are complicit

[kactus]

Excerpts from an article today-

RCMP sorry for inaccurate account of Dziekanski death

So either they are incompetent, or lying. Which one is it? Because either way, charges should be laid.

Give it another 2 years they will make a case for the poor victim and he will be forgotten! btw isn't there supposed to be a procedure in using taser guns?

[kimmy]

Tim Shields is back in the news!

As one of the RCMP's media representatives during the Braidwood Inquiry, Tim Shields was prominently involved in lying to Canadians. Now he's back in the news for more reprehensible behavior: he's being sued for sexual harrassment by an RCMP civilian employee.

(Coincidentally Pierre Lamaitre, the RCMP's Head Liar in charge of misleading the public after the slaying of Robert Dziekanski, died just this past week, at the age of 55.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/british-columbia/rcmps-public-face-during-dziekanski-incident-found-dead/article13560595/ )

Tim Shields is of course not the only RCMP officer connected with the Dziekanski case who has legal trouble right now. The four RCMP officers who murdered Dziekanski were charged with perjury. One of them was just acquitted. It was not exactly a resounding exoneration for Bill Bentley... the judge just said that he wasn't convinced beyond reasonable doubt. The status of the perjury charges against the remaining 3 is uncertain as a result of Bentley's acquittal.

One of the four murderers has already had legal trouble since the Braidwood Inquiry. Benjamin Robinson, the supervisor of the group, left a party after drinking 5 beers, and proceeded to kill a motorcyclist in a collision. Rather than stick around, Robinson ran home and banged down 2 shots of vodka ("to suppress pain"), then returned to the scene of the accident. Robinson was charged and convicted of Obstruction of Justice, as drinking the vodka at home was a ruse intended to make it impossible to administer a breathalyzer test.

And, well, it worked, because instead of a jail sentence for drunk driving causing death, the best they could charge him with was obstruction. So instead of jail time, Benjamin Robinson served 1 month of house arrest and was ordered to write an apology to the family of the victim. (yep, for real.)

-k

[bleeding heart]

Good lord. Robinson is a genuine menace.

Maybe the third time he's involved in a killing, he'll have to perform some serious community service, or something.

[Icebound]

^{We should be hearing an apology from the Toronto Police soon.....}

[westguy]

I am appalled that the RCMP would commit perjury to cover their improvident conduct. Can anyone explain why judges still believe them?

[kimmy]

Good lord. Robinson is a genuine menace.

Maybe the third time he's involved in a killing, he'll have to perform some serious community service, or something.

Canada's version of the "3 strikes" laws?

-k