RCMP refuses to apologize at Taser inquiry

[nicolewong]

RCMP refuses to apologize at Taser inquiry

The Canadian Press
February 25, 2009

VANCOUVER — The first RCMP officer to testify at the inquiry into the death of a Polish immigrant Tasered at the Vancouver airport ended his evidence Wednesday by refusing to apologize — even when offered an opportunity to do so by a lawyer for the Polish government.

The inquiry also heard evidence for the first time Wednesday morning that the actual Taser used against Dziekanski cycled for 31 seconds, including at least three jolts directly attached to the man’s skin, one of which lasted as long as nine seconds.

“I never heard anything from this officer (Const. Gerry Rundel) other than words in defence of what he had done,” said Don Rosenbloom, lawyer for the Polish government.

“I gave him what was his last opportunity before the commission to offer a mea culpa and apologize to the Canadian public and acknowledge certain improprieties were committed that night by those officers,” said Rosenbloom.

Rundel insisted that a bystander video backs up the version of events, which Rundel set out in two statements given to police, one on the night of the incident on Oct. 14, 2007, and the second four days later.

“The officer’s statement was patently absurd, as it is clear from the video that Mr. Dziekanski never raised the stapler above his head or made any threatening gestures before he was hit the first time by the Taser,” said Rosenbloom.

The amateur video of the incident was played again in court for the witness, which caused Dziekanski’s mother to run out of the courtroom in tears.

 

[nicolewong]

RCMP regarded stapler as a weapon

The Canadian Press
February 25, 2009

"Subject grabbed stapler and came at members screaming."

RCMP Constable Bill Bentley made this notation shortly after he and three other Mounties had confronted distraught Polish traveller Robert Dziekanski at Vancouver International Airport on Oct, 14, 2007.

The notation was incorrect. Const. Bentley admitted so on Wednesday, at the inquiry examining Mr. Dziekanski's death. "I believed it was accurate at the time I made the note," he said.

In fact, it conflated events at the airport the night Mr. Dziekanski died. Had it gone unchallenged, the young constable's first account might have explained the RCMP's heated response to a disturbance call and an accidental death, perhaps even removed the need for the present inquiry.

Mr. Dziekanski, as commissioner Thomas Braidwood has heard, was in a distressed state of mind at the airport, to say the least. An inexperienced traveller, he had flown alone from Poland, and, in a considerably confused state, he could not make his way from the airport's secure international arrivals area to a public concourse.

He was not behaving normally, to be sure, and he was causing more than just a ruckus when the airport RCMP were called; he was tossing around furniture, erecting a barrier, pacing and swearing in Polish.

"Not the behaviour of a rational person," Const. Bentley testified on Wednesday. "I thought that maybe he was emotionally disturbed, and unpredictable."

Or worse. Earlier on Wednesday, another attending RCMP officer, Constable Gerry Rundel, told the inquiry that there had been "no doubt in my mind" that Mr. Dziekanski "had every intent" to injure someone at the airport that night. "There was no doubt in my mind," he repeated.

But this assessment was made after a series of unfortunate events that started with two brief and inaccurate RCMP dispatch reports made about Mr. Dziekanski, received by the four RCMP officers as they lunched inside their airport sub-detachment and then as they drove to the airport terminal. He was described as intoxicated and throwing chairs through glass. The officers arrived and found Mr. Dziekanski standing at a doorway near a public greeting hall. Indeed, Const. Bentley described him on Wednesday as calm and co-operative.

His behaviour quickly changed. Mr. Dziekanski threw his hands up in the air, moved toward a desk, and grabbed a stapler. This sub-chain of events is not in doubt; the video footage demonstrates just what Mr. Dziekanski did.

What is in question is interpretation: The two RCMP officers to have appeared at the inquiry this week -- constables Rundel and Bentley -- both testified that by moving away from them as he did, he became disobedient. He gave the officers no time to further analyze the situation, testified Const. Rundel on Wednesday.

Mr. Dziekanski picked up a stapler. Both officers have testified that they interpreted Mr. Dziekanski's movement then as "combative."

The officers have both said their training caused them to react, which all four did. Mr. Dziekanski was hit with five Taser blasts. He was wrestled with on the carpet, put into handcuffs. Tragically, his heart stopped and he died.

Police training must teach officers to record accurate notes of an event. Const. Bentley failed to do that.

"Subject grabbed stapler and came at members screaming," he wrote.

The Paul Pritchard video was played again for the inquiry. Again, a surrounded Mr. Dziekanski was seen holding a stapler, receiving the first Taser jolt, teetering to the ground.

"I don't see him coming towards you or the other members," inquiry lawyer Peter McGowan put to Const. Bentley. "Is that something you see?"

"He doesn't advance forward," conceded the officer.

Why had he written that down? "Everything happened so fast," he explained. "I was tired when I made my notes."

It was only after getting some adequate rest and then watching the Pritchard video that he realized his glaring mistake, he added.

Were it not for the existence of that video footage, would it still be his recollection, that Mr. Dziekanski had come at him with the stapler screaming?

Const. Bentley's lawyer objected to Mr. McGowan's question. Commissioner Braidwood allowed it. The question was repeated.

Had the video changed his recollection?

"I don't know," replied Const. Bentley, to grumblings from the public gallery.