Posts Tagged ‘Canada’

Are the ‘new’ body cameras really going to solve police accountability? Or lead to more problems?

We must first begin with understanding cameras without even mentioning police officers. There are cameras in grocery stores, big malls, parking lots, streets, offices, and many other public facilities, but what it really comes down to is; does that really stop crime from happening? No! Crime is still there, people will still steal from malls, or rob cars in parking lots. Having a camera there will not change the outcome of an individual’s actus reas when their mind has already made up the decision to commit a crime. The only thing that really changes is a criminal’s way to go about the criminal activity without getting caught. Now I’m not saying having those cameras there are useless; they do provide safety, and protection for the public, and the police. The point here is that they do not stop crime from happening; it is still there regardless. Really the only difference is now one can visibly see someone stealing or committing a criminal act. The whole point of having police officers is to create a safe community. When we look at measuring safety we look at the dimensions of victim harm, and the rate of crime. To me personally if an individual’s mens rea is there, then really a camera won’t change the outcome of the act. A perfect example to really show what I am trying to get at is the ‘Stanford Prison Experiment’. This experiment had normal healthy young males who prior did not have any record of deviance, be either a guard or a prison inmate at random. Now clearly, the prisoners knew there were cameras, or at least were being watched, while the guards also knew there were cameras. That did not stop them from treating inmates inhumanly. What this means is even ‘real’ police officers will still be corrupt if that is truly where their mindset is. They will just be more careful. We can even hypothesis that new types of corruption can be created from this, like for example ‘accidently’ deleting recordings or a camera ‘breaking’ and so forth. The blue wall can also come into effect here, where there can be chances of officers covering for other officers, even with the no deleting recordings policy. Corruption exists in many ways, and those who try to get away with deception, usually find a way around the system. It has happened in the past, and can very well do so in the future.

This video shows exactly how corruption can still exist even with body cameras

The publics uproar about police accountability is really only based on three main cases, Ian Tomlinson, Robert Dziekanski, and Ferguson; two of which did not even occur in Canada. Yes, I do agree justice should be done, but that does not mean every Police officer in Canada should have their privacy invaded. If we zoom into the Dziekanski case, maybe better cameras should have been in the airport instead of blaming the whole police community of the acts of a few correction officers. The rotten apples should not spoil the rest of the barrel by making them undergo a big economical system change. Would anyone like to be on camera throughout his or her whole shift, especially for a 12-hour shift (common hours for police officers). Would a secretary at work like being filmed they’re whole shift, or would teachers like having their classroom being recorded all day. I would assume no they would not, but yet workplace, and classroom incidents are also common situations where body figures misuse their authority in Canada (Moulden et al, 2010).

Coming back to cameras, companies like Axon, and VieVu have already started making products for this new police equipment. According to the TASER’s website the ‘Axon’ body camera is designed to record easily in a wide-angle view while being light weight, and show clear footage (TASER, 2014). The police officer would wear it on their uniform and anytime they would be interaction with a civilian they would simply slide the camera lens off. Once the interaction was over they would slide the lens cover back on. They conclude with showing that the rate of complaints have fallen 87.5%. What I would like the reader to note here is that the study they show here is in only one agency of Rialto, CA which it directly says is a small town. Why have they not shown a study of a big town? We must be critical and note why there are no other agency studies posted on their website? Is it because the other ones do not show improvement? Or did they simply only take the agency that showed to have the most improvement compared to any other agency. By doing this it automatically show improvement because they are ‘marketing’; this means that they are only showing what they want ‘buyers’ to see so they can make money. Another thing to note is the graphs they show fail to go in-depth about the range they are counting for complaints, and use of force. To the naked reader we have no idea what these numbers really mean. The cost for an average body camera is typically around $400. This does not even include the chargers, docks and other gadgets that also would need to be bought. Once the camera has recorded material on it, it can then be charged into the dock where it automatically uploads to evidence.com. The material here can be accessed by police administrative bodies, and usually held for up to 180 days directed by TASER, unless it is in need for evidence. Recordings are able to be watched by the officers, but are not able to be deleted, or modified once they are uploaded. Additionally I would like to inform the reader that from all my research I was not able to find any information about new facilities that would have to open to store the recordings, or new workers that would have to be employed to manage the recordings. Articles just talk about the body cameras; people need to realize that money is not only going to be put into the cameras, but there will be money needed in other areas as well.

Tiny Police Cameras Oakland

Body cameras having been first implemented in the U.S and have made their way to Canada now. Justice officials say that if the public has cameras, so should the police. The body cameras allow the officers to safely protect the public, while ensuring they’re own safety as well. Questions about officer reliability, and accountability are being answered after watching footage. Many civilians may not use force due to knowing it will all be filmed, and vice versa. The safety of both parties here can be potentially benefited. Police officers do not have to deal with as many lawsuits that also cost tax payer’s money. Also sometimes witnesses, or victims decide to later withdraw from a case, which can cause the case to have no evidence. With the cameras there will always be evidence for the court; this can be either good or bad depending on the victims life. Police may in fact come out on top after all the criticism that they have received throughout the years. Now the public will understand that the police officer could have been justified in they’re actions. In situations of police misconduct, the police would have full accountability in cases like these because even the courts would not be able to save them. The courts would never have to feel obliged to take a police officers report as the only evidence anymore, because now they would have footage.

costs

Justice officials in New York claim that body cameras are economically beneficial in saving the city millions of dollars in lawsuits every year, which would in the end pay for all of the cameras themselves (Lopez, 2015). The world of technology is always evolving, and with the dash cams just not being able to cut it anymore; body cameras may prove to be effective on their own. In Goldsmith’s article, he establishes that phone cameras, and the media are apart of the police organization now. Police having they’re own body cameras have evolved from that. Goldsmith would say that the police too should have they’re own cameras so that they can prove what maybe the public ‘filmer’ failed to record. Most civilians only start to record once an event begins to get ‘interesting’. The police officers on the other hand would get the full footage, from beginning to end. He would claim that now accountability would go to whichever party is at true fault.

This is a beneficial way for police officers to prove they’re innocence.

Here is an video that allows viewers to see how Body Cameras are used and can be effective, and beneficial.

I would just like to conclude with one last thing, we live in a ‘democracy’. This means everyone should get the opportunity to see all of the pros and cons, and then decide if we as a community want and need the cameras, since it is affecting everyone’s privacy. If citizens, and police officers all think body cameras are necessary in today’s age, then by all means that is what should happen. I want to leave the reader thinking with one incident I once heard a retired police officer say, “A young female was about to commit suicide by jumping off a bridge…. I sat with her for two hours, and continued talking until she finally decided that life had a lot more for her…this saved her life”. I personally think if the police officer was wearing a camera the female would not have opened up as she did, and possibly the police officer may have not been able to say everything he had to as well. Not every situation should be on film, there’s times when having a camera can be invasive, and create more drama then it really needs to be. As the reader, really ask yourself is this what you would like to see in the next couple of years?

References:

AXON. (2013, January 1). City of Rialto Case Study. Retrieved February 8, 2015. http://info.taser.com/rs/taser/images/CA_Rialto_PD_Case_Study.pdf

Lopez, G. (2015, January 13). Why police should wear body cameras — and why they shouldn’t. Retrieved February 08, 2015. http://www.vox.com/2014/9/17/6113045/police-worn-body-cameras-explained

Moulden, H. M., Firestone, P., Kingston, D. A., & Wexler, A. F. (2010). A Description of Sexual Offending Committed by Canadian Teachers. Journal Of Child Sexual Abuse19(4), 403-418.

Stroud, Matt. “The Big Problem With Police Body Cameras.” Bloomberg. 15 Jan. 2015. Web. 8 Feb. 2015. <http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-01-15/police-body-camera-policies-wont-work-if-cops-dont-turn-cameras-on&gt;.

Advertisements

Wrongful convictions have been a part of the Canadian criminal justice system for decades. Yet very few criminologists or legal scholars have been looking into the topic. We have only recently begun looking at previous criminal convictions which may have been the result of a wrongful conviction. A situation where an individual is found to be legally guilty of a crime he or she did not commit; and the actual perpetrator is out free in the world. For a variety of reasons a person may be wrongfully convicted of a crime he or she did not commit, and the only way to prove his or her innocence is in a court of law. The various research that has been conducted on this topic primarily focuses on the phenomenon of tunnel vision, which Margaret Beare defines in her scholarly article Shouting Innocence from the Highest Rooftop as: “the single-minded and overly narrow focus on an investigation or prosecutorial theory so as to unreasonably color the evaluation of information received and one’s conduct in response to the information”(2008, p.21). Put differently, tunnel vision is the presumption that an individual suspect is guilty at an early stage of the investigation and proceeding with that focus firmly in mind. But Beare and her colleagues have determined that while tunnel vision is definitely a factor in wrongful convictions, it is the end result. A variety of other factors including faulty investigatory procedures, police deviance and corruption, and systemic, structural, and individual factors, all play a huge role in adding up to the final step, of tunnel vision. Various inquiries have been held to determine the root causes of these wrongful convictions but the recommendations stemming from these extremely time-consuming follow ups are not being followed or understood, and more wrongful convictions are occurring. These recommendations are not being understood by the police officers, and more importantly the individual police agencies are failing to accept this guidance. They are not doing enough in regards to re-training of officers or training of new ones in order to help combat this problem. Noble cause corruption is another phenomenon which leads to wrongful convictions. It is a mindset or sub-culture which fosters a belief that the ends justify the means. Also various other factors have come to light including invalid expert testimony given by so called experts in the field, which has later proven to be incorrect.
An interesting theme that is apparent to the broader literature is the use of DNA testing to exonerate hundreds of wrongfully convicted individuals. A majority of wrongful conviction articles look at cases in the United States of America; this is not surprising in the sense that the U.S. has a much larger criminal justice system in comparison to its neighbor, Canada. Also Leo and Gould give other factors in wrongful convictions, included in their article Studying Wrongful Convictions: Learning from Social Science, which are “eyewitness misidentifications, false confessions, informant perjury, junk science, tunnel vision, police, and prosecutorial error”(2009, p.18). Many of these are in direct relation to the police. Police deviance has been an ongoing issue for decades now, and lately has become more and more prominent due to the advancements in technology, and the media attention it receives. Leo and Gould highlight the fact that in the late 1980′s DNA testing is what launched the inquiries into wrongful convictions, and since then more than 230 individuals have been exonerated of their wrongful sentences. We must not forget that there are currently hundreds of applications for inquiries into cases, but due to the lengthy time it takes for the cases to proceed, innocent individuals remain stripped of their liberties and freedoms.
Margaret Beare makes a very interesting point in regards to police officers assuming innocence until proven guilty. When one is working for weeks, months, and in some cases years to prove the guilt of an individual it is extremely difficult for him to build his guilty case by assuming innocence. She points out an apparent theme in many of these wrongful conviction cases to be “that justice is a game that you wrap to fit your preference, or your unconscious biases. Therefore “shop around” and select evidence, experts, and judges based on your specific agenda”(2008, p.33). Erroneous errors in police investigations have been one of the most common causes of wrongful convictions. Officers wanting to get the guy they “know” to be guilty and forgetting about other possible suspects, which leads to their instincts being false. This has been repeated time and time again in several wrongful convictions such as the case of Donald Marshall Jr.
Beare argues that wrongful convictions are caused by other issues such as systemic problems within the criminal justice system itself. She goes on to say these are “problems that won’t be fixed as long as the miscarriage of justice is treated as an isolated even…wrongful convictions don’t occur in a vacuum. There are systemic reasons they go wrong”(2008, p.29). She stresses the fact that just saying it is a systemic problem does not cure the fact that it continues to go on. In relation to this I have noticed that many of the articles published make various realizations such as, this is a problem with the criminal justice system, or a structural problem within a specific organization, but they make no suggestions in regards to solving these issues. We must ask ourselves how big of an actual problem is this, that it is taking this long to solve? Agreeing with Bears belief, Punch suggests that police corruption and deviance should be looked at through a systemic viewpoint, and many instances of deviance are due to organizational problems.
The idea of noble cause corruption is also something to ponder in the sense that the “justice officials – in the name of getting a conviction – are prepared to violate laws, Charter protections, and any number of ethical considerations”(Beare, 2008, p.33). According to Maurice Punch in his text Police Corruption: Deviance, accountability and reform in policing, noble cause as an officer doing what he had to do in order to “get a result, achieve convictions and see justice done.”(2009, p.107). He believes that an officer is guilty of the noble cause corruption syndrome when said officer is willing to do anything within his means to achieve a conviction. The officer strongly believes that a guilty person will get away with a crime unless he or she does something about it. Whether this means putting someone they suspect of committing a crime behind bars, instead of having solid proof, then so be it. Many officers work on cases and investigations for months at a time only to be left with the uncertainty of whether the suspect will get convicted. Many officers take it upon themselves to ensure that ‘justice is served’, and feel that they are doing it for the good of the community and in some cases, the country.

Some Wrongful Conviction Victims in Canada
Some Canadian wrongful conviction victims: Donald Marshall Jr., James Driskell, David Milgaard, William Mullins-Johnson, Steven Truscott, Kyle Unger

Various wrongful conviction inquiries have been made in the past several decades, many of which have gathered vast media attention. One of the major ones that made headlines around the globe was the wrongful conviction of Steven Truscott. He was sentenced to hanging in 1969, at the age of 14 for a schoolmates murder. After spending several months as Canada’s youngest inmate on death row, his sentence was changed to life imprisonment. After spending almost his entire life in prison the Ontario Court of Appeal in 2007 overturned his conviction declaring the case “a miscarriage of justice that must be quashed”. He was awarded compensation for the mistake but that does not come close to the years of mental and physical anguish he had to endure while imprisoned. This was due to a number of factors, such as police laying down charges too quickly, and completely ignoring other potential suspects. Such as a sexual offender living nearby, and an electrician with a rape conviction; both were ignored by police, the obvious question being, why was this?(CBC, June 7/08).
Another interesting inquiry was made into the case of Donald Marshall Jr. where he was convicted of murdering his friend. It gives an example where police officers conceived a predetermined notion that he was the killer. Since he was already known to police they focused the investigation onto him. After his sentence had been overturned an inquiry commission determined that “systemic racism had contributed to his conviction”(CBC, Oct 14/10). Margaret Beare mentioned in her article that race was a prominent factor in many of the wrongful conviction cases in Canada; but even when the race factor was absent, the individuals were stereotyped by police and deemed to be weird or unordinary. She gives the example of Guy Paul Morin who was a beekeeper, a musician, and a gardener, and the police paid particular attention to him because of these “unusual” characteristics.

Just recently a man has filed a lawsuit against the Manitoba Court of Queen’s Bench last month in regards to a wrongful conviction sentence he served of 14 years. Kyle Unger was convicted in a murder of a teenage girl, but after serving part of his sentence, his charges were withdrawn thanks once again to there being no DNA evidence linking him to the crime(CBC, Sept 27/11).

Some Causes of Wrongful Convictions
Chart From: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/741032/posts

Many issues have arisen stemming from the research conducted into the topic of wrongful convictions. Numerous scholars have claimed that there are many factors that are important which when combined together, can lead to a wrongful conviction. One of main factors that lead can lead to a wrongful conviction is mistaken identity, whereas the identity of an individual is mistaken as being the suspect. This can come from a number of different avenues, a witness may just want to help “solve” a crime, and point out an individual that had similarities between the suspect they saw and the individual standing before them in a police line-up. The police will then just “run with it” and focus their attention on getting the conviction without thinking about the error of eye-witnesses.

Another key factor in wrongful convictions is expert testimony; experts come into our judicial system to provide their opinion on a matter, well as history has shown, at times their opinion is wrong. For example with the William Mullins-Johnson case an expert pathologist was called in to testify. Charles Randal Smith was an expert pathologist that testified and played a major role in determining the time of death of the victim and whether she had been sexually assaulted or not. Eleven years after the initial trial it was determined by three other pathologists, that there was no evidence that the girl had been sexually assaulted, and Mr. Mullins-Johnson was acquitted.

An interesting study by Garrett & Neufield, Invalid Forensic Science Testimony and Wrongful Convictions claims that of the 82 cases or 60% of the bulk of trials looked at in regards to testimony by 72 forensic analysts called by the prosecution, were invalid. Also noting that defense counsel rarely obtains experts of their own and fails to cross-examine the “experts” brought in by the crown. This leads me to an earlier point made by Beare “that justice is a game that you wrap to fit your preference, or your unconscious biases. Therefore “shop around” and select evidence, experts, and judges based on your specific agenda.” I understand that humans make mistakes, we all do it, but when an individual’s life is in jeopardy; the criminal justice system should do more in order to confirm these opinion statements given in court, not just rely on them because they were given by experts.

Hundreds of cases of wrongful convictions have surfaced in North America alone over the past several decades, thanks to an increase in new technology, more and more individuals are being released from their prisons due to various inquires being conducted. Unfortunately these inquires should not have been necessary in order to allow free individuals to enjoy their liberties and not have been made to face the conditions they did. Several factors including police misconduct, systemic racism, tunnel vision, erroneous eye witness testimony as well as incorrect expert testimony have all lead to wrongful convictions over the last several decades. The question arises, what can we as a society to do help combat wrongful convictions? Can we do anything in regards to police training, and ensuring expert testimony is credible or are these issues going to remain regardless?

References

Beare, M. (2008). “Shouting Innocence from the Highest Rooftop”, in M. Beare (ed.) Honouring Social Justice. Toronto: University of Toronto Press: 17-54.

Punch, M. (2009). Police corruption: deviance, accountability and reform in policing. UK: Willan Publishing.

An Introduction:

‘Agent Provocateur’ what does this mean exactly?  No, not the lingerie brand.  Obviously it relates, somehow, to police deviance.  This is a relatively obscure term used to describe a certain type of crime. An agent provocateur is created when an undercover agent has moved from a passive involvement in crime to an active involvement. This means that such an individual might (and as often is the case) not be a police officer.  The individual could be any number of things, from a police officer working undercover, to an informant who is paid or blackmailed, to a member of The Canadian Security Intelligence Agency (CSIS) — which is not a policing agency, and is not in fact required to enforce Canadian law.

Typically, an agent provocateur is a police officer that encourages others to commit crime in order for fellow police officers to arrest said guilty parties.  These encouragements can vary depending on circumstance. They could be crimes of themselves.  And the encouragements enacted by the police officer universally stray in to that legal gray area known as entrapment – whether the act of encouraging itself is a crime or not.

A little context is, perhaps, in order.

Grant Bristow and Operation Governor:

When we speak of agents provocateur, it is important to note that agents provocateur are not a new phenomenon in Canadian legal history.

Historically, we also have the case of Grant Bristow, a former CSIS agent who worked with the Canadian chapter of the Aryan Nations.  Unfortunately, the only comprehensive resource on Grant Bristow comes from Wikipedia.  Although we do have fellow blogger, Ezra Levant‘s commentary on the matter, as well as Bristow’s interview with The Walrus to draw on. Less user-friendly is a SIRC report written in 1994 investigating CSIS and Bristow’s role in the Heritage Front Affair.

Regardless, in this case the Wiki article seems to be quite succinct on the subject of Grant Bristow according to my subsequent research.
Grant Bristow
Grant Bristow was an informant employed by CSIS who worked closely with the eventual leader of the Canadian Aryan Nations front, Wolfgang Droege in the ’80s. He has spoken to the fact that his ties with Droege allowed him to prevent various horrific acts of violence, including bombings and riots. However, further investigation has revealed that his placement as Droege’s right hand man may have been what allowed the organization to continue its operations when Droege assumed leadership. The purpose of Bristow’s infiltration was to identify the financial supporters of the Canadian Chapter of Aryan Nations. However, it was upon the impending arrest of Droege (on unrelated charges of assault) and Bristow’s subsequent departure of Aryan Nations in March 1994, that the Front disbanded.  Bristow was forced to step down, because if he had not, he would have become the de facto leader of the chapter.

In 1994, Toronto Sun reporter Bill Dunphy released an expose on Operation Governor; sadly this news article is not available on the newspaper’s website.  Without a copy, what can be said about it is this: the article negatively exposed CSIS’s role in the Heritage Front/Operation Governor Affair and ousted Grant Bristow as the agent in question.

In September 2004, Bristow sat down with the Walrus and narrated his own perspective of the operation.

Bob Lambert:

Robert Lambert

Dr. Robert Lambert is currently the co-director of the European Muslim Research Centre at the University of Exeter. He also lectures at the Centre of the Study of Terrorism and Political Violence at the University of St. Andrews. He was a former officer employed by the London Metropolitan Police from 1980-2008. He is the author of Countering Al Qaeda in London: Police and Muslims in Partnerships. He was inducted as a Member to the Most Excellent Order of the British Empire in 2008, for his work as a police officer.

Under the false identity “Bob Robinson,” Lambert infiltrated various environmental, animal rights, and anti-racist activist groups. I bring this case up not as a discussion of agents provocateur, but to highlight a similar issue found in the Kennedy case below: Lambert instigated an 18 month relationship with a London Greenpeace activist in an attempt to gain credibility in his undercover role. While police chiefs claim that undercover officers are expressly forbidden from engaging in sexual relations with activists, other undercover officers have come forward to say that sex is most definitely used as a tool to gain trust.

Although Lambert has never been accused of being an agent provocateur, he currently is under investigation by the Metropolitan Police in regards to whether or not he was prosecuted under his assumed identity, while undercover.

Robert Lambert

Montebello:

The Montebello Incident involved the Sûreté du Quebec using three undercover officers to infiltrate the anti-Security and Prosperity Partnership (SPP) of North America protests. The SPP was an open dialogue between Canada, America, and Mexico with the purpose of enhancing trade, sharing intelligence, cooperation, environmental protection, and economic stability between the three nations. The SPP was meant to exist alongside institutions such as the North American Free Trade Agreement. The SPP was cancelled in August 2009.

In the above video, peaceful demonstrators are protesting the SPP at the North American leaders’ summit in Montebello, Quebec. The above video shows Dave Coles (president of the Communications, Energy and Paper Workers Union) ordering three masked men, who were later revealed as undercover SdQ officers, to leave. In August 2007, the SdQ admitted to its involvement.

Informants:

To further broaden our look into agents provocateur: the issue of informants is paramount.  Mother Jones offers are clear and frank exploration of the use of informants from the American perspective in its September/October 2011 article “The Informants”.  From the Canadian perspective, we have the work of Mathilde Turcotte and his study of police informants and their handlers in Quebec, in the article “Shifts in Police-Informant Negotiations.”

From the Canadian perspective we have the following: police are required to actively seek out and maintain a network of informants without much leverage.  Typically, informants are gathered through actions such as bribes, blackmail, and “flipping.” “Flipping” is where a criminal is given the opportunity to “work off” his crimes through aiding in police investigations. Blackmail is the threat of legal action before an informant is charged. This could include issues of immigration.  However, in Canada, police have no real control over the reciprocity process.  In order to prevent the abuse of power on part of the police, outside agencies have control over the reciprocity process. This creates a unique situation where the informant could gain leverage over his handler, and make demands in return for cooperation. This also puts the handler in jeopardy during the bargaining process, because he cannot be certain that any promises he makes to an informant will be carried through.

As the informant gains more power in his relationship with his handler, it is often the case that he works outside his orders and without confirmation or approval.  An example provided by Turcotte involves an informant, while wearing a wire, attempting to entrap a contact in a drug deal.  This was outside the scope of the informant’s directions, and completely illegal — any evidence he might have gathered would have been inadmissible in court.  As a civilian agent, he was not aware that his actions constituted entrapment. Fortunately, the contact did not accept the deal; if he had, the ramifications are impossible to predict, although it could be said with certainty that the Police would not have come out of it with high public opinion.

Mother Jones also brings up the issue of wires and undercover operations, in the context of terrorist sting operations.  The concern raised here is that, while technology advances further and has allowed for virtually undetectable recording devices, there are still many incidents of key interactions not being recorded. The law enforcement side of the debate offers the excuse of “technical difficulties,” while the pragmatic approach is simply one of convenience. Certain conversations are not recorded because it is “inconvenient” for the agency that they are on record.

Mark Kennedy:

Mark Kennedy

Mark Kennedy is a former London Metropolitan police officer who worked undercover for seven years, between 2003 and 2010, infiltrating various activist groups across Europe. Most recently, he was involved in the case of 20 activists convicted of conspiracy to commit aggravated trespass at the Ratcliff-on-Soar Power Station. However, this conviction was overturned on Tuesday, July 19, 2011. Three appeal court judges ruled that a grave miscarriage of justice had occurred when audio evidence Kennedy had collected during the activists’ meetings was not disclosed by prosecution. The audio evidence showed Kennedy “was involved in activities which went much further than the authorization he was given, and appeared to show him as an enthusiastic supporter of the proposed occupation of the power station and, arguably, an agent provocateur.”

Kennedy’s involvement in the planned occupation of the Power Station was not passive. He recruited, drove reconnaissance, and offered financial backing. In total, 114 individuals were arrested when they gathered for a meeting in April 2009. When Kennedy’s involvement in the group as an undercover officer was exposed, he faced harsh denouncement from the activists he had infiltrated, who had considered him a close friend and confident. They express feelings of violation and betrayal. Kennedy also faces allegations that he had used sex as a means to gain trust and information while under cover.

In response to this controversy, Kennedy claims that “he was mishandled by senior officers and has been hung out to dry.” Interesting, in that this is a technique of neutralization. In the field of sociology, we would describe this as shifting blame to a higher power – in this case Kennedy’s superiors. Although it is important to qualify that what he has to say is quite logical. And not unexpected when, often, police institutions seek to single out the blame and distance the institution itself from corruption.
http://c.brightcove.com/services/viewer/federated_f9?isVid=1
Seven inquiries have been launched in regards to Kennedy’s infiltration and the prosecution of the activists.  In total, of the 114 individuals arrested, none have been convicted.

Analysis:

Undercover officers – what do they mean for police and police deviance?  Maurice Punch (2009), in his book Police Corruption: Deviance, accountability, and reform in policing, tells us time and again to look not at the “bad apples,” but the “bad barrels” and “bad orchards” (p. 48), meaning: look at the situation, circumstance, and environment surrounding police that might lead them to corruption. Undercover officers work with, more often than not, criminals; to put it plainly, an officer is expected to infiltrate suspected criminal groups with the intent of gathering evidence (we hope) against these criminals that can be used to bring them to justice.  It is most definitely a dirty job. Getting ‘street cred’ alone usually requires some sort of criminal act.  This common theme of “credibility” or “trust” or “information” is found in the cases of Bristow, Lambert, Kennedy, and Mother Jones’s “The Informants.” In the cases of Kennedy and Lambert, we are further introduced into the idea of sexual encounters as a point of leverage. Morals are pushed and boundaries are reformed. It is natural to assume that somewhere along the line ‘the end justifies the means.’

Gary T. Marx asks us to explore the origins and motives of informants, what they do in radical groups, and factors that enable their transformation into agents provocateur (n.d.).

This leads us first to look our cases of undercover officers as informants, identify some of the motives and concerns that might have lead them to become agents provocateurs.

Bristow’s case is interesting because, as an informant working for CSIS, he is in a different position than the others, who were actual police officers. Bristow had no overarching mandate to uphold the law. And he was tasked with uncovering the financial supporters of Aryan Nations. In his quest to do so he developed a strong relationship with Wolfgang Droege. The maintenance of that relationship required Bristow to act the part of a supporter of the white supremacist cause.  This was an “ends justify the means” situation. Or we could call it a type of Nobel Cause or Dirty Harry corruption.  Maurice Punch describes these types of corruption as specific types of police deviance, however in this case we can apply them to Bristow.  Bristow did not believe in the cause of white supremacy, yet he assumed the guise of such in his undercover role.

The SdQ undercover officer’s roles in the Montebello incident are most definitely Nobel Cause or Dirty Harry corruption. However, as SdQ is a police agency, with a legal mandate to uphold Canada’s law, we have the further issue of Accountability.  Attempting to provoke or incite violence for whatever purpose is illegal. In some cases it could be considered entrapment.  However, it is important to note that Entrapment is only a defense at law; it is not in itself illegal. (Robichaud’s Criminal Defence Legislation blog offers a clearly defined explanation of entrapment if you are so interested.)  The SdQ’s actions at Montebello neatly fall into the definitions of entrapment, although in this case the protesters resisted incitement.  Although no violence occurred, why were the police not held accountable for their actions? If Droege had been prosecuted for his involvement with the Aryan Nations Front, would he have been able to plead entrapment? The role of the agent provocateur is a convoluted one.

In the study of agents provocateur and their roles in undercover operations, the issue of accountability continues to raise its head. There is a certain “legal gray area” that clouds the use of informants and the use of police undercover agents. We can identify some of the motives of agents provocateur, chiefly the types of corruption Maurice Punch labels as Noble Cause, or Dirty Harry corruption.  We cannot, however identify the solution to agents provocateur, because there is so little investigation into the use of them, and there is no transparent accountability structure in place.  CSIS informants hide behind the veil of “National Security.”

Further, what are the ramifications of the agent provocateur? As eluded to above, and as found conclusively in the case of Mark Kennedy, the identification of an agent provocateur can, and will, lead to acquittal.  So what then, makes an individual decide to jeopardize any possible legal action by inciting crime? In Bristow’s case, his purpose was not to arrest Droege – or anyone for that matter. He was tasked with identifying certain individuals and he had no interest in criminal charges.  We see a similar theme in Lambert’s and Kennedy’s situations – they were tasked with gathering information, as well. Is there a distinction between “information gathering” and “nailing the bad guy for a crime”? The literature on police deviance would suggest not.  Mathilde’s and Mother Jones’s articles both allude to the situation of the informant as key to the creation of the agent provocateur.

To look at the cases of Lambert and Kennedy again: I bring them up together because they share similar themes. While Lambert’s case was not one of the agent provocateur (he was an undercover police officer and is currently under speculation for false testimony, not inciting crime), both he and Kennedy were deep undercover agents who operated for years. They created intense interpersonal relationships with the people they were tasked to observe. And they both faced harsh criticism for they duality. They are also both former police officers. Under Peel’s principles that “the police are the public and the public are the police,” we have a concern. The controversy these two individuals are involved in seriously affects the relationship between the public and the police.

Ultimately, the damage the agent provocateur does, to the public and the agency to which he or she belongs, seems to outweigh any benefit. And yet, still these instances occur. What is so very tempting in tempting others into crime?

References:

Marx, G. (n.d.). “Thoughts on a Neglected Category of Social Movement Participant: The Agent Provocateur and the Informant,” American Journal of Sociology 80(2): 402-442.

Punch, Maurice. (2009). Police Corruption: Deviance, accountability, and reform in policing. Portland, Oregon: Willan Publishing.

Turcotte, Mathilde. (2008). Shifts in police-informant negotiations. Global Crime, 9(4), 291-305. doi: 10.1080/17440570802543508.

And all the electronic resources cited here-above.

Wrongful convictions have been a part of the Canadian criminal justice system for decades. Yet very few criminologists or legal scholars have been looking into the topic. We have only recently begun looking at previous criminal convictions which may have been the result of a wrongful conviction. A situation where an individual is found to be legally guilty of a crime he or she did not commit; and the actual perpetrator is out free in the world. For a variety of reasons a person may be wrongfully convicted of a crime he or she did not commit, and the only way to prove his or her innocence is in a court of law. The various research that has been conducted on this topic primarily focuses on the phenomenon of tunnel vision, which Margaret Beare defines in her scholarly article Shouting Innocence from the Highest Rooftop as: “the single-minded and overly narrow focus on an investigation or prosecutorial theory so as to unreasonably color the evaluation of information received and one’s conduct in response to the information”(2008, p.21). Put differently, tunnel vision is the presumption that an individual suspect is guilty at an early stage of the investigation and proceeding with that focus firmly in mind. But Beare and her colleagues have determined that while tunnel vision is definitely a factor in wrongful convictions, it is the end result. A variety of other factors including faulty investigatory procedures, police deviance and corruption, and systemic, structural, and individual factors, all play a huge role in adding up to the final step, of tunnel vision. Various inquiries have been held to determine the root causes of these wrongful convictions but the recommendations stemming from these extremely time-consuming follow ups are not being followed or understood, and more wrongful convictions are occurring. These recommendations are not being understood by the police officers, and more importantly the individual police agencies are failing to accept this guidance. They are not doing enough in regards to re-training of officers or training of new ones in order to help combat this problem.

An interesting theme that is apparent to the broader literature is the use of DNA testing to exonerate hundreds of wrongfully convicted individuals. A majority of wrongful conviction articles look at cases in the United States of America; this is not surprising in the sense that the U.S. has a much larger criminal justice system in comparison to its neighbor, Canada. Also Leo and Gould give other factors in wrongful convictions, included in their article Studying Wrongful Convictions: Learning from Social Science, which are “eyewitness misidentifications, false confessions, informant perjury, junk science, tunnel vision, police, and prosecutorial error”(2009, p.18). Many of these are in direct relation to the police. Police deviance has been an ongoing issue for decades now, and lately has become more and more prominent due to the advancements in technology, and the media attention it receives.  Leo and Gould highlight the fact that in the late 1980’s DNA testing is what launched the inquiries into wrongful convictions, and since then more than 230 individuals have been exonerated of their wrongful sentences. We must not forget that there are currently hundreds of applications for inquiries into cases, but due to the lengthy time it takes for the cases to proceed, innocent individuals remain stripped of their liberties and freedoms.

Margaret Beare makes a very interesting point in regards to police officers assuming innocence until proven guilty. When one is working for weeks, months, and in some cases years to prove the guilt of an individual it is extremely difficult for him to build his guilty case by assuming innocence. She points out an apparent theme in many of these wrongful conviction cases to be “that justice is a game that you wrap to fit your preference, or your unconscious biases. Therefore “shop around” and select evidence, experts, and judges based on your specific agenda”(2008, p.33). Erroneous errors in police investigations have been one of the most common causes of wrongful convictions. Officers wanting to get the guy they “know” to be guilty and forgetting about other possible suspects, which leads to their instincts being false. This has been repeated time and time again in several wrongful convictions such as the case of Donald Marshall Jr.

Beare argues that wrongful convictions are caused by other issues such as systemic problems within the criminal justice system itself. She goes on to say these are “problems that won’t be fixed as long as the miscarriage of justice is treated as an isolated even…wrongful convictions don’t occur in a vacuum. There are systemic reasons they go wrong”(2008, p.29). She stresses the fact that just saying it is a systemic problem does not cure the fact that it continues to go on. In relation to this I have noticed that many of the articles published make various realizations such as, this is a problem with the criminal justice system, or a structural problem within a specific organization, but they make no suggestions in regards to solving these issues. We must ask ourselves how big of an actual problem is this, that it is taking this long to solve? Agreeing with Bears belief, Punch suggests that police corruption and deviance should be looked at through a systemic viewpoint, and many instances of deviance are due to organizational problems.

The idea of noble cause corruption is also something to ponder in the sense that the “justice officials – in the name of getting a conviction – are prepared to violate laws, Charter protections, and any number of ethical considerations”(Beare, 2008, p.33). According to Maurice Punch in his text Police Corruption: Deviance, accountability and reform in policing, noble cause as an officer doing what he had to do in order to “get a result, achieve convictions and see justice done.”(2009, p.107). Many officers work on cases and investigations for months at a time only to be left with the uncertainty of whether the suspect will get convicted. Many officers take it upon themselves to ensure that ‘justice is served’, and feel that they are doing it for the good of the community and in some cases, the country.

Wrongful conviction victims: Donald Marshall Jr., James Driskell, David Milgaard, William Mullins-Johnson, Steven Truscott, Kyle UngerSome Canadian wrongful conviction victims: Donald Marshall Jr., James Driskell, David Milgaard, William Mullins-Johnson, Steven Truscott, Kyle Unger

Various wrongful conviction inquiries have been made in the past several decades, many of which have gathered vast media attention. One of the major ones that made headlines around the globe was the wrongful conviction of Steven Truscott. He was sentenced to hanging in 1969, at the age of 14 for a schoolmates murder. After spending several months as Canada’s youngest inmate on death row, his sentence was changed to life imprisonment. After spending almost his entire life in prison the Ontario Court of Appeal in 2007 overturned his conviction declaring the case “a miscarriage of justice that must be quashed”. He was awarded compensation for the mistake but that does not come close to the years of mental and physical anguish he had to endure while imprisoned. This was due to a number of factors, such as police laying down charges too quickly, and completely ignoring other potential suspects. Such as a sexual offender living nearby, and an electrician with a rape conviction; both were ignored by police, the obvious question being, why was this?(CBC, June 7/08).

Another interesting inquiry was made into the case of Donald Marshall Jr. where he was convicted of murdering his friend. It gives an example where police officers conceived a predetermined notion that he was the killer. Since he was already known to police they focused the investigation onto him. After his sentence had been overturned an inquiry commission determined that “systemic racism had contributed to his conviction”(CBC, Oct 14/10). Margaret Beare mentioned in her article that race was a prominent factor in many of the wrongful conviction cases in Canada; but even when the race factor was absent, the individuals were stereotyped by police and deemed to be weird or unordinary. She gives the example of Guy Paul Morin who was a beekeeper, a musician, and a gardener, and the police paid particular attention to him because of these “unusual” characteristics.

Just recently a man has filed a lawsuit against the Manitoba Court of Queen’s Bench last month in regards to a wrongful conviction sentence he served of 14 years. Kyle Unger was convicted in a murder of a teenage girl, but after serving part of his sentence, his charges were withdrawn thanks once again to there being no DNA evidence linking him to the crime(CBC, Sept 27/11).

Hundreds of cases of wrongful convictions have surfaced in North America alone over the past several decades, thanks to an increase in new technology, more and more individuals are being released from their prisons due to various inquires being conducted. Unfortunately these inquires should not have been necessary in order to allow free individuals to enjoy their liberties and not have been made to face the conditions they did.

Referenced:
Beare, M. (2008). “Shouting Innocence from the Highest Rooftop”, in M. Beare (ed.) Honouring Social Justice. Toronto: University of Toronto Press: 17-54.

Punch, M. (2009). Police corruption: deviance, accountability and reform in policing. UK: Willan Publishing.

To expand my previous definition, an agent provocateur is created when an undercover agent has moved from a passive involvement in crime to an active involvement. This means that such an individual might (and as often is the case) not be a police officer.  The individual could be any number of things, from a police officer working undercover, to an informant who is paid or blackmailed, to a member of The Canadian Security Intelligence Agency (CSIS) — which is not a policing agency, and is not in fact required to enforce Canadian law.

When we speak of agents provocateur (AP), it is important to note that AP’s are not a new phenomenon in Canadian legal history.  Although, generally, the newer cases of Montebello and Toronto G20 come to mind.

Historically, we also have the case of Grant Bristow, a former CSIS agent who worked with the Canadian chapter of the Aryan Nations.  Unfortunately, the only comprehensive resource on Grant Bristow comes from Wikipedia.  Although we do have fellow blogger, Ezra Levant‘s commentary on the matter, as well as Bristow’s interview with The Walrus to draw on. Less user-friendly is a SIRC report written in 1994 investigating CSIS and Bristow’s role in the Heritage Front Affair.  Interesting to note is that as I write, this website seems to be no longer available. I will have to look into it.

Irregardless, in this case the Wiki article seems to be quite succinct on the subject of Grant Bristow according to my subsequent research.

Grant Bristow and Operation Governor:
Grant Bristow Undercover Grant Bristow was an informant employed by CSIS who worked closely with the eventual leader of the Canadian Aryan Nations front, Wolfgang Droege in the ’80s. He has spoken to the fact that his ties with Droege allowed him to prevent various horrific acts of violence, including bombings and riots. However, further investigation has revealed that his placement as Droege’s right hand man may have been what allowed the organization to continue its operations when Droege assumed leadership. The purpose of Bristow’s infiltration was to identify the financial supporters of the Canadian Chapter of Aryan Nations. However, it was upon the impending arrest of Droege (on unrelated charges of assault) and Bristow’s subsequent departure of Aryan Nations in March 1994, that the Front disbanded.  Bristow was forced to step down, because if he had not, he would have become the de facto leader of the chapter.

In 1994, Toronto Sun reporter Bill Dunphy released an expose on Operation Governor, sadly this news article is not available on the newspaper’s website.  Without a copy, what can be said about it is this: the article negatively exposed CSIS’s role in the Heritage Front/Operation Governor Affair and ousted Grant Bristow as the agent in question.

In September 2004, Bristow sat down with the Walrus and narrated his own perspective of the operation.

Montabello:

The Montebello Incident involved the Surete du Quebec using three undercover officers to infiltrate the anti-Security and Prosperity Partnership (SPP) of North America protests. The SPP was an open dialogue between Canada, America, and Mexico with the purpose of enhancing trade, sharing intelligence, cooperation, environmental protection, and economic stability between the three nations. The SPP was meant to exist along side institutions such as the North American Free Trade Agreement. The SPP was canceled in August 2009.

In the above video, peaceful demonstrators are protesting the SPP at the North American leaders summit in Montebello, Quebec. The above video shows Dave Coles (president of the Communications, Energy and Paperworkers Union) ordering three masked men, who were later revealed as undercover SdQ officers, to leave. In August 2007, the SdQ admitted to its involvement.

Tying into the Study of Police Deviance…:

If we take Grant Bristow’s work with Aryan Nations as a true example of an agent provocateur (it, of course has not been labeled as such by law – which brings about issues of accountability to be discussed below) and the police involvement of the Montebello incident, we have two examples of the use of Agent Provocateurs. Gary T. Marx asks us to explore the origins and motives of informants, what they do in radical groups, and factors that enable their transformation into agents provocateur (n.d.).

This leads us first to look at Bristow and the SdQ undercover officers as informants, identify some of the motives and concerns that might have lead them to become agents provocateurs.

Bristow’s case is interesting because, as an informant working for CSIS, he is in a different position than the undercover SdQ officers. Bristow had no overarching mandate to uphold the law. And he was tasked with uncovering the financial supporters of Aryan Nations. In his quest to do so he developed a strong relationship with Wolfgang Droege. Maintaining that relationship required him to act the part of a supporter of the white supremacist cause.  This was an “ends justifies the means” situation. Or we could call it a type of Nobel Cause or Dirty Harry corruption.  Maurice Punch describes these types of corruption as specific types of police deviance, however in this case we can apply them to Bristow.  Bristow did not believe in the cause of white supremacy, yet he assumed the guise of such in his undercover role.

…and Accountability:

The SdQ undercover officer’s roles in the Montebello incident are most definitely Nobel Cause or Dirty Harry corruption. However, as SdQ is a police agency, with a legal mandate to uphold Canada’s law, we have the further issue of Accountability.  Attempting to provoke or incite violence for whatever purpose is illegal. In some cases it could be considered entrapment.  (Robichaud’s Criminal Defense Legislation blog offers a clearly defined explanation of entrapment if you are so interested.)  The SdQ’s actions at Montebello neatly fall into the definitions of entrapment, although in this case the protesters resisted incitement. Although no violence occurred, why were the police not held accountable for their actions?

Informants:

To further broaden our look into APs: in my own opinion, the issue of informants is paramount.  Mother Jones offers are clear and frank exploration of the use of informants from the American perspective in its September/October 2011 article The Informants.  From the Canadian perspective, we have the work of Mathilde Turcotte and his study of police informants and their handlers in Quebec, in the article “Shifts in Police-Informant Negotiations.”

From the Canadian perspective we have the following: police are required to actively seek out and maintain a network of informants without much leverage.  Typically, informants are gathered through actions such as bribes, blackmail, and “flipping.” “Flipping” is where a criminal is given the opportunity to “work off” his crimes through aiding in police investigations. Blackmail is the threat of legal action before an informant is charged. This could include issues of immigration.  However, in Canada, police have no real control over the reciprocity process.  In order to prevent the abuse of power on part of the police, outside agencies have control over the reciprocity process. This creates a unique situation where the informant could gain leverage over his handler, and make demands in return for cooperation. This also puts the handler in jeopardy during the bargaining process, because he cannot be certain that any promises he makes to an informant will be carried through.

As the informant gains more power in his relationship with his handler, it is often the case that he works outside his orders and without confirmation or approval.  An example provided by Turcotte involves an informant, while wearing a wire, attempting to entrap a contact in a drug deal.  This was outside the scope of the informant’s directions, and completely illegal — any evidence he might have gathered would have been inadmissible in court.  As a civilian agent, he was not aware that his actions constituted entrapment. Fortunately, the contact did not accept the deal; if he had, the ramifications are impossible to predict. Although it could be said with certainty that the Police would not have come out of it with high public opinion.

Mother Jones also brings up the issue of wires and undercover operations, in the context of terrorist sting operations.  The concern raised here is that, while technology advances further and has allowed for virtually undetectable recording devices, there are still many incidents of key interactions not being recorded. The law enforcement side of the debate offers the excuse of “technical difficulties,” while the pragmatic approach is simply one of convenience. Certain conversations are not recorded because it is “inconvenient” for the agency that they be on record.

Conclusions:

In the study of agents provocateur and their roles in undercover operations, the issue of accountability continues to raise its head. There is a certain “legal gray area” that clouds the use of informants and the use of police undercover agents. We can identify some of the motives of AP’s, chiefly the types of corruption Maurice Punch labels as Noble Cause, or Dirty Harry corruption.  We cannot, however identify the solution to APs, because there is so little investigation into the use of APs, and there is no transparent accountability structure in place.  CSIS informants hide behind the veil of “National Security.” Police provocateurs have not been legally identified in contemporary cases involving clear incitement.

References:

Marx, G. (n.d.). “Thoughts on a Neglected Category of Social Movement Participant: The Agent Provocateur and the Informant,” American Journal of Sociology 80(2): 402-442.

Turcotte, M. (2008). Shifts in police-informant negotiations. Global Crime, 9(4), 291-305. doi: 10.1080/17440570802543508.

And all the electronic resources cited here-above.

In Canada we are fortunate to have a stable criminal justice system. When people are accused of a crime they are presumed innocent, and it is incumbent upon the state to demonstrate their guilt beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law governed by rules of due process. Despite this, there are some instances where our criminal justice system may make mistakes that is detrimental to the reputation of policing and law organizations. Some that are less fortunate have to suffer under brutal and unfair situations which would seem unappealing to the westernized world that we reside in. Some countries in the world use cruel and unusual punishments as methods of interrogation and execution of alleged criminals. In these same countries they are no stranger to police deviance and corruption.

The web audit on Maher Arar showed many reliable sources such as, CBC, Vancouver Sun, and the Globe and Mail. These sites helped me produce my overview of this topic. Also article by Jules Lobel Review of Litigation gave some really good insight into the Arar case. But these website often reiterated the information that I already had for the blog topic. Also I came across one website with the caption “Maher Arar is a liar”, in which this blogger bashes Maher Arar about the ordeal he was in. It is kind to take this source seriously due to the fact they do not have any real sources about the Arar case.

Maher Arar came to Canada in 1987 and is a full citizen of Canada. He attended McGill University where he obtained his bachelors degree in computer engineering. He and his family moved from Montreal to Ottawa where in 2001 he opened his own consulting company, Simmscoms inc.; Arar was detained for 12 days in the US and deported to Syria and spent another year in jail. How this case became such big deal to the media in regards to police deviance was Maher Arar was detained at John F. Kennedy International Airport (NYC) during a layover where he was coming back from a family vacation in Tunisia. The officials in New York because he was “subject to lookout for” as being apart of a terrorist organization (Lobel, 2008) After his detention in the US he got deported to Syria. Syria is known to practice torture and it is apart of Syrian police culture to get information from their suspects (Lobel, 2008). What Arars’ lawyers argued was the US officials sent him to Syria because the US official’s knew that they practice torture and they wanted answer’s from Maher Arar about his allege ties to a terrorist group by the name of Al-Queda. During the one year he was imprisoned in Syria, he was kept in inhumane conditions and was beaten daily with cables by the Syrian officials (Lobel, 2008). At one point during incarceration he lied about being involved with Al-Queda to ease the torture that was placed on him. Also since he wasn’t an American citizen his request for legal aid in Syria was denied. Maher Arar was released in October. 5, 2003 and the media quickly got a hold of Arar’s story. There were many inquiries and investigation that were issued in this case. Most of the investigation was about looking into the involvement of Canadian and US officials sending an individual under extraordinary rendition, which means the illegal transportation of a person from one nation to another. After all the legal proceeding, what was ultimately concluded was that Maher Arar had no involvement in terrorism. He was cleared of all charges, received compensation of around $11.5 million from the Canadian government, and he received an apology from Canadian government. This topic is significant to the issue of police deviance because the US law enforcement illegally deported a Canadian citizen to Syria, where he was tortured for a year.

The people involved attempted to perform a noble cause for the greater good of the society by protecting their citizen’s from a suspected terrorist (Punch, 2009), but they did it illegally and inappropriate manner. Improper investigation and practice were involved in this case. Due to lack of information they had also contributed to the deportation of Maher Arar. Clearly They broke an International law by deporting Maher Arar to Syria knowingly that they do torture people to retrieve information (Lobel, 2008), especially information in regards to terrorism. During a time when 9/11 and terrorism is still fresh in the minds of the Government and the law enforcement officers, these agencies would do anything to get their hands on this type or lead and information to protect their country.

References

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LBWp4iMnHN0

Lobel, Jules. Review of Litigation, Symposium2008, Vol. 28 Issue 2, p479-500, 22p

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maher_Arar

Punch, Maurice. (2009). Police Corruption: Deviance, accountability and reform in policing. Portland, Oregon: Willan Publishing.

The role of police in wrongful convictions has been a heated debate for many years in Canada. Several high-profile cases have been in the media involving wrongful convictions in our courts. Following these cases, several high-end inquiries have taken place that have looked into the circumstances that produced these wrongful convictions, including police negligence, wrongdoing, and tunnel vision. One of the major aspects of wrongful convictions is tunnel vision; which is when the police focus their investigation towards one individual, and tend to forget about other possible suspects. They focus all their man power into convicting one person of interest while completely forgetting about other possibilities.
A wrongful conviction is exactly how it sounds, someone is wrongfully convicted of a crime that they did not commit, and the actual perpetrator is out there with his/her freedom. There have been many wrongful convictions that have made it to the spotlight, there are probably hundreds of others that still are forgotten. Many of these convictions were during the pre-DNA era, prior to the use of DNA testing. This is a common trend through many of the wrongful convictions that have occurred in Canada’s history. Many people were wrongfully convicted due to misconduct and lack of knowledge by the police.
While conducting an initial Google search on the topic “The Role of Police in Wrongful Convictions in Canada”, a number of interesting cases emerged. Several articles, some up to 90 pages in length, are present, and help showcase some of the reasons behind the wrongful convictions. Some of these articles including “Wrongful Convictions: The Effect of Tunnel Vision and Predisposing Circumstances in the Criminal Justice System” by Bruce MacFarlane give some insight into tunnel vision experienced by the police. Where they focus only on one suspect and work extremely hard to put them behind bars while forgetting about potential others.
Another result was a news article published by CBC news that highlights some major cases in Canadian history. It looks at twelve cases throughout Canada’s history and gives a brief description followed by an outcome. This article is written from the media’s perspective and no comments from the police are noted. Along with the other results this one is fairly recent, only a year old. It helped broaden my search on the topic by focusing on some of the major convictions that were overturned due to them being wrongful. It also gave me a case list of potential exploration on the topic for the future.
An interesting case that was found during the preliminary research done on the topic is the case of Ivan Henry. Ivan Henry was convicted of a number of sexual assaults in the 1980’s in Vancouver, and has spent 27 years in prison because of it. One of the key points resulting in his conviction was the victims identifying him from a photograph of a police line-up. Here is the photograph: Ivan Henry Police Lineup
One can clearly see why the victims chose him, because he is the one in a headlock and appears to be wild, unlike the other suspects who are all police officers with smiles on their faces. Now the question arises why were the police officers allowed to unjustly play games with this man’s future? It is clear that they are not taking their occupation seriously in this manner, and should have been reprimanded for their actions. These types of stories highlight the role of police in wrongful convictions. Some police officers engage in misconduct and have the potential to jeopardize the life’s of innocent citizens.
Another interesting case and the only Wikipedia link in the results was the case of Donald Marshall Jr. Though it was fairly short it provided some insight into the case, and gave another example of the role of police in wrongful convictions. In this case the police had a predetermined notion that Marshall was the killer. Even though the true killer had admitted to the stabbing, he later lied about his role to police. Donald Marshall Jr. was already known to police and therefore the police focused on him and became victims of tunnel vision focusing just on him and not other possible suspects. Unfortunately for Mr. Marshall he was released after serving 11 years of his prison sentence, which was life imprisonment. If it was not for a witness coming forward it is still possible the Mr. Marshall could still be in prison. A majority of the results where articles that were written by University professors, and a couple of media articles but none of them had any response from the police in them. None of the search results yielded a police apology or mentioned any investigation to be completed.