The RCMP Taser Case: How Not To Handle An Accidental Death

The RCMP is reportedly not releasing footage of Robert Dziekanski’s death after being tasered by police shortly after arriving to Canada at the Vancouver International Airport. The reports come after the mother of the deceased was refused a request to view the footage. Much of how the RCMP has dealt with this case should be taken as a crash course by law enforcement across the country of what not to do following an accidental death.

While it is understandable that a public release of the footage could hamper the investigation into what occurred in the wee hours of Sunday, October 14th, denying the victim’s mother the right to see such footage, even in the presence of a lawyer, doesn’t help the image of the organization widely held responsible by witnesses for the death of Mr. Dziekanski.

Questions remaining around how long an investigation should even take do little to help with painting a more civic-friendly image of the police force, with the RCMP suggesting that such an investigation, despite having a limited number of easily identifiable witnesses for an incident that was video taped, could take upwards of 2.5 years.

In fact, having the beleaguered RCMP investigate its own officers in the taser-related death might not be the best of positive image building tactics. As with many policing agencies, the RCMP is a tight-knit organization, causing some to question how appropriate it is to have officers investigate fellow officers.

Granted, the job of police everywhere is a difficult one. Officers are often on the front line exposed to many dangers and, let’s face it, a lot of scum. There is a considerable psychological price to pay facing such a reality day in and day out. The RCMP places additional social challenges on its officers by moving officers around the country leaving many officials to only make friends amongst fellow agents. The limited external fraternization coupled with the normal stress involved in the job can lead to an “us versus them mentality.” Unfortunately, as a result of increased public scrutiny over allegations of corruption and misconduct, the “them” in this situation could arguably be increasingly perceived to be anyone outside of law enforcement.

A prevailing sense of being responsible for upholding the law has caused some law enforcement officers to believe that they are the law. This can lead to a feeling that they have more authority then they actually hold, and, at times, carry out measures that are unnecessary. Essentially, it’s the perception of holding authority without much accountability. Considering such a mentality from a very human angle, an officer with this altered perception of his or her role in society who is having a bad day might think using a taser on an irate man brandishing a stapler is a completely justifiable measure, whatever the outcome might be.

The negative fallout of all of this, the unfortunate death of Mr. Dziekanski aside, is the deepening of a growing rift between Canadian civil society and law enforcement in the country. The greater the number of incidents that suggest that Canadian law enforcement agencies do not have the best interest of civil society in mind, the less likely such organizations will be viewed as friendly by the public. The long-term impact on security of such an image problem are considerable. Indeed, the level of security we currently enjoy is derived from the symbiosis between a co-operative civil society and trust worthy law enforcement. If such a relationship deteriorates, police officers with good intentions (which hopefully are in considerably greater numbers than those without) will find their jobs that much more difficult and the rates of vigilantism à la Grand Manan will likely increase as civil society seeks other alternatives.

None of this is to say that the RCMP is full of mentally unstable individuals. Indeed, we certainly hope not. It is to say, however, that law enforcement agencies are comprised of humans, and as humans they are bound to err or at the very least be susceptible to mental lapses or poor judgement. As a result, and for the sake of maintaining the necessary public-police symbiosis, incidents such as the death of Mr. Dziekanski need to be treated differently by law enforcement agencies. Admitting early on about the possibility of a lapse in good judgement, being open about investigations and putting the victim’s friends and family at ease in cases that just might implicate law enforcement officials is key.

The problem is largely one of perception and, as a result, the potential outcomes of not addressing the issue are very preventable. The RCMP, however, is proving ill-adept at correcting its image problems, as the Dziekanski case suggests. It should stand as a lesson to all law enforcement agencies of what not to do when things go wrong.

This entry was posted on November 1 2007 at 01:45 and is filed under Security Measures, North America. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response or trackback from your own site.