For reference, RCMP publish their serious conduct decisions. Here’s the one for this particular bag of hammers:
Constable Jason Kitzul - Royal Canadian Mounted Police
I’m glad the profession is rid of him. Everything to follow is speculation:
-verbally and physically abusing his common-law partner
-driving drunk.
-shot D.R. with a BB gun
-lit her hair on fire
-punched her
Of course they were
Dropping the impaired charge is a no brainer. No way they could prove it beyond a reasonable doubt with that fact set. They don’t have a BAC reading, and driving behaviour is subjective, and probably wasn’t able to be described with much precision. Easy for him to claim he was pissed off and just driving like a douche because he was upset, tired, emotional, etc. There was probably similar uncertainty about how much he drank and over what span of time. To go straight impaired by alcohol without a BAC is a heavy lift even when police actually intercept the driver and can make observations about speech pattern, smell of beverage alcohol, physical coordination, etc. I’ve done it, but it’s hard. I’m more surprised the charge was ever laid.
For the assault and assault with weapon charges, looks like charges were stayed right after she testified. Best guess is that something about her testimony caused crown to no longer feel there was a reasonable prospect of conviction. Sometimes prosecutions fall apart when the victim gets up on the stand. Remember that the criminal threshold is ‘beyond a reasonable doubt’, whereas the internal conduct stuff is ‘balance of probabilities’.
Initially I was wondering if it might have been a Jordan application for undue delay (22 months), but that would have had to be made before trial, so likely not.
Can anyone explain why folks are given the ability to resign, rather than have a public termination on their record? There's a public condemnation element to being fired vs resigning; in an instance such as this, firing them would seem to be a more appropriate sanction than giving them the ability to resign.
What ‘record’, exactly? The decision and sanctions are published, so the public gets to see it anyway. I suspect Bruce may have been on to something- when they make the decision to resign, that would be harder to turn around and appeal than a dismissal. In the case of the Mounties, a dismissal for misconduct can cost them their pension benefits, so there’s an incentive to eat the resignation.
www.thestar.com
www.timescolonist.com
