A cop, a kitten and a charge of ‘compassion’

WHITBY, ONT. • The case against Beth Richardson, the police officer accused of discreditable conduct for rescuing a kitten from a woman on a drug binge, began as an allegation of theft and has fast wound down into a matter of paperwork and police protocols.

Richardson, a constable with Durham Regional Police east of Toronto, was summoned to appear before a disciplinary tribunal Wednesday — a move that riled animal protection advocates. A dozen or so protesters showed up outside the nondescript office complex in Whitby, where the tribunal was held, with a 14-year-old dog named Stanley and placards that read “Compassion is not a crime,” and “The job is to protect and that’s what she tried to do.”

It turns out, the tribunal later heard, that prosecutors in the case don’t necessarily disagree.

The admission came about after Animal Justice, a national animal rights group, made a move to intervene at the tribunal — looking to block any retribution against Richardson, for fear that it would deter other officers from saving distressed animals in the future.

But after an hour-long meeting with prosecutors on the sidelines of the hearing, Animal Justice backed out — avoiding what was expected to be a full day of airing legal arguments about whether or not the advocacy group should be allowed to participate.

Instead, Animal Justice and the prosecution returned to the tribunal with a hastily written joint statement, where prosecutors made clear that their issue with Richardson wasn’t her intent to save the cat, but the way she went about it.

“The prosecution’s position is that police officers are required to preserve all life, including animals,” read the statement — which was in itself enough for Animal Rights executive director Camille Labchuk to declare “victory,” reassured that the case, regardless of outcome, is no longer at risk of having a chilling effect on other officers around the country.

The case, prosecutors clarified, was really about police procedures — alleging that in fulfilling her duty to the cat Richardson failed to take notes, file a report, inform her supervisors or tell the pet owner. And since Animal Justice “takes no position with respect to police procedures,” it abandoned its application to intervene.

Richardson’s lawyer, Joseph Markson, called the joint statement “surprising and even shocking,” accusing the prosecution of changing its position “at the last minute.”

He read aloud the original wording of the charge against Richardson, from the official notice that ordered her to attend the hearing, which alleged that she “removed a kitten from a residence without the owners’ knowledge or consent, thereby committing the offence of discreditable conduct.”

Now, however, the prosecution appeared to be basing its case on what Richardson didn’t do after the fact — fill in the paperwork — rather than the act of taking the cat, Markson said.

Discreditable conduct, as defined in the code of conduct, means acting in a “disorderly manner … likely to bring discredit upon the reputation of the police force.”

“What’s discreditable about some missing documentation?” Markson asked outside court.

Prosecutor Ian Johnstone dismissed Markson’s comments.

“It’s always been our position,” he said in an interview after the hearing. “We just clarified.”

Johnstone likened the situation to a police officer removing a child in distress from a home, without notifying parents and police supervisors or filing a report.

This case centres on Tia, though — a thin, fetid kitten who Richardson found cowering beneath a table while responding to a 9-1-1 at an Oshawa, Ont., home in January. Richardson was part of a team called there to check on a woman, who had reportedly been using drugs for several days.

Markson said Richardson didn’t ask for the pet owner’s consent before taking the cat because the woman was high on crystal meth and “out of control.”

“Having a conversation with somebody who’s high on crystal meth isn’t a conversation,” the defence lawyer said. “That person can’t understand or comprehend anything.”

The humane society was closed, so Richardson — who is allergic to cats — paid for a veterinary clinician to examine the kitten. She then arranged for a friend to care for it overnight until the humane society reopened. Meantime, the woman’s boyfriend called Durham Police and accused Richardson of stealing the cat. The cat was returned and the owners declined to press charges, according to the notice of hearing.

The hearing will continue on Feb. 7.

IT’S ALWAYS BEEN OUR POSITION. WE JUST CLARIFIED.