RCMP officer cleared of charges after slapping prisoner, ASIRT rules

Alberta's police watchdog says an RCMP officer convicted of using too much force on a prisoner in custody in 2011 committed a 2018 assault when he slapped a handcuffed man across the face. However, no charges will be laid.

On July 11, 2018, the Alberta Serious Incident Response Team (ASIRT) was directed to investigate the case from June 9, 2018, involving an RCMP officer and a handcuffed man being detained at the Strathcona County RCMP detachment.

In a news release Friday, ASIRT said the 30-year-old was arrested and placed in handcuffs at 2:13 a.m. by “witness officer #1.” Due to the man's agitated and intoxicated state, the first officer required help from other officers, “witness officer #2” and the “subject officer,” who was acting as watch commander at the time.

The three officers escorted the man, who was handcuffed behind his back, to the guard desk, where there was a civilian cellblock guard.

According to the witnesses, the man was intoxicated, off balance, and belligerent and had been exchanging in yelling and insults with the subject officer since their arrival.

“While at the desk, the witness officers were on either side of the affected person,” the release states.

“The affected person was in front of the subject officer when something happened, and the subject officer struck the affected person once with the front of his open right hand. The slap was not overly hard and caused no injuries.

The witness officers interceded in some manner, and the subject officer left the area.”

The accounts of what led up to the slap vary slightly. According to the first officer, the handcuffed man was leaning against the wall, then leaned toward the subject officer and the officer then struck the man.

The second officer states the man took a couple steps toward the subject officer and then the subject officer hit him.

The subject officer, meanwhile, said the man moved quickly toward him, taking four or five steps between the two other officers. The man was yelling and spitting due to his yelling.

“The subject officer told him to turn around since he was spitting on him. The affected person got close to him and then he hit him in order to move his head away,” the release states.

ASIRT also noted the subject officer had three prior assault complaints made against him related to use of force on prisoners in custody, with one leading to a conviction in 2011.

While it is not disputed a slap occurred, ASIRT said the question falls around whether the slap “falls within the protections provided by the Criminal Code for police actions or for defence of person.”

Once the investigation was concluded, ASIRT found there was clear evidence that an offence of assault was committed.

The investigation was forwarded to the Alberta Crown Prosecution Service, which found the evidence did not meet the standard for prosecution. ASIRT was advised the “test for proceeding with a prosecution is not met” and that “a reasonable likelihood of conviction does not exist.”

ASIRT noted while the spitting from the man did not appear to be deliberate, the subject officer could have taken steps to not be spit on.

The subject officer could have moved outside the reach of the spittle, by moving a few steps backward or leaving entirely.

“His presence was not achieving any legitimate law enforcement goal. Indeed, if anything, his conduct was interfering with the task of getting the person properly lodged in cells,” ASIRT said.

“When the subject officer did leave the area, having been asked by the witness officers to remove himself after the slap, it was completely effective in ending the situation.”

The officers could have also used a spit mask or sock as a barrier to the spittle, ASIRT said, or if the subject officer had “started to act professionally or removed himself from the situation earlier, the entire situation would likely have de-escalated.”

ASIRT also noted a slap is not useful to prevent being spit on.

“It would be hard to characterize it as a control tactic, and additionally, there is almost a demeaning element to its use by an officer on a handcuffed prisoner,” the release states. “It is certainly not going to stop someone from yelling nor will it stop spittle from the leaving the affected person's mouth.”

ASIRT found the force used was “more than reasonably necessary, if it was necessary at all.”

“Had the Crown found that the evidence met their standard for prosecution, the officer would have been charged.”

ASIRT'S report and concerns will be provided to the RCMP for consideration of “alternate methods of accountability for the conduct in question.”

Had the Crown found that the evidence met their standard for prosecution, the officer would have been charged.