Officer suspended after good deed goes bad
Officer illegally searched lawyer’s car, went into residence as family slept
No good deed goes unpunished, especially when you violate a defence lawyer’s rights while doing it.
A Montreal police constable with 26 years of experience has been suspended for three days without pay for having entered a person’s home and searching through his car illegally while trying to return a lost wallet.
While Ghyslain Lavoie was trying to perform a good deed in August 2017, the problem was the methods he used to do it. That included entering the home of Yves Gratton, a Montreal lawyer, while he and his family slept before 2 a.m. on the morning in question.
Gratton defends clients who require legal aid and has displayed an impressive knowledge of Canada’s Charter of Rights and Freedoms in cases heard at the Montreal courthouse.
According to a decision released by the Police Ethics Committee on Monday, a citizen found a wallet and handed it to Lavoie while he was on patrol on Aug. 20, 2017. The wallet belonged to Gratton’s daughter, but Lavoie had no idea who she was when he received it.
The police officer went to a first address, knocked on the door and no one answered. He then looked in a database and found a second address which turned out to be where the lawyer lived with his family, including his daughter.
Lavoie went to the second address at the ungodly hour of 3:22 a.m. He knocked on the door and no one answered. He then tried to call a phone number he found in the database and no one answered. When Lavoie’s late shift ended, he informed his sergeant he was unable to return the wallet.
When he started his late shift the following night, he checked to see if the wallet had been reported as stolen or lost and found nothing. Nearly three hours later, at 1:46 a.m. on Aug. 22, 2017, he returned to the second home accompanied by his partner, Milena Maturana. The lawyer, his wife and their three children were asleep inside.
Maturana rang the front doorbell and no one answered. While she did this, Lavoie looked inside a car parked at the address and noticed another wallet that had been left on the passenger seat. He opened the car door and grabbed the wallet, which belonged to Gratton, and noticed it contained information confirming it belonged to someone living at the same address.
According to the committee’s decision, Lavoie grabbed the wallet while believing he was preventing a possible theft. Lavoie went to the front door, proceeded to knock on the door and rang the doorbell several times but no one answered.
Lavoie then headed to the back of the home and tried a back door on the veranda. He said it was unlocked and that a second door inside the home was open.
“According to (Lavoie’s) version of facts, he mentioned that he entered to verify if a theft had been carried out or to see if someone inside needed help,” the committee wrote. “While he was inside the home, Constable Lavoie shouted ‘Police, allô’ each time he took three steps.”
Lavoie then headed up a stairway to the second floor of the home where the family slept.
“It was then that the (lawyer) and his wife perceived Constable Lavoie, in their home, in the middle of the night,” the author of the decision wrote.
Gratton asked Lavoie what he was doing inside his home and the police officer handed the attorney his wallet along with his security pass to the Montreal courthouse. At that moment, Lavoie still did not know that he had entered a lawyer’s home. He informed Gratton that he had opened his car door and found the wallet inside.
The lawyer invited Lavoie back downstairs so they could discuss what happened. That is when the lawyer noticed Maturana was also inside his home. Lavoie handed Gratton his daughter’s lost wallet
While he was inside the home, Constable Lavoie shouted ‘Police, allô’ each time he took three steps.
and explained how he entered the family’s residence uninvited. Lavoie recommended that they should always lock their doors and left.
Gratton then called 911 to complain about what Lavoie and Maturana did. More than a week later, he filed a police ethics complaint.
Lavoie later conceded he had searched the lawyer’s car when he had no right to do so. He also acknowledged he had no right or justifiable reason to enter the family’s home. He admitted his actions constituted violations of two sections of the Quebec police ethics code.
The committee agreed with the joint recommendation made from both sides of the case that Lavoie receive a three-day suspension. It was also determined that Maturana did not violate the ethics code.