Charles dates his current troubles with police back to incidents
with the police in 2006.
On May 28, 2006, Charles covered the “Solidarity across
Borders” protest in Fredericton and reported
it in his blog, mentioning also that he would be covering the Atlantica
Conference in Saint John the following week.
His pictures of police arresting peaceful demonstrators were featured by
ATV news, leading to an apology by Fredericton’s Chief of Police.
On June 9, 2006, Charles was arrested by police as he
covered the protest at the Atlantica Conference as a blogger and amateur journalist. Some masked protestors rushed the gates to
force their way into the conference. Police
arrested two of the protestors, and singled out Charles who was standing with the
media taking pictures. According to a CBC
news story of November 2, 2006:
Duane Roussel, who was also
with the protesters, saw LeBlanc's arrest unfold in front of him and, like
Williston, says LeBlanc was doing nothing but taking pictures. "Charles
LeBlanc was with the media, off on the side," he said. "But he wasn't
chanting. He wasn't wearing a mask. He wasn't hiding anything."
CBC video* of Leblanc appears to
confirm that, showing him standing off to the side with his camera, and then a
second time with his flash going off, and a third time kneeling to get more
pictures.
Watching the video, Tim Currie says
LeBlanc doesn't appear to be doing anything different from other
journalists. "It seems clear from this footage that Charles Leblanc
is acting in the same way as the other reporters. He doesn't seem to be in the
middle of the crowd, he's off to the side."
Acting no differently, but treated
much differently by police.
Toward the end of the
demonstration, video shows Leblanc's arrest occurring quickly
as Sgt. John Parks hands a protester he already has in custody
off to another officer. The exchange happens right in front of LeBlanc,
who still has his camera focused on the main demonstration.
As the arrested protestor
is led away, the camera catches a glimpse of Parks moving toward
LeBlanc, past newspaper photographer Peter Walsh and CTV reporter Mike
Cameron, where out of view he grabs LeBlanc, pushes him across the floor and up
against the far wall right in front of protestor Duane Roussel.
"What I saw was the police
officer take, with his hand, take Charles by the head and push him into the
wall where the pictures are and I saw the pictures moving back and forth and I
thought, 'Charles, why did they have to do this to Charles?' He wasn't pushing
police. He wasn't trying to push his way into the conference centre. He was
just taking pictures."
Charles was charged with obstruction of justice and denied
legal aid. Fredericton lawyer,
Harold Doherty, stepped forward to defend Charles, and he was acquitted. According to a
CBC news story on November 25, 2006:
The judge who acquitted a New
Brunswick blogger of obstructing justice says Charles LeBlanc was merely
"plying his trade" at a protest last summer and shouldn't have been
arrested.
In his
20-page written decision, Judge William McCarroll noted that LeBlanc was
not among the mob of demonstrators during the Saint
John protest, but was in a public space taking pictures of
the protesters for his website when he was arrested.
He said LeBlanc is well-known for
his blog, well enough that police officers admitted to consulting it to
gather intelligence about the conference.
"Mr. LeBlanc was never advised
by the police that he would be arrested if he did certain things. He was simply
plying his trade, photographing the demonstration for inclusion in his blog
when he was arrested," he wrote.
LeBlanc, who writes about poverty
and politics on his website, was arrested and pinned to the ground by three
police officers outside a business conference last June. A police officer later
admitted to deleting a photo of himself from LeBlanc's camera.
LeBlanc maintained he did nothing
different from any other journalist covering the event, but was singled out by
Sgt. John Parks, the arresting officer.
Parks testified that he arrested
LeBlanc partly because he was "scruffy" looking and carrying an
unprofessional-looking digital camera. Parks also testified that LeBlanc
challenged police authority at the event, and resisted arrest.
However, CBC videotape of the
event, entered as evidence by the defence, contradicted police testimony that
LeBlanc refused a police order to leave the conference centre and resisted
arrest.
McCarroll said the
pictures proved beyond a reasonable doubt that LeBlanc did nothing wrong.
"There is such a discrepancy
between the evidence of Sgt. Parks and the CBC video, that I find it unsafe to
convict Mr. LeBlanc," he wrote. "I am not even satisfied beyond a
reasonable doubt that if Mr. LeBlanc was in fact ordered to leave by Sgt.
Parks, he heard or understood the order."
McCarroll also said the officers
had no right to seize LeBlanc's digital camera or delete his photo without a
search warrant.
The concerns raised by the Saint John Police arrest, and the
handling of a complaint about the Police conduct at the time of the arrest and
at trial, were detailed by Harold Doherty in a letter to the Solicitor General
and Minister of Public Safety, John W. Foran which is reproduced in Charles' October
2, 2008 blog entry:
1) The RCMP conducted investigation
found no evidence of perjury.
The finding of no evidence of
perjury, as opposed to insufficient evidence of perjury, with respect to Sgt.
Parks, as alleged in Mr.LeBlanc’s complaint, is difficult to accept in light of
the evidence produced at trial, the findings of the learned trial judge and the
information submitted with Mr. LeBlanc’s complaint.
2) The Findings of the Trial Judge
In Mr. LeBlanc’s trial on charges
of obstructing justice he was acquitted by His Honour Judge McCarroll in R.
v. LeBlanc, Citation #2006NBPC37:
Page 16
It is clear from the C.B.C. video
that contrary to what Sergeant Parks testified to, Mr. LeBlanc was off to his
right some distance, not behind him. It’s likewise clear when reviewing the
tape in slow motion, that contrary to what Sergeant Parks testified to, the
defendant was not moving towards him just prior to his arrest. It is
inconceivable to me after viewing the tape, how Sergeant Parks could have
perceived the defendant, down on one knee, some distance from the protestors,
taking pictures, as a threat.
Page 17
It is clear from the video that
immediately upon turning the previously arrested Mr. Webber over to another
officer, Sergeant Parks for some reason, went directly towards the defendant,
grabbed him in the upper chest area,pushed him towards the far wall, and pinned
him there. In his testimony, Sergeant Parks said that he did not touch the
defendant until they were at the far wall. Sergeant Parks justified his arrest of the
defendant, not only on the basis that the defendant was behind him and that he posed
a threat with his camera, and that he was moving towards him, but also because
he refused a direct order from Sergeant Parks to leave the area. After viewing the video many times at normal
speed and slow speed, the conversation the officer said he had with Mr. LeBlanc
prior to his arrest was not in any way apparent to me.
Pages 17-18
Sergeant Parks said the defendant
was resisting somewhat and had to be taken to the floor in order to apply handcuffs,
yet the photo marked Exhibit “D” clearly shows Sergeant Parks and Mr. LeBlanc
strolling arm and arm from one side of the foyer to the other with no sign
whatsoever of resistance from the defendant.
Page 20
The conflicting evidence in this
case presents me with difficulties in arriving at a conclusion the accused is guilty
as charged. There is such a discrepancy between the evidence of Sergeant Parks
and the CBC video, that I find it unsafe to convict Mr. LeBlanc. I am not even
satisfied beyond a reasonable doubt that if Mr. LeBlanc was in fact ordered to
leave by Sergeant Parks, he heard or understood the order. I have pointed out
other serious inconsistencies between the evidence of Sergeant Parks and the
video earlier on in this judgment. Considering the evidence in it’s totality
with all of the inconsistencies,I am not satisfied beyond a reasonable doubt
that Charles LeBlanc willfully obstructed Sergeant Parks in the execution of
his duty.
His Honour Judge McCarroll is an
experienced trial judge and a former Crown prosecutor. His choice of language
in describing the several inconsistencies between the CBC video and Sgt. Parks
is unusually strong in not accepting the testimony of an experienced police
officer. As the decision makes clear, Judge McCarroll studied the evidence
carefully, viewing the CBC video recording several times. The inconsistencies
he found in Sgt. Parks evidence were not peripheral facts in the case. They
were central to the charge of whether Mr. LeBlanc committed obstruction of
justice and to Judge McCarroll’s decision to acquit.
3) Sgt. Parks’ Deletion of Photos
on Mr LeBlanc’s Camera
Sgt. Parks stated in his file notes
and in testimony that he saw and deleted only one picture from Mr. LeBlanc’s
camera. Constable Tanya Lawlor testified that Mr.LeBlanc had been on the scene
throughout the day taking pictures. Mr. LeBlanc did not testify in court but
informed investigating RCMP Officer Delaney-Smith that he had taken many
pictures that day and that they had all been deleted. He also informed her that
the Canon camera he uses does not permit you to unknowingly delete all photos.
The CBC video shows Mr LeBlanc
taking pictures of the demonstration in the opposite direction from Sgt Parks
before he is arrested. The last picture on the camera could not have been of
Sgt Parks and he would have had to do a search of the camera in order to see a
picture of himself. All photos were deleted and that can not be done
accidentally with this type of camera.
You either have to delete all
pictures one at a time and therefore intentionally or you have to press delete
all in which case the camera asks you to confirm that you want to delete all
and then you have to perform another 2 steps by moving the cursor over to the
right and pressing OK. A bright green line then shows you the progression of
the deletion process. Again, you can not unknowingly delete “all” on this Canon
camera model. This information was presented to the first investigating officer
Delaney-Smith.
4) A Second Officer Took Over the
Complaint File
The RCMP investigation was
initially conducted by RCMP Corporal Delaney-Smith. She spoke with me in
addition to interviewing Mr. LeBlanc. I understood from my discussion that her
report would be done in December. In the new year there was no news and at some
point I was informed that the file was being handled by Staff Sgt. Gary
Belliveau.
It is understood that there may be
more than one officer involved in a file for any number of innocuous reasons.
In the circumstances of this case though, with an experienced trial judge
pointing out, in strong language, several clear inconsistencies between Sgt.
Parks testimony and the CBC video evidence, and an investigation conclusion of
NO evidence of perjury Mr. LeBlanc is suspicious that the RCMP may not have
liked the first investigating officer’s conclusions and then changed them. I
share Mr. LeBlanc’s suspicion.
On that day in Saint John, Charles gained in stature and credibility
in the eyes of the public. KHJ radio host Randy McKeen had this to say:
Many of you know the name Charles
Leblanc. For years he was a frequent letter writer to provincial newspapers and
caller to radio and television talk shows. Several years ago he pitched a tent
on the grounds of the legislature to protest what he felt was the
over-prescription of Ritalin for children with A-D-H-D.
He’s also gained some notoriety by
being banned from the legislature and for operating a blog that takes shots at
politicians, bureaucrats, the Irvings and Rogers Television. Leblanc is the
first to tell you he can be a pain in the butt and many politicians and most of
the mainstream media clearly see him that way. Two years ago, Leblanc was
arrested while covering a demonstration in Saint John for his blog. He was
roughed up during the arrest and the pictures he had taken of the demonstration
were deleted from his digital camera.
Leblanc was charged with
obstruction of justice. He was denied legal aid and only got legal
representation because Fredericton lawyer Harold Doherty agreed to take his
case for free. The cards were clearly stacked against Leblanc. Despite that, he
was acquitted and as the facts became known, it became apparent there was an
obstruction of justice, but it wasn’t Charles Leblanc doing the obstructing.
He should never have been charged.
In fact, he should never have been arrested and the evidence of that is as
plain as day. The presiding judge certainly saw that. In handing down his
decision, Justice William McCarroll noted that much of Saint John Police
Sergeant John Parks’ testimony was inconsistent with the video evidence. The
judge’s language was strong and left no doubt he did not believe the officer’s
sworn testimony.
I mean anyone who knows Charles
Leblanc knows that Parks had to be lying when he said he deleted only one
picture from his camera. When Leblanc is out and about getting stuff for his
blog, he takes one picture about every ten seconds. There’s no doubt there was
more than one picture deleted.
Despite all this, an R-C-M-P
investigation – which had a suspicious change of investigating officers midway
through – concluded there was no evidence of perjury. It didn’t say there was
insufficient evidence. It said there was no evidence. That, quite frankly, is
ludicrous and should make everyone very leery of our justice system. In the
vast majority of criminal cases, defendants are convicted based in large part
on the sworn testimony of police officers. I don’t doubt that in the vast
majority of cases, police tell the truth. This is a case where the evidence suggests
a police officer did not and that should not be allowed to go unchallenged,
regardless of whether the person is charged is a pain in the butt.
The enduring effect of that day in Saint John is reflected in
this comment on Charles’
blog post of June 27, 2011, a very bad day for Charles:
You certainly should be upset, not
for getting a ticket in front of others but for just getting a ticket period.
Too bad you did not have your blow horn with you, you could have told the
public around the scenes how our tax money is being spent chasing cyclist like
you and it could happen to them. The blow horn could have also helped you
transmit your message in oiseau's face and he would not have gotten so close to
your personal space.
Most of us here in NB support you.
Writing from Shediac, NB a fan
since seing the abuse you received from those evil, corrupt police tugs in
Saint John. Could not believe a police officers from NB could do that to an
innocent by stander and not get fired. Just unbelievable!!! Mayor and
counsellors should be embarresed. You should blog the names of police involved
- but maybe that might get you a bullet instead of a ticket? Who knows after
what we witnessed on CBC 5 years ago to the torture you undured.
A fan forever
Many questions remain from this disconcerting episode. Charles’ acquittal was no redress for the manifest
injustice done to him. Who was out to get
Charles at Atlantica? How and why did the
justice system so obviously fail him?
No comments:
Post a Comment