No charges are being recommended against a Manitoba RCMP officer following an investigation into impaired driving and Highway Traffic Act offences last summer.
The Independent Investigation Unit (IIU) says it was made aware of the situation and began investigating June 12, 2019.
RCMP told the watchdog one of its officers had received a text message from an off-duty member around 3:00 a.m. on June 9, 2019, asking if they could bring him an Approved Screening Device (ASD) to determine if he was “good to drive.”
The off-duty officer had been at a fair in Niverville and was preparing to drive home.
Instead, the member who received the text reported the incident to Steinbach RCMP who then intercepted the subject officer’s vehicle near Highway 206 and Highway 52.
The report says the Mounties observed the vehicle travelling “at a high rate of speed,” and after conducting a traffic stop, noticed the driver was slurring his words and seemed nervous.
Based on the signs of impairment, the officer used a roadside ASD which returned a “warning.”
The officer later told investigators she was unaware she could lay an impaired driving charge based on the screening, and had she known she “would have done so 100 percent.”
- Gas station clerk stabbed several times during violent attack at Ultramar in Montreal
- Canada’s most wanted list: Toronto suspect in fatal shooting at No. 1
- Man acquitted in Tina Fontaine murder found dead, says her aunt
- Canadians should expect politicians to support right to bail, Virani’s office says
The subject officer was given a 72-hour licence suspension and a ride home from a friend. He then called his supervisor to inform them of what happened.
The supervisor told investigators the officer didn’t sound impaired over the phone, but he expressed concern about his employment, given he was still on probation.
In an email response to questions from Global News, Manitoba RCMP say a code of conduct investigation is ongoing, and couldn’t say whether the officer was or will be reprimanded.
The IIU investigation shows at least four other officers had contact with the subject member prior to the traffic stop, either at the fair in Niverville or outside of a grocery store later that night.
All but one described seeing signs of impairment — that officer told investigators the subject officer slurred his speech during normal conversation – or had otherwise seen him drinking.
The IIU says an officer can’t be compelled to provide notes or a statement regarding their own investigation, and in this case the subject officer did neither.
The watchdog forwarded the file to Manitoba Prosecution Service (MPS) for a review and opinion on whether any charges would be authorized. The MPS decided the case didn’t meet the prosecution-charging standard as there was no reasonable likelihood of a conviction.
Comments