When will they learn?
Already under the microscope due to a public perception problem and a rapidly decaying relationship with the media, you’d think the local police would find a way to stay out of the news for a while.
But no, there they were on Dec. 20, in the spotlight again for all the wrong reasons.
GuelphToday reporter Richard Vivian says an OPP officer grabbed his arm, detained him and seized his camera equipment while he was trying to cover a fatal collision in Guelph. The Canadian Association of Journalists has called the officer’s conduct “a physical assault” and Village Media, which runs GuelphToday, called it “a gross violation of press freedom and a flagrant abuse of power.”
Village Media has vowed to file complaints, and both the Coroner’s Office and the OPP have stated they will “review” the incident, though we’re not holding our breath for a meaningful outcome.
At the very least, you’d think the OPP officer in question would have learned his lesson, but clearly even that is too much to ask.
On Dec. 29, just nine days later, the same officer that seized Vivian’s equipment threatened to do the same to an Advertiser reporter at the scene of another fatal crash on Highway 6 south of Fergus.
As if no one had admonished the officer for his previous deplorable behaviour – and this wouldn’t be a surprise – he went on at length about a coroner’s right to seize the reporter’s equipment during a condescending eight-minute tirade that also included topics such as the Victim’s Bill of Rights, Canada Evidence Act and media morality.
Our reporter, of course, remained respectful throughout the diatribe, despite the BS being spun by the officer.
(Several people have questioned why a reporter would take photos of “a dead body.” We don’t. Normally, journalists at the scene of a crime, accident or other incident know very little about what has transpired to that point. We’re there to cover the news. We decide later [not the police] what to publish based on the outcome, respect for victims and a host of other factors.)
The OPP officer’s first mistake was (twice) trying to hide behind the Coroner’s Act, which does in fact state the Coroner can “seize anything” he/she “has reasonable grounds to believe is material to the purposes of the investigation.”
But how could a photo of an accident scene well after it occurred (in the case of the Dec. 29 crash, over five hours later) possibly form part of the investigation into the death?
It’s absurd.
Yet the “seize now, ask questions later” approach is subjectively applied, at least by this officer, thanks to the false belief no one will challenge the OPP or the Coroner on their misreading – deliberate or not – of this legislation.
We suspect the officer’s reprehensible treatment of Vivian, a professional that understands media rights, was tied to the fact Vivian had the audacity to stick up for himself. In fact, the officer’s own comments to our reporter on Dec. 29 suggest that may have been exactly what happened.
Though the officer falsely accused the Advertiser reporter of “blocking an active investigation” (as he did Vivian), he also told our reporter, “You are much easier to talk to than the last fella … not everyone is as pleasant to deal with as you.”
I guarantee you there is no section of the Coroner’s Act – or any other legislation for that matter – permitting the Coroner and police to grab or detain journalists and seize their equipment to teach them a lesson about pleasantness.
The other talking points spewed by the officer to our reporter are complete nonsense.
The Victim’s Bill of Rights has little to do with the media. It does however, have several sections governing the actions of police.
And the Canada Evidence Act? It applies largely to court proceedings, not accident scenes. Of particular note: at least one section of this act is dedicated to protecting journalists and their sources.
The only portion of the officer’s lecture that made any sense was his assertion that the OPP’s official statement on the Vivian incident “almost sounds inculpatory.”
“‘We’re aware that there’s a thing, we’re looking into it.’ Right,” the officer said, mimicking the OPP press release.
This behaviour is extremely unprofessional, but sadly, it’s not surprising.
As for the OPP officer’s speech about respect at accident scenes, the Advertiser’s reputation on that front is beyond reproach.
A lecture on morality is quite rich coming from an organization dealing with over 120 civilian oversight agency complaints and with a documented propensity for punching people in the face (or worse) during arrests.
Here’s hoping 2024 marks a year of change for the OPP.
