Mere Suspicion Does Not Provide Reasonable Grounds For Arrest

Published date13 August 2020
Subject MatterGovernment, Public Sector, Criminal Law, Constitutional & Administrative Law, Crime
Law FirmAlexander Holburn Beaudin + Lang LLP
AuthorMr David McKnight and Naomi Krueger

Background

On May 22, 2020, the BC Supreme Court issued its reasons in Joseph v. Meir, 2020 BCSC 778 with additional reasons on July 6, 2020. The case concerned a plaintiff who sought damages against an RCMP officer and the Attorney General of Canada in relation to events that took place at Marks Works Warehouse in Smithers, BC. She alleged she was injured when the officer improperly detained and arrested her believing she stole a scarf from the store. She claimed damages for false arrest, false imprisonment, assault and battery and violation of her Charter rights.

At trial, the officer and the Attorney General maintained the plaintiff was properly detained and that the arrest was lawful and reasonable. They argued s. 25 of the Criminal Code protected them from liability. To come within the protection of s 25, they were required to establish that the officer was authorized by law to arrest the plaintiff, that he had reasonable grounds for the arrest, and that no more force was used than necessary during the detention and arrest.

The plaintiff's evidence was that, at 61 years of age, she required a walker for mobility. She had a fused ankle and various medical issues, including chronic pain. On the day of the arrest she saw someone she recognized in the store. The two women shopped in the same area of the store while speaking to each other for a while. The store manager thought they were together and, when the manager saw the younger woman put a pink scarf in her bag, she confronted both women. The younger woman pulled the scarf out of the bag and threw it to the ground before fleeing the store. The plaintiff told the manager she had a scarf around her neck that she was buying.

A staff member called the police and the officer was dispatched to the store. He was told there were two suspects, a younger woman who had run from the store and an older woman who was still in the store. He attended the store without pursuing the woman who had fled. When he arrived, the plaintiff was in line to pay at the cash register. The manager met the officer and provided him with information about the allegations.

The officer waited until the plaintiff had made her purchases. As she left the store, he asked to speak to her but she refused to stop or provide information to him. She told the officer she had done nothing wrong and did not need to speak to him. The officer radioed his partner who attended the store to provide backup.

In the meantime, the officer attempted to place the plaintiff in handcuffs. She resisted, holding her hands clasped to her front and turning away from him as he tried to take her arms back for cuffing. He took her to the ground and she continued to resist while she was on the ground. Eventually he stopped the struggle without handcuffing her and helped her to her feet. At approximately the same time, his partner arrived on scene.

The officer searched the plaintiff's belongings and found no stolen merchandise. She was released without charges and immediately alleged she had sustained injuries in the struggle.

The officer's evidence was that he initially told the plaintiff she was being detained on...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT