6 days ago
Charter rights violated in arrest connected with million-dollar drug bust: judge
Judges bench at the Edmonton Law Courts building, in Edmonton on June 28, 2019. THE CANADIAN PRESS/Jason Franson
A judge has found that a man had his rights breached after he was arrested in connection with a million-dollar drug bust in Edmonton four years ago.
The decision on a voir dire was made Monday by Justice Kent Teskey, who concluded that officers breached the accused's charter rights under sections eight and nine.
The accused cannot be named due to a publication ban.
According to the decision, investigators were surveilling a believed stash house in a downtown apartment building in Edmonton on Nov. 2, 2021.
A person who was the target of the investigation was seen leaving the building with a box and approached a Jeep driven by the accused.
While the surveillance team observed the rear tailgate of the Jeep open, they did not see anything being put into the Jeep and couldn't confirm whether the target was carrying the box as they passed the vehicle.
Hours later, the accused was stopped outside of Edmonton, arrested and immediately released after the vehicle was searched, said the decision.
'The police never intended to pursue the arrest of the accused and at all points were planning to release him,' said the decision. 'The only purpose of the arrest was to perform a warrantless search.'
A box containing meth was found during the search.
'This case engages questions of the limits on police power to conduct a search incident to arrest and whether police had sufficient grounds for the arrest,' said the decision. 'I find that police did not have reasonable and probable grounds to arrest the accused.
'In any event, the search was not authorized by law.'
The decision said that officers violated the accused's charter rights under section 9, which protects against arbitrary detention and arrest.
Teskey said officers did not have enough evidence to arrest the accused, adding that 'the highest inference to be drawn was one of adjacency to criminal conduct, rather than involvement in it.'
The day before the arrest, probes in the target's vehicle recorded a conversation with the accused. While the conversation indicated that the accused was familiar with drug slang, Teskey's analysis determined it was ambiguous about the accused's actual involvement in an illicit business relationship with the target.
'While it was reasonable for the police to have suspicions about the accused based on the discussion … it was a long way from reasonable and probable grounds,' said Teskey in the decision.
The judge also said there was concern about the lack of evidence supporting the accused dropping a box of meth in the Jeep.
'While I am aware that the standard for arrest is far less than a certainty, this was a brief interaction with significant gaps in continuity from which it would be impossible to conclude that the drugs had been placed in the vehicle,' wrote Teskey.
The accused's section 8 charter rights were also violated, ruled Teskey.
'Police never intended to continue the arrest of the accused,' wrote Teskey. 'At all points, the intention was to arrest the accused for the sole purpose of searching the vehicle and then to release him immediately.'
Because the accused was confronted by police hours after the believed drop of the box occurred, Teskey said any objective basis to believe the box would still be in the vehicle later was significantly imperiled.
'The evidence is clear that the police always intended to release the accused and that the arrest was simply a means to effect a warrantless search,' said Teskey. 'There was no evidence of officer or public safety concerns, exigent circumstances, or a need to procure evidence to be tendered at the trial of the accused.'
The accused is to appear in court for a preliminary hearing on July 24.
