As you have probably figured out reading our blog, we have sources of inside information in the Government and some police forces in BC. It’s not nefarious. Often the information we get merely confirms what we already know. Many people on the inside find the IRP scheme deeply flawed and as a consequence they tell us what’s going on. So as we’ve mentioned before, we would love to have told you the rumours, for example about the Government eliminating traffic court, but there is some information that we must hold back.
What we have learned from police officers is that many have concerns with the reliability of ASDs, there has been an increase in hit and run accidents and high speed chases directly flowing from the introduction of the IRP scheme and subtle pressure is being put on police officers in BC to customize their evidence so as to support the issuing of an IRP.
We concluded long ago that the Solicitor General’s office and the police are in cahoots to advocate for the IRP scheme, issue IRPs and ensure that they are upheld on review. The Government has applied subtle pressure wherever it can to forward this goal. This is a natural result of the fact that the Government is interested in the outcome.
For example, a number of officers reported to us that in their detachment their supervisors are in touch with the OSMV almost every day to talk about the IRP scheme. The chief of police in Victoria told us on the phone that he was reassured virtually every day by the OSMV that all IRPs are revoked if, for example, the grounds to make an ASD demand are insufficient.
Of course, either he is being lied to or he was not forthright with us. No “Fail” IRP was ever lifted for a Charter breach such as insufficient grounds for a demand. Not one. But we accept his word that he speaks to the OSMV regularly about the IRP scheme, among other things.
And other high-ranking officers told us the same thing — that they speak with the OSMV regularly about IRPs. More interesting, however, is what the rank and file officers told us.
We were approached by some officers who told us that, when an IRP is lifted, the OSMV sends that information to a supervisor at their detachment. In some detachments the supervisor then sends a bulk email out reporting what happened and why the IRP was lifted.
The officers who approached us about this said the ostensible reason is to ensure quality control. But they don’t believe the ostensible reason, because it is garbage. These officers told us the real reason is to try to humiliate them in order to pressure them to customize their evidence, i.e. fabricate if necessary, so that the IRP will be upheld on review.
This is the subtle pressure applied in the first stages, when the investigation takes place, to achieve the Government’s goal with the legislation. Knowing that they will never be cross-examined on their evidence, we imagine many officers simply follow the implied instructions because it is the safest way to protect yourself in the organization.
The officers who approached us with this information sought our help because they didn’t want to be part of a lie. That was not the reason that they became police officers. They are being pressured to lie by their superiors.
You can see why we believe that the right to a trial in court is essential to get at the truth. This is the type of collusion that would be revealed in cross-examination.
Officers are being pressured to customize their evidence to support the issuing of a driving prohibition. By omitting certain information, or changing the facts they can avoid humiliation at work, protect their status in the organization and win prizes.