Neal Hall, Vancouver, B.C. (Vancouver Sun) – A Burnaby RCMP officer on the force for two years has been charged with theft for allegedly stealing change from a desk at a community policing office.
Const. Derrick Holdenried, 37, was suspended from duty with pay last December when the allegations of theft were reported by another officer, who had noticed loose change going missing from a desk drawer.
Senior officers ordered an immediate investigation and Holdenried was formally charged.
Police have alleged that the coins stolen over a period of time amounted to about $70.
“It’s not the amount that matters — it’s the breach of trust issue,” RCMP Sgt. Rob Vermeulen said Wednesday.
He said officers are in a position of trust, so any breaches of trust are taken very seriously.
Holdenried is scheduled to make his first court appearance in Vancouver Provincial Court at 2 p.m. on Feb. 14. He also faces an internal disciplinary investigation.
Valid points on the hiring JohnnyG. In the 50’s the applicants had to comply with the following:
Single male
British subject or Canadian citizen
18 to 30 years old
Grade 8 minimum, grade 10 preferred
5′ 8″ minimum
Maximum weight 185 if 6″ 1″ or under 200 if over that.
Chest expansion of 70″ with max to min 2″
Physically fit with good muscular development
Exemplary character
Speak, read and write either English or French,
Starting salary 203 per month
No marriage for 5 years
1970 did not change much, 5665 per year, grade 11, grade 12 preferred, 19 to 29 years, valid drivers license, no marriage for 2 years.
Today:
Be a Canadian citizen;
Be of good character;
Be proficient in English or French;
Have a Canadian secondary school (high school) diploma or equivalent;
Possess a valid, unrestricted Canadian driver’s license;
Be at least 19 years of age at the time of engagement (may apply at 18 years of age);
Meet medical/health standards;
Be willing to relocate anywhere in Canada; and
Be physically fit.
On the surface, it appears not to have changed too much, except for the subtleties….
There is definitely something to the fact that recruits were by and large young people who could be easily molded to what was needed/expected. You could not be a member of the RCMP in those days if your brother/family member was a member of the Hells Angels or involved in any criminal activity, not so today. You could not join if you were female, not so today. You could not continue employment with the RCMP with a criminal conviction, not so today. You could not join if you ever smoked marijuana, not so today. You could not join as a landed immigrant, not so today. You could not join if you were 52 years old. Not so today. You could not join if you had tattoos, not so today. You could not join if you stuttered, not so today. The list goes on.
Our precious civil rights and the politically correct nazis have ensured the police departments in this country cannot hire as they choose. All the bleating about it will not change what society has brought about. We can only expect our departments to work diligently with what they have in the light of government meddling and legislation pandering to squeaking wheels. The challenge of ridding ones department of undesirables is ongoing.
I am reminded of the two recruits stationed in a small town in central Alberta who were discovered several weeks out of training in 1971 smoking a joint in the single men’s quarters in the detachment. Lockers cleared, employment terminated, into court, guilty pleas and on the road within 24 hours. With all the legislation and labor law in place today, this would not happen in 2011, much as some would pine for it.
Well-liked comment. Do you Like or Dislike:
19 
12
All good points!
I do think there were some area’s in regards to the force in the past where people were kept out on the grounds of “image” over ability to do the job. For example, someone who joined the force in the mid 1960’s told me someone was kept out for having “flat feet”. When I responded with a “really”? He went on to say that “some people have been kept out of the force for some pretty foolish reasons.”
With that said, the only image the force is currently interested in maintaining is a politically correct one. Was there unfairness in the past? No doubt about it! But, things have gone too far the other way.
The liberal minded always pat themselves on the back and get a warm fuzzy feeling, whenever they hire or promote some politically correct sympathy card who otherwise couldn’t make it on their own merit. The conservative minded, lament for the more deserving who didn’t get the fair chance because of the above listed circumstance.
Well-liked comment. Do you Like or Dislike:
13 
1
Right D, members as anyone else shouldn’t steal. But, part of the job of police is to be proactive and PREVENT crime. How can this officer be trusted to go out and rattle door knobs and protect the property of others, if he can’t even get a grip on his loose change? If theft wasn’t an issue in a police station, than everyone would have a key to the exhibit room- not just supervisors.
Also, if the theft has occurred “numerous times”, than you would think that someone would have the common sense to not continually leave up to $70 lying around for a potential clepto to steal.
If you had $5 ripped off out of a drawer at work, would you put more and more in to get stolen until you hit the magic $70 mark? I know I wouldn’t. That money would have been better used lighting a fire in a wood stove. Atleast the person would have got some use out of it.
One of the old school lessons of the military is that if your stuff goes missing because it is unsecured- It’s your fault!
Hot debate. What do you think?
14 
10
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Poorly-rated comment. Do you Like or Dislike:
10 
31
Whenever there has been a ring of thefts going around Depot, the admin always blames the custodial staff. It’s not them, never thought it was….
Hot debate. What do you think?
13 
7
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Poorly-rated comment. Do you Like or Dislike:
16 
41
I believe the RCMP had better members pre 1973 for 4 big reasons.
1. Before then the RCMP was a smaller outfit, and didn’t have the municipal contracts they had today. You had more people to choose from because there were less positions. You didn’t have the “BOOM and BUST” hiring cycles where hardly anyone gets in for 20 years, then they hire anyone for 10. Hiring was more consistent and steady.
2. The force had a more rigid system of honor/discipline and was run more independently from the government. Nobody told the force who they had to hire. Either you fit the mold or you didn’t.
3. The pay was terrible then, so nobody did the job for a paycheck. With that said, there were lots of abuses such as no overtime, and being forced to do things such as hang around the office and answer the phones on your day off. But, the guys who did this had their heart in it, and those who didn’t, didn’t last long.
4. I’ll give Calvin Lawrence credit for this one. Back in those days the model of police was Dragnet or Adam 12. The image of the police was polite and true professionals. Nowday’s the bulletproof vest and the badge hanging around the neck like Ice T on Law and Order is what people imagine. Officers in the old days used their mouth to stay out of trouble, not get them into it, as they had no taser to get them out of every problem.
Not here to say things were perfect anytime or the right people always got in. But, this is why I think public perception of the RCMP is not what it was and some long time retired members I know saw this coming before the media campaign against the force took off.
Well-liked comment. Do you Like or Dislike:
15 
8
“Can’t you see a defence attorney take this guy apart should he every testify in any case for the rest of his career as we all know he will keep his job as that is a given in the RCMP.”
On January 16, 2009, the Supreme Court of Canada released judgment in R. v. McNeil, 2009 SCC 3, a case that looks at the Crown’s duty to disclose police records relating to findings of misconduct by police officers involved in the investigation against the accused as part of the first party disclosure package.
Sorry D. It wasn’t the RCMP, but predicated by an Ontario’s municipal officers conduct and subsequent proceedings. You can read it here, try not to skip anything especially para 42:
http://scc.lexum.umontreal.ca/en/2009/2009scc3/2009scc3.html
Basically, every police officer in Canada has to disclose to the Crown internal / criminal proceedings adjudicated against them. (it is actually done by the internal investigation units) This has been in effect for quite a while now. It should give you some measure of comfort.
I guess JohnnyG some persons are not with the lock everything up crowd. It will be interesting to see if this loose change drawer was for coffee, buns, etc., and if the “accused” had contributed to it in the past.
Well_Informed says: “Just one day earlier the award winning Global BC news anchor charged with numerous counts of child sexual assaults did not gain this widespread attention. ”
Very true, and I noted of the major newspapers in the country, the Vancouver Sun from BC had the story of the Toronto PD member killed on B4. Certainly an indication of their stance with respect to issues isn’t it? If it bleeds it leads, as long as its not a police officer.
http://bc.rcmp.ca/ViewPage.action?siteNodeId=404&languageId=1&contentId=8875
Hot debate. What do you think?
16 
12
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Poorly-rated comment. Do you Like or Dislike:
16 
40
This is certainly a very unfortunate circumstance for the RCMP however, it is good to see that they are accountable for their actions and are not sweeping this under the rug. The RCMP is arguably raising the bar when it comes to accountability and this incident is proof of that. Within hours of the RCMP voluntarily releasing this information to the media it was covered in national news across Canada, the United States, and featured in newspapers as far away as Australia. Just one day earlier the award winning Global BC news anchor charged with numerous counts of child sexual assaults did not gain this widespread attention.
By no means would I defend this cops actions but let’s face it, in our society we love to see a cop screw up and the general assumption made by the media and public in general is that all cops are guilty. Police are held to a higher standard and rightfully so given the fact that he voluntarily worked to put himself in a position of trust and in doing so accepts greater responsibility than the general public.
It is a shame that the media loves these kinds of stories while ignoring many other positive contributions police make to our society. Who can blame them? Thats what people want to see and they are in this business to make a living so they give people what they want to see. The question I ask is why don’t we want see any positive things covered in the media? Why are people not interested when a police officer saves a life? Why are people not interested when a police officer takes dangerous criminals off the street? These are questions that are rarely asked but easily answered… people just don’t care. Police save lives every single day in this country but it is extremely rare for anyone to ever hear about it because people simply don’t find it as interesting. We all love to see a Mountie screw up. What we all seem to forget is that these cops are human beings too and make the same mistakes as millions of other people in this country. Shouldn’t a police officer know better? Yes, of course, but shouldn’t we all?
Well-liked comment. Do you Like or Dislike:
19 
4
I agree that this is a trust issue.
But, what does this say about the intelligence of someone who leaves loose change around unsecured. If it weren’t for people like this, thievery wouldn’t be as bad the world.
Hot debate. What do you think?
12 
10
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Poorly-rated comment. Do you Like or Dislike:
13 
37