Edmonton, Alberta (Canadian Press) – Alberta Justice Minister Ron Stevens apologized Wednesday to a former RCMP officer who was falsely accused of sexual assault.
John Hudak, 54, settled his lawsuit against the RCMP and Alberta Justice last week for an undisclosed amount of money. Part of the deal is that Hudak can’t say the amount.
He claimed his reputation was irrevocably damaged when he was wrongly accused of sexual assault while serving as a Mountie in Rocky Mountain House.
“We do apologize to Mr. Hudak and his family for the distress that they’ve suffered as a result of this,” Stevens said outside the legislature.
Stevens said also said the prosecutor should have dropped the charges against Hudak due to lack of evidence.
“I am saying that in this particular case we did make an error and that error was made by the prosecutor.”
Stevens said he will send a formal, signed apology letter to Hudak this week.
Hudak was acquitted at a trial in 2002 in Red Deer. At the time, the judge said he doubted a trial would have taken place at all if Hudak hadn’t been an RCMP officer.
Mildred Johnson, 65, of Rocky Mountain House made the false accusations in 2000. It was later revealed that she lied at Hudak’s preliminary hearing in 2001 and again during the trial.
Johnson was convicted later of perjury and uttering a forged document. She received a six-month conditional sentence and a year of probation. She was also named in Hudak’s lawsuit.
Hudak said he’s been waiting seven years for an apology from the province.
He agreed that the prosecutors were to blame, but also said RCMP investigators share that blame.
“They operated their investigation in a tunnel; they only wanted to come to one conclusion.”
Despite all he’s been through, Hudak said he bears no grudge towards the RCMP.
An RCMP spokesman said the service will apologize once the province has formally apologized.
Hudak, who now lives in Trail, B.C., is self-employed.
I assume that the clearing of the air mantra that is in use now will only be sacrificed , or at least examined more carefully due to decisions like this. Just how egregious this was is demonstrated in the public apology by the Justice Minister for the Province and unspecified damages. I would think that the taxpayer deserves better procedure. However, you cannot discount the hysteria that ensues in these issues and that some will probably still be espousing cover up or special treatment.
Your point with respect to the effects on the employee is well taken. The strain on the family and friends of the person would be under tremendous strain in the past 9 years, which as you note was not up for any consideration.
My question now is exactly what the repercussions are going to be for this shoddy affair, other than whipping the taxpayer for a few million.
Do you Like or Dislike the above comment:
1 
1
Whenever people hear about police getting off, it is usually because of a lack of evidence or some technicality of the courts. Police officers should be given the same right to a fair trial as anyone else.
But, nowdays I believe any case involving a police officer is far more likely to go to trial and be pursued to not show cover up.
With that said, I do believe the RCMP will do what ever it can to protect it’s image via reality control, wither it works out good or bad for the employee involved.
Do you Like or Dislike the above comment:
1 
1
“At the time, the judge said he doubted a trial would have taken place at all if Hudak hadn’t been an RCMP officer.”
Seems to sum it up pretty well.
Do you Like or Dislike the above comment:
3 
1
I retiired from the RCMP in 1997. I currently am before the courts in what appears to be a very similar set of circumstances as Mr. Hudaks. Congratulations on your victory!
It used to be our motto was, Maintain The Right, it now seems more appropriate to be We Always Get Our Man.
I feel that based on how their investiigation was done on me, that striking the words Royal and Mounted would better suite their title now
Do you Like or Dislike the above comment:
2 
1
This is good!
yes
Do you Like or Dislike the above comment:
1 
1