(Canadian Press) - A longtime Mountie has been charged with assault in an apparent case of road rage in B.C.’s Okanagan Valley.
Cpl. Andre Turcotte, a 15-year member of the force, is accused of assault causing bodily harm as the result of an incident in Summerland last November when he was off duty.
The Mounties say Turcotte was driving his personal vehicle on Highway 97 along with a red compact car when both vehicles pulled over and Turcotte approached the red car.
A male passenger in the car said Turcotte identified himself as a police officer and produced a police badge before an altercation occurred and the passenger was assaulted.
When police arrived, the woman driving the red car was given a 24 hour roadside suspension before officers tracked down Turcotte based on a physical description and a licence plate number.
Turcotte’s duty status is under review and the RCMP are conducting an internal investigation of the case.
13 responses so far ↓
1 Royal Mounted // Apr 23, 2008 at 16:26
Has this officer with a BAD TEMPER been accused previously of assaults or other violent behaviour on or off the job? If yes, should he be investigated? Human nature being what it is, makes this kind of violent behavior in middleage, not something new.
2 Justbecause // Apr 23, 2008 at 23:19
Lets try to remember , everybody has an entitlement to their day in Court . Many Members are charged , however after trial proceeding are found not guilty . That is the foundation of the judicial system , right or wrong . I do agree that law enforcement Officers should be held to a higher standard than most , however do have the same rights under the Charter in Canada.
3 babyblu // Apr 24, 2008 at 11:47
I do not read that the officer jumped on the people, who were intoxicated. Who’s to say that they didn’t attack the officer and he had to take them down until help arrived? We obviously do not have the full story to condemn the officer here, folks. Go easy until you have the facts.
4 Royal Mounted // Apr 26, 2008 at 09:49
Being found NOT guilty does not mean you didn’t do it. That IS A FACT!
5 babyblu // Apr 26, 2008 at 13:56
So, he was found not guilty? Where did you read that?
6 Royal Mounted // Apr 27, 2008 at 09:23
AS a general rule, an acquittal in Court at anytime for anything does not PROVE that the incident did not happen or the accussed was not responsible. Please try to read the item before you jump in to defend this person. There are many legal rules that can end a trial having nothing to do with the facts of the case. Anuone who has ever been in a real Court room knows that.
7 Justbecause // Apr 27, 2008 at 14:11
Royal Mounted …why then do we have a judicial system that allows people to have a trial that determines that fact ! Lets add a third option that says not guilty but maybe he did it . I think you may have watched a little to much O.J Simpson !!
Get real …… give the member his day in court just as we would with any other citizen of Canada before invoking a public berating on him !!!!!!.
8 GetReal // Apr 27, 2008 at 16:09
Nolo contendere is the option of which you speak. It is part of the American legal system.
everybody gets to read between the lines and cast their won thoughts to fill the void of real facts which are rarely reported in full or impartially for both sides.
Crackerjack reporting triumphs again. There should be such vigor for fair and balanced reporting as there is for jumping all over any authority that is deemed to have erred.
9 Royal Mounted // Apr 28, 2008 at 00:35
Yes the USA does have the NO contest plea which basically means you are pleading guilty; In your mind you are not guilty but onl you can not bring a viable defence to the charge.
You can be acquitted but mens rea applies in the real world even though it may be dismissed by the Courts.
10 Royal Mounted // Apr 28, 2008 at 01:09
I was NOT making any claim or accusation about the accused, I was just simply stating a fact vis-a-vis Court verdicts and their
If the acussed is acquitted there should still be a review of the incident as I have stated: a Court verdict does not mean the accused is in fact innocent.
11 GetReal // Apr 28, 2008 at 15:47
The article does state there is a review underway. Agreed the fact of an acquittal is certainly not always proof the accused is innocent. The only thing that is determined is the legality of the evidence gathered, the method, the conduct of the police, and only lastly is there enough to support a conviction.
12 Royal Mounted // Apr 28, 2008 at 18:23
And that was my initial point.
13 J-rebel // Apr 30, 2008 at 06:02
royal mounted you need to take a good long look at what little info is provided in the press release. If you are so vocal about this maybe you can share the real story about what happened? If you know it? Don’t be so quick to stomp on the people who go to work daily to baby-sit and protect you and your disfunctional followers!
You must log in to post a comment.