Terrace, B.C. (Terrace Standard) An assault trial against a local police officer stationed at the RCMP detachment ended almost as soon as it began when the officer pleaded guilty May 2.
After Terrace RCMP Const. Robert Hull pleaded guilty, Judge Agnes Krantz adjourned court to fix a date for sentencing.
Hull was charged with assault for punching an intoxicated woman when she was in the police cell block here.
The woman was in custody after being arrested outside a local night club Oct. 17, 2010.
Reports indicated that Hull was trying to calm the intoxicated woman when she allegedly kicked him in the groin and he punched her in the face.
An RCMP Internal Code of Conduct Investigation and a criminal investigation were launched and the findings were forwarded to prosecutors who laid the assault charge against Hull Feb. 23, 2011, said police in a press release at that time.
Staff Sgt. Robert Pritchett, acting Terrace RCMP detachment commander, said last week Hull was initially on administrative duty when the police code of conduct investigation was ongoing but went back to active duty when the investigation was completed in February 2011.
“Constable Hull was found to be in breach of the RCMP Act and did receive discipline for that,” said Pritchett, adding he believed it was a breach for disgraceful conduct.
“Just to point out: we are accountable as police officers for our actions,” said Pritchett.
“Where there is allegations of misconduct, we fully investigate them and if there is evidence to suggest a criminal act has been made, we fully co-operate with Crown Counsel and forward all materials to them for assessment.”
Pritchett couldn’t say specifically how Hull was disciplined.
The range includes a verbal or written reprimand to loss of pay and, in extreme situations, dismissal.
A disciplinary measure takes into account the officer’s history, performance record, if there’s been past discipline and the discipline someone else in the similar situations received.
The incident remains in the officer’s permanent personnel file, Pritchett said.
Hull will be sentenced in court at a later date.
[Source]
Calvin: “If you are saying that your martial arts training causes you to react to attempt kick in the groin by punching the person”
Is that what I said Calvin? No it is not. Are you asking what would happen? If that was your obtuse reference just ask the question.
Calvin: “To avoid giving a subject a groin target the police officer may blade his body or be able to see the persons feet when conducting an interview.”
I believe the article says he was trying to calm her down. Your interview stance is not all protective in any dynamic and fluid situation, it is only a means to minimize target area and give time to react. As we are not privy to the exact unfolding circumstances, we do not know if both were in motion at the time do we? You can “what if” it to death.
You may be more instructive if you relate the times you successfully navigated such a situation after being struck in the groin by a hysterical woman.
I saw a definite trend during my time in the Force. Many more members assaulted during their duties over the years, and growing reluctance of Crown to lay any assault charges on the ones responsible. I was told by one Crown lawyer that it was expected during arrests and his office would not consider it. With out the court system backing its police, do we really wonder why there are such problems growing?
Neither one us know what happen here.
I can only ask questions which I did in my comments.
To avoid giving a subject a groin target the police officer may blade his body or be able to see the persons feet when conducting an interview.
As a practitioner of Kyokushin Karate for over 26 years, I can tell you what automatically happens if I am kicked in the groin.
DT
If you are saying that your martial arts training causes you to react to attempt kick in the groin by punching the person; then I feel sorry for the ninety year old Alzheimer’s patient who trys to kick you.
Calvin Lawrence
Sorry Calvin, I should have opined something far more sinister. Your dismissal of the fact he wished to plead guilty, as some people actually do because they are, is very instructive with respect to your attitude toward officers involved in a fracas.
“Why was the police officer charged if there was not a reasonable expectation of a conviction?”
It seems patently obvious to me he was, or why else would there be a guilty plea in court? If this is one of your pointed questions, what is the point?
In the Province of BC Calvin, the charges are laid after investigative reports are forwarded to Crown Counsel for review and charge approval, a process not employed in most of the country. The other obstacle after “reasonable likelihood of conviction” is “in the public interest” before BC Crown proceeds with laying the charges.
“Was there a fear of the full story coming out in court; hence a guilty plea?”
This pointed question continues with your theme of negativity.
“Why was the women not charged with assault of the police officer if she tried to kick him in the groin?”
I read the article as “…she allegedly kicked him in the groin…” Or are you suggesting an attempted assault charge?
An attempt to commit an offence is distinct from the crime alleged to be attempted. Although s.265(1) describes an attempt or threatened application of force by act or gesture in circumstances where there is present ability to effect that purpose as an assault as opposed to an attempted assault, the nature of the crime is nonetheless distinct from the actual application of force, which would be the predicate offence.
I was unaware that you were in full possession of the facts in this matter. Please enlighten me as to what happened that renders my comment well meaning but not even close. Perhaps even a bit of wisdom on why police officers seem to be fair game.
You have instructed in police defensive tactics for a few years, so by all means tell us what happened here. As a practitioner of Kyokushin Karate for over 26 years, I can tell you what automatically happens if I am kicked in the groin.
Perhaps the officer felt that although he was assaulted by being kicked in the groin, his most probable reaction of a punch was not appropriate and therefore admitted his “guilt” before a court of law.
DT
The above statement is a bit of reach.
I would have some pointed questions regarding this encounter.
Why was the police officer charged if there was not a reasonable expectation of a conviction?
Was there a fear of the full story coming out in court; hence a guilty plea?
I suspect, dare I say prognosticate, that you are inclined to feel that officers are supposed to get kicked in the groin, scratched, punched or generally roughed up because they get paid to? They are not, and unfortunately we do not know what befell the drunk woman who assaulted the officer, but there should be sanctions for assaulting officers.
DT
Why was the women not charged with assault of the police officer if she tried to kick him in the groin?
The use of force by police officers is not as clear as the public might think.
I instructed on Police Defencive Tactics in the RCMP and your comment in my opinion, while well meaning is not even close to what happened here.
Calvin Lawrence
“Very interesting, a guilty plea, must think it will be very lenient.” Interesting yet totally uninformed prognostication.
Perhaps the officer felt that although he was assaulted by being kicked in the groin, his most probable reaction of a punch was not appropriate and therefore admitted his “guilt” before a court of law. This court will provide the sentencing and if you are at all well read you would note that in many instances the court recognizes the onus of a higher standard and it is reflected in its adjudications.
I suspect, dare I say prognosticate, that you are inclined to feel that officers are supposed to get kicked in the groin, scratched, punched or generally roughed up because they get paid to? They are not, and unfortunately we do not know what befell the drunk woman who assaulted the officer, but there should be sanctions for assaulting officers.
Your vitriol should be directed at the courts if you do not think the sentences are at all commensurate with the infraction. The extra sanctions imposed via hearings in the RCMP (which the public are not subject to) are available if you care to do some research, and the hearings, if held, are open to the public. Refer to PART IV DISCIPLINE subsection 41 of the RCMP Act for the informal discipline and PART IV DISCIPLINE subsection 43 for formal discipline.
Very interesting, a guilty plea, must think it will be very lenient.
Be interesting to find out what the RCMP did about this and how he will be handled internally. The RCMP are still not getting it with all their favoritisms and secrecy that the public wants them to operate like a genuine honest police force and honor the oath they took.
When punching a woman in the face is not taken serious, what can we expect next?
When a woman or a child is assaulted on the street, at home, in the back of a police cruiser or in a cell it should NOT BE handled differently based on who you are and what you do but should result in justice being served. Bases on the damage he should be demoted or out right fired.
Justice for an official seems to be treated allot different by the justice system than justice for the general public…. why?