MP Response to fire - Split from First infantry regular force female LCol.

[Journeyman]

Your point being what? 

You specifically made a point of saying "regardless how anyone thinks the MP acted."

I stated only that the judge believed the "peace officer behaved in a manner that I find to be absolutely unacceptable for a representative of the law."

It was posted in response to your statement.  No discussion required.

 

[RCDtpr]

You specifically made a point of saying "regardless how anyone thinks the MP acted."

I stated only that the judge believed the "peace officer behaved in a manner that I find to be absolutely unacceptable for a representative of the law."

It was posted in response to your statement.  No discussion required.

So you're only going to use half of the sentence I said and out of context at that?  Ok then...guess discussion is over.

 

[Eye In The Sky]

From reading that case law the issue doesn't seem to be her walking into the CP; the issue was her telling everyone else not to co-operate.....which is obstruction.

But, reading the decision, that didn't actually happen.  Quote directly from the decision:

The acrimonious exchanges continued between them, and the peace officer pushed Major Wellwood with his hands at chest level to prevent her from telling her subordinates not to assist him in his investigation, or at least so the police officer thought.

Reading thru the decision, I noted the following:

Major Ellwood told the peace officer that this was not a Military Police matter and that the member in question was not at CP8.

So, the MP was aware at that time, from a Senior Officer in the CAF, that the member he was ordered to locate and protect [two members of the military police, posted to the Beauce area for the duration of the exercise in a traditional role of police and peace officer, being ordered to find the individual and take appropriate measures to ensure his safety] wasn't at the location he was at.

So, why the need for this then?

the peace officer pushed Major Wellwood with his hands at chest level

According to the facts laid out in the decision, the answer is this.

to prevent her from telling her subordinates not to assist him in his investigation, or at least so the police officer thought.

I find that pretty weak.  The MP knew the person he was looking for was not inside the CP.  I am no law professor, but I think there should have been 2 people charged out of this one, the 2nd one being the MP who crossed the line IMO.  I know, I'm no judge but I wouldn't have batted an eye if I found out the MP was charged with STRIKING OR OFFERING VIOLENCE TO A SUPERIOR OFFICER.  Reading 'to notes', there is no exclusion for MP NCMs WRT this charge, as they are military police, and also subj to the CSD.

From the decision:

In a military context, it matters little that those with peace officer powers are not subordinates, except by their rank, as the case may be, of Forces members, who are the subjects of their day-to-day duties. They are still Forces members and are themselves subject to the duties and obligations incumbent on Canadian Forces members with regard to respect towards both subordinates in rank and superior officers.

However, this cannot be used as an excuse by Major Wellwood, an experienced officer, for her behaviour towards the peace officer. There can be no doubt that she reacted hastily and disproportionately. She showed a lack of judgment and self-control. I agree with the prosecution that her role required her to take a co-operative approach rather than to contribute to a confrontation that did nothing to resolve the situation. She had a duty to act with respect and professionalism. That is not what she did. As a superior officer and commanding officer, she too had a duty to respect the peace officers who were carrying out their duties and to not act in a way that undermined the legitimate respect that the persons mandated by law to protect persons and property in our civilian and military society deserve.

This could have as easily read:

However, this cannot be used as an excuse by Major Wellwood the MP , an experienced officer a CF NCM and peace officer, for her his behaviour towards the peace officer SNr Officer. There can be no doubt that she reacted hastily and disproportionately. She showed a lack of judgment and self-control. I agree with the prosecution defence that her his role required her him to take a co-operative approach rather than to contribute to a confrontation that did nothing to resolve the situation. She He had a duty to act with respect and professionalism. That is not what she he did. As a superior peace officer and commanding officer Non-commissioned member, she too had a duty to respect the peace superior officers who were carrying out their duties and to not act in a way that undermined the legitimate respect that the persons CAF members mandated by law the NDA to protect persons and property in our civilian and military society deserve under their lawful command.

I think both the MP and the Maj would have reacted differently if either or both of them would have taken 3 seconds to step back and breathe deep.  I don't see anything the Major did as warranting the MP to push her;  he'd already been informed the person he was looking for wasn't at CP8.

I think the "I thought she was going to order her subordinates to not help me so I pushed her" explanation was about as lame and desperate as it appears.  An 'after the fact, damn I screwed up there' grab at something to justify pushing a female Senior Officer to the ground in front of witnesses.  Pretty lame IMO.  :

An opinion from the cheap seats.  :2c:

 

[Pusser]

To be fair, I've met doorknobs in every trade and occupation.  And some mornings, reflecting on things I've done, I've seen a pretty glaring one in the mirror...

Agreed. I can say the same thing.

 

[Pusser]

I think the "I thought she was going to order her subordinates to not help me so I pushed her" explanation was about as lame and desperate as it appears.  An 'after the fact, damn I screwed up there' grab at something to justify pushing a female Senior Officer to the ground in front of witnesses.  Pretty lame IMO.  :

I think her gender is irrelevant.  Pushing anyone under those circumstances is inappropriate.  I wonder though whether he would have been inclined to get physical with a 6'2", 250lb male senior officer?

I'm also not convinced that this MP necessarily got off scot-free.  I would like to think that were some repercussions.

 

[Eye In The Sky]

I think, in Canadian society, males pushing females is more scrutinized than male-male, or even female/male.  Ever watch a guy smoke another guy outside a bar in a fight?  How does the crowd react?

Also, there is a 'male dominance' aspect that could be taken into consideration.  As noted, there are far fewer female Snr Officers in the service than there are male.  How do we account for that? 

And, of course, your own example of the male 6'2' 250lb Major.

 

[RCDtpr]

But, reading the decision, that didn't actually happen.  Quote directly from the decision:

Reading thru the decision, I noted the following:

So, the MP was aware at that time, from a Senior Officer in the CAF, that the member he was ordered to locate and protect [two members of the military police, posted to the Beauce area for the duration of the exercise in a traditional role of police and peace officer, being ordered to find the individual and take appropriate measures to ensure his safety] wasn't at the location he was at.

So, why the need for this then?

According to the facts laid out in the decision, the answer is this.

I find that pretty weak.  The MP knew the person he was looking for was not inside the CP.  I am no law professor, but I think there should have been 2 people charged out of this one, the 2nd one being the MP who crossed the line IMO.  I know, I'm no judge but I wouldn't have batted an eye if I found out the MP was charged with STRIKING OR OFFERING VIOLENCE TO A SUPERIOR OFFICER.  Reading 'to notes', there is no exclusion for MP NCMs WRT this charge, as they are military police, and also subj to the CSD.

From the decision:

This could have as easily read:

I think both the MP and the Maj would have reacted differently if either or both of them would have taken 3 seconds to step back and breathe deep.  I don't see anything the Major did as warranting the MP to push her;  he'd already been informed the person he was looking for wasn't at CP8.

I think the "I thought she was going to order her subordinates to not help me so I pushed her" explanation was about as lame and desperate as it appears.  An 'after the fact, damn I screwed up there' grab at something to justify pushing a female Senior Officer to the ground in front of witnesses.  Pretty lame IMO.  :

An opinion from the cheap seats.  :2c:

Here's my issue with this...the MP was tasked to investigate (stemming from I I believe a 911 call).....at this point it is not up to a "senior officer in the CAF" who does or does not have investigational jurisdiction...that MP had a legal obligation to investigate.  For the major to walk out and basically say "yeah I got this now leave" wouldn't fly with the police in any other circumstance....why is she special?  An infantry officer has no more knowledge of the law than anyone else....being a major doesn't make her qualified to investigate crimes etc.

You also have to ask yourself....would she have reacted this way if it was a civilian police officer who attended?  While obviously nobody can say for certain....id be willing to bet the answer is no.  This strikes me as a case of a major who decided that by virtue of her epaulette, she could tell the police what to do while he was acting in the capacity of a police officer because he's a corporal......well guess what.....the judge ruled that isn't the case.

Being a police officer is a hard job....it certainly wouldn't be any easier when supposed professional senior officers behave deplorably and think they can obstruct the police whenever they want because they are a higher rank.

 

[Scoobie Newbie]

Here's my issue with this...the MP was tasked to investigate (stemming from I I believe a 911 call).....at this point it is not up to a "senior officer in the CAF" who does or does not has investigational jurisdiction...that MP had a legal obligation to investigate.  For the major to walk out and basically say "yeah I got this now leave" wouldn't fly with the police in any other circumstance....why is she special?  An infantry officer has no more knowledge of the law than anyone else....being a major doesn't make her qualified to investigate crimes etc.

You also have to ask yourself....would she have reacted this way if it was a civilian police officer who attended?  While obviously nobody can say for certain....id be willing to bet the answer is no.  This strikes me as a case of a major who decided that by virtue of her epaulette, she could tell the police what to do while he was acting in the capacity of a police officer because he's a corporal......well guess that.....the judge ruled that isn't the case.

Being a police officer is a hard job....it certainly wouldn't be any easier when supposed professional senior officers behave deplorably and think they can obstruct the police whenever they want because they are a higher rank.

Isn't this why there used to be RPs and MPs embedded in the unit?

 

[Strike]

Here's my issue with this...the MP was tasked to investigate (stemming from I I believe a 911 call).....at this point it is not up to a "senior officer in the CAF" who does or does not have investigational jurisdiction...that MP had a legal obligation to investigate.  For the major to walk out and basically say "yeah I got this now leave" wouldn't fly with the police in any other circumstance....why is she special?  An infantry officer has no more knowledge of the law than anyone else....being a major doesn't make her qualified to investigate crimes etc.

You also have to ask yourself....would she have reacted this way if it was a civilian police officer who attended?  While obviously nobody can say for certain....id be willing to bet the answer is no.  This strikes me as a case of a major who decided that by virtue of her epaulette, she could tell the police what to do while he was acting in the capacity of a police officer because he's a corporal......well guess what.....the judge ruled that isn't the case.

Being a police officer is a hard job....it certainly wouldn't be any easier when supposed professional senior officers behave deplorably and think they can obstruct the police whenever they want because they are a higher rank.

Your error in your methodology is that you're treating this like a situation that a non-military cop would handle with a civilian.  But, because we're talking MPs and CAF members you always have to keep that into consideration.

The MP's first error was in entering the restricted area without following proper protocols warranted by the Ex - Reach the check point, allow the guards to radio in, then enter.  Instead they used lights and entered without any explanation.  As members of the CAF they are also still required to play by CAF rules.

The second error is in failing to recognize that the Maj was responsible for CP8 and everyone and everything inside of it.  As a member of the CAF, AND without REASONABLE belief that the member in question was in CP8, the MP had no reason to enter the area if the OC told him that the person they were searching for was not in there.  Heck, she's the OC AND told him the member didn't even belong to them so the guy they were searching for had no reason to be there to begin with.

Again, being an MP for the CAF, this is where that finnickiness comes into play where he needs to weigh his duties as a peace officer with his duties as a CAF member and he failed to do so.  The Sr officer was in a position of authority for the CP, there was no alcohol involved and she was carrying out her duties.  For all we know, the crowd in CP8 could have been in a very crucial part of the Ex and to have the MPs enter could have disrupted the whole thing.  Add to that that the MPs on the Ex already had a history of acting somewhat recklessly without regard to the Ex and the people participating, as stated in the decision.

There was no investigation warranted.  He was tasked to find a certain member.  Period.  No investigating required until AFTER the member is found anyway.

 

[Oldgateboatdriver]

I tend to agree with Strike on that one: This was NOT a police investigation, it was a search for a soldier in order to protect him from himself. Once the senior person present informed him that the person he sought was not in that building, he had no business trying to enter it. The obvious next question for him would have been to inquire with the major whether she knew where the person he sought could be or how he could find said person. That's it.

BTW, is it just me or is this whole thing cockeyed? Here, I am going to ask police officers (civilian ones) to chime in.

It seems to me that if a civilian 9-1-1 centre got a call from someone claiming that their spouse  expressed suicidal thoughts, they would not dispatch a squad car, but an ambulance/paramedics (sure, if the person is not at the residence, the police may send a car to get the "missing" person's details and issue a BOLO, but that would not  be a police "investigation"). It would be treated for what it is: a medical matter (we just had Bell Canada Let's talk day on mental illnesses). When did it become a police matter to protect people with mental illness from themselves?

Here, would  not the proper course of action for the M.P. getting a 9-1-1 call have been to inform base hospital and then contact the member's unit to advise them of the situation , then up to the unit to locate its member and get him/her to the medical services?

 

[Jarnhamar]

The MP's first error was in entering the restricted area without following proper protocols warranted by the Ex - Reach the check point, allow the guards to radio in, then enter.  Instead they used lights and entered without any explanation.  As members of the CAF they are also still required to play by CAF rules.

Great post Strike.  I don't envy the position MPs are in. I've heard some stories from an MP friend of officers being pulled over for traffic violations and demanding the MP salute them before speaking to them and making a big scene about it. Or SNCOs and WOs playing the do you know who I am game? (telling someone you're the RSM of a unit when the MP pulling you over is good friends with that RSM is a bad career move apparently).

It does sound like the MP in this story made some bad decisions. It's 100% not posturing but I can think of some officers at my work who, if an MP shoved them, would have any troop within arms reach piling on the MP.  It's absolutely wrong of the troops to do and they'd suffer for it big time but it is what it is.

I think where MPs run into issues is when they expect attitude from their calls so in turn show up with an "I'm the ****ing police, you got that, buds?" attitude.



edited to fix formatting

 

[Bruce Monkhouse]

When did it become a police matter to protect people with mental illness from themselves?

Since modern policing began.........and even more prevalent nowadays.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

Since modern policing began.........and even more prevalent nowadays.

Some jurisdictions have officers dedicated to respond to mental health calls. They are partnered with a MH social worker.

 

[Oldgateboatdriver]

Additional question here:

Let's say that our friendly MP at issue here actually found "his man" and that the said man told him to "F*** O**, I am not going anywhere with you - I'm on an ex.". What then? Could the MP arrest him? On what charge? Having expressed suicidal thoughts to your wife? That is not  criminal or disciplinary infraction. What is the MP to do then?

I am sorry, but to me this whole thing, not just the specific events that led to the charge against the major, are a big military police coc*-up based on the organization's (the MP) self-importance delusion.

And Jarnhamar, that delusion I mention covers exactly the type of situation you describe: A MP making a traffic stop not saluting an officer. The MP is still a NCM in the CAF and proper forms of respect and address have not been set aside just because the MP is making a traffic stop, regardless of the fact that the "branch" has elected to buy themselves fancy uniforms to try and look like "real" cops instead of members of the military. If they hadn't done that and remained in proper military uniforms, they may be reminded daily when they dress that they are part of the military and that there are chains of command out there they would do well to keep apprised of ongoings (in fact, they may remember that not so long ago, pre-charter topsy-turvy turning of service discipline on its head, they actually answered and worked for the chain of command)/RANT OFF.

 

[mariomike]

It seems to me that if a civilian 9-1-1 centre got a call from someone claiming that their spouse  expressed suicidal thoughts, <snip>

I don't know how they do it out of town.

How should 911 handle potential suicide victims?
http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/2009/09/16/how_should_911_handle_potential_suicide_victims.html

"I go to my door and it's two ambulance guys with a gurney ... asking, `Can we come in?'"

 

[Humphrey Bogart]

All parties involved made mistakes.  IMO, the whole thing sounds completely ridiculous. 

The Colonel should have just let the MP wander around aimlessly conducting his "investigation" while the MP should have remembered he is in the military. 

Everyone involved acted like children.

 

[Bruce Monkhouse]

Additional question here:

Let's say that our friendly MP at issue here actually found "his man" and that the said man told him to "F*** O**, I am not going anywhere with you - I'm on an ex.". What then? Could the MP arrest him? On what charge? Having expressed suicidal thoughts to your wife? That is not  criminal or disciplinary infraction. What is the MP to do then?

Can't help you there.......they are long arrested before I come into contact with them.

 

[Haggis]

I've heard some stories from an MP friend of officers being pulled over for traffic violations and demanding the MP salute them before speaking to them and making a big scene about it.

About a year ago, I was pulled over while driving my own car on base (there was a lookout on a similar vehicle from an incident in town).  Once the MP completed his customary tactical approach to the car and recognized me as an officer, he saluted.  We concluded our business, he saluted again and we parted ways.  Knowing a little bit about law enforcement TTPs I would not have expected or demanded a salute.

Officers and NCMs should not confuse thier rank with the authority of the MP.  However, MP should realize that they can get farther with honey than with salt.  Saluting an offcer, when the situation permits, costs the MP nothing and can pave the way for coooperation.

My personal rule of thumb, whether it's dealing with police/MP, game wardens, Border Services Officers, is "don't p*ss off anyone who can ruin your day".

 

[Strike]

Additional question here:

Let's say that our friendly MP at issue here actually found "his man" and that the said man told him to "F*** O**, I am not going anywhere with you - I'm on an ex.". What then? Could the MP arrest him? On what charge? Having expressed suicidal thoughts to your wife? That is not  criminal or disciplinary infraction. What is the MP to do then?

Fair point, especially if said spouse made up the whole occurance, which has been known to happen.  In which case it then really does become a CoC issue so that they can support the member with whatever personal issues the spouse is dealing with.  The MP's responsibility then I would think would be to stand back and let his own CoC handle the false call accordingly maybe?

(I like threads like this, becase the branch really is stuck in two worlds and it's interesting to see how the overlap could be dealt with.  Thanks to the admins for not pending to the pressure of an individual who though we were bashing on the trade)

 

[RCDtpr]

Your error in your methodology is that you're treating this like a situation that a non-military cop would handle with a civilian.  But, because we're talking MPs and CAF members you always have to keep that into consideration.

The MP's first error was in entering the restricted area without following proper protocols warranted by the Ex - Reach the check point, allow the guards to radio in, then enter.  Instead they used lights and entered without any explanation.  As members of the CAF they are also still required to play by CAF rules.

The second error is in failing to recognize that the Maj was responsible for CP8 and everyone and everything inside of it.  As a member of the CAF, AND without REASONABLE belief that the member in question was in CP8, the MP had no reason to enter the area if the OC told him that the person they were searching for was not in there.  Heck, she's the OC AND told him the member didn't even belong to them so the guy they were searching for had no reason to be there to begin with.

Again, being an MP for the CAF, this is where that finnickiness comes into play where he needs to weigh his duties as a peace officer with his duties as a CAF member and he failed to do so.  The Sr officer was in a position of authority for the CP, there was no alcohol involved and she was carrying out her duties.  For all we know, the crowd in CP8 could have been in a very crucial part of the Ex and to have the MPs enter could have disrupted the whole thing.  Add to that that the MPs on the Ex already had a history of acting somewhat recklessly without regard to the Ex and the people participating, as stated in the decision.

There was no investigation warranted.  He was tasked to find a certain member.  Period.  No investigating required until AFTER the member is found anyway.

With all due respect, this post shows you don't have a clue what you're talking about.  Firstly, the judge was very clear when he stated the MP was acting as a peace officer, therefore regardless of her rank, she was dealing with a peace officer conducting his duties.

Secondly, just because she is an officer, does not make her word anymore credible than anyone else's.  For all the MP knew, the guy was missing because his upper leadership was bullying him and he took off, she knew this and did not want police involved.  (I am in no way saying this is the case, however I have been to many calls where things at face value are not as they seem; to not investigate all avenues is negligence by a police officer.).

Let's change the scenario a bit.....police officer is called to Microsoft to investigate something and middle management comes down and says "you can't investigate now leave."  Every single one of you would laugh and say that manager was an idiot.  This is no different, a major is middle management in the company that is the military and she (regardless of what her ego may think) cannot tell a police officer how he will conduct his investigation or where he will go.  This was an ex, not an operation, and it carries no weight to any police officer if something is disrupted for 10 minutes.

The fact that people here are defending her actions and saying she had the right to tell him to leave etc is mind boggling.  This attitude seems much too prevalent in the upper ranks of the CAF and it's sickening at the lack of professionalism.  I have watched first hand a LCol attempt to push past a Cpl MP by using his rank.  When a civvie cop went over and used these words exactly "get lost or goto jail you're choice" the LCol replied he was sorry and left the area.  To treat MPs (who are the police whether you like it or not) like garbage because they are a lower rank is deplorable.

You guys can argue here all you want, there is no argument.  She obstructed him and had no right to act how she did.  How do I know?  She was found guilty of obstruction.  End of story.