POLICE MUST PLAY BY THE RULES - ALL THE TIME

Officers Should Know About Getting Evidence Legally

The recent court ruling that let David Jacob Funk dodge 13 trafficking
and weapon-related charges was given a miss by most media hounds.

It's likely reporters figured the public had had its fill of suspects
successfully sidestepping the justice system due to botched
investigations by cops.

Funk's case was more of the same -- and not of huge public appeal,
either.

There are no stats on the rate and frequency of acquittals due to
violations of accuseds' legal rights by police.

And many may argue the failure rate of law-enforcement investigations
is miniscule when stacked against their huge, ever burgeoning caseload.

But Canadians should always be concerned when the tax dollars they
invest in police, the courts and the attorney-general's staff fail to
show a substantial return.

And that is Funk's case to a T.

He was driving in Maple Ridge when a Mountie fresh out of training got
a report of two suspects pulling a B&E.

The officer stopped Funk and found his licence and owner's
registration in order. But a black bag with a lunch bag on it in the
back seat piqued the cop's curiosity.

He wanted to see if it contained crowbars, razor blades, bolt cutters
or stolen jewelry because, according to the constable's evidence,
homeless people often use the same type of bag to transport stolen
goods.

When Funk stepped out of the car at his request, the officer noticed a
folded pocket knife clipped to his jeans as well as an outdoorsman
Gerber knife in a pouch hanging from his belt.

Funk was handcuffed and arrested for possession of a concealed
weapon.

A second constable, also a rookie, arrived to find her colleague
itching to unzip the bag, but they wondered if they had the right to
search the car since they didn't have a warrant.

Next on the scene was a corporal who was just as perplexed. The trio
called a sergeant at the Maple Ridge detachment, who told them to go
ahead.

Now, regardless of how you feel about the Charter of Rights and the
legal protection it provides citizens, it has been Canadian law for 26
years.

It has been interpreted on thousands of occasions by judges who have
detailed time and time again the procedures police must follow to
avoid stepping over the line.

What are they doing in Mountie boot camp if not memorizing every word
of these court directives?

These cases are their bible, the tools of their trade, essential
elements of our criminal-investigation process. If police don't
operate within the law, all their hard work is for naught.

To protect Canadians from random, police-state-like conduct, the law
says police who want to search and/or seize must first have
reasonable, probable grounds that a crime is being committed or is
about to be or that their safety or that of others is at risk.

After all, no one wants to live in a country where police rummage
willy-nilly through their stuff at their leisure.

But after 26 years of case law, many RCMP still haven't got it.

Yes, they did find drugs in the bag, evidence B.C. Supreme Court
Justice Linda Loo said officers obtained unlawfully, including the
knives which she said Funk was wearing the proper way.