'NO FISHING,' COPS TOLD

Police Say Ruling Won't Hogtie Crimefighting Efforts

OTTAWA -- The Supreme Court of Canada upheld a Winnipeg judge's ruling that
slaps a No Fishing sign over police trolling Canadian streets for suspects
and evidence. But a police organization spokesman said he doesn't believe
yesterday's ruling seriously hinders cops from catching crooks.

In the first such Charter of Rights ruling on an everyday police practice,
Canada's highest court guardedly agreed police may briefly detain
individuals for investigative purposes -- if they have reasonable
suspicions linked to a specific crime.

POCKETS

But police can't go on "fishing expeditions" in people's pockets for
evidence, said a majority of the seven-member bench.

The decision upholds a ruling by a trial judge in Winnipeg, who acquitted
Phillip Henry Mann of trafficking after police stopped him on the street
after a nearby break-and-enter.

"Individuals have a reasonable expectation of privacy in their pockets,"
Justice Frank Iacobucci wrote in a majority decision that divided the high
court 5-2.

"The search here went beyond what was required to mitigate concerns about
officer safety and reflects a serious breach of (Mann's) protection against
unreasonable search and seizure."

The ruling suggested Parliament might consider legislating a proper,
written balance between individual liberty and officer safety.

In the absence of such written guidelines, the court found that police are
entitled to do a pat-down search if they reasonably believe a detained
person presents a safety risk.

REASONABLE TARGET

The court agreed police were justified in stopping Mann as he walked on a
Winnipeg street near midnight on Dec. 23, 2000.

Mann fit the description of a robbery suspect and was only three blocks
from the crime scene, making him a reasonable target.

That didn't stop the justices, however, from taking a long, hard look at
what Iacobucci called "the unregulated use of investigative detentions in
policing, their uncertain legal status, and the potential for abuse
inherent in such low-visibility exercises of discretionary power."

A spokesman for the Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police, which
intervened in the case, said the ruling was a "little disappointing" but
doubted it would hurt police work.

"If you're going to go into someone's pocket during a search, you would
have to have a strongly articulated reason (such as officer safety)," said
Frank Ryder, a detective chief superintendent with the OPP.