A DARK DAY FOR POLICING

The Kenora Police Service has joined the list of police forces whose
members stand accused, that in enforcing the law, they broke the law.

The OPP has disbanded one of its elite units due to improprieties, a half
dozen members of Toronto's drug squad are facing charges relating to theft
and extortion, and Saskatoon, Saskatchewan police are under the gun for an
unofficial policy of leaving drunks to freeze - in at least one case to
death - on the outskirts of that city.

Now, in an damning indictment of the Kenora Police Service, Ontario
Superior Court Justice Peter Hambly says the three officers who made up the
force's criminal investigation branch three years ago are guilty of crimes
themselves.

Sergeant Tom Favreau, Sergeant Lloyd White and Const. Chris Ratchford lied
to other officers, their superiors, to Crown attorneys and on the witness
stand in the Justin Carambetsos case. They suppressed some evidence and
fabricated other evidence, said Hambly.

Hambly's Feb. 18 ruling staying any further proceeding against Carambetsos
in the Oct. 2000 death of Max Kakegamic pulled no punches.

" I cannot accept anything that these three officers say unless it is
corroborated by reliable, independent evidence," wrote Justice Hambly at
one point in his 55-page ruling.

Hambly went much further than throwing out the case against Carambetsos
because of numerous breaches of his Charter rights. He said Carambetsos may
be innocent, just a guy in the wrong place at the wrong time.

Other Suspect

In his ruling, Hambly laid out a credible case against a second suspect, a
suspect with opportunity and a history of violence. A relative of Sgt.
Favreau who headed the investigation. This suspect - the adopted son of one
of Favreau's cousins - was never investigated by the officers, said Hambly.
Even though a witness placed him at the scene, no action was taken until
several days later. And after the alibi he gave police that he was out of
town was quickly proven false, they took no further action.

The judge's allegations are serious, and must be taken seriously.

It's not that police officers can't do wrong, even break the law. Some
people may naively believe those charged with protecting us would never
break the law, but they do. We don't like it, may even try to deny it, but
it happens.

The fact the officers cited in Hambly's ruling have a legal benefit of the
doubt and presumption of innocence until a formal finding by a police
disciplinary board or a court of law, is almost moot.

The decision by the Crown not to appeal the ruling, and the fact they told
the judge in arguing motions on admissibility of evidence they would not be
calling the officers as witnesses due to credibility problems adds a heavy
weight to Hambly's indictment. Hambly made it quite clear the officers are
guilty of serious offences. The question is: What's being done?

Like other police forces which have been down this road, the Kenora Police
Service has received a devastating knock against the credibility of its
officers and its ability to serve as a public guardian.

It is going to have to deal with it and it will be a tough fight to regain
the public's trust. There will be plenty of Monday morning quarterbacking
and calls of serious action.

But there are a few things to keep in mind as the rhetoric heats up.

First, three officers is not an entire force. Hambly made a point in his
ruling and in comments in court sessions that there was no fault with the
actions of others directly involved in the case.

Still, questions have to be asked about who knew what, when they knew it,
and what was done.

This case has been ongoing for three and half years. The public has been
kept largely in the dark through publication bans and a refusal by police
to talk about it. Many warning signs

There were indications right from the beginning that there were problems.
It is hard to believe that others on the force, including senior officers,
didn't know something was amiss, yet no real action was apparent .

Thunder Bay Crown attorney Dan Mitchell raised serious questions about the
officers involved following the preliminary hearing in 2001. It resulted in
the re-assignment of Favreau from the investigation branch to patrol
supervision, but no disciplinary action. Subsequently, White was promoted
to take over the investigation branch.

Kenora's Superior Court judge, Erwin Stach, withdrew from the case in 2002
due in part to the fact the validity of warrants sworn before him by the
officers involved were becoming part of the case. That could have placed
him in the position of having to testify before himself.

The OPP took over investigation of the case in 2002. Mitchell himself was
taken off the case in 2003 and was on the witness list for the January trial.

Despite this, local police officials took no real action until two days
after Hambly's Feb. 18 ruling - moving Favreau and White to administrative
duties and calling in the OPP for a full, independent investigation of the
officers' actions and the judge's findings.

When that investigation is complete, and if criminal or police act charges
are laid, senior officers and Kenora police commission members will have to
explain why no internal action - a formal investigation, dismissals,
demotions - were taken earlier.

There's is also the issue righting wrongs police action created.

Carambetsos' guilt or innocence is no longer an issue. The stay means no
further action can be taken against him, ever. Hambly's ruling opens the
door to a civil suit by Carambetsos.

Will the city settle quickly, righting a clear wrong, or drag its feet?.

The question has to be asked: What about Danny Favreau?

Hambly clearly considered him a viable suspect, a more likely suspect than
Carambetsos.

The Kenora Police, which initially had the case, and the OPP, which took
over in 2002, will have to answer why he wasn't investigated.

Crown attorneys will have to explain why they continued to pursue the case
against Carambetsos in light of mounting evidence they may have had the
wrong suspect.

Finally, people in Kenora served by the force will want to know if this was
a singular incident, or a pattern of poor policing.

Have poor practices, even malfeasance let the guilty go free in other cases
involving these officers? Or worse yet, sent the innocent to jail?