Assaulting Transit Staff Good Legal Sport?

Gone are the days of true investigative journalism. Today’s motto: simply write whatever piece of imbalanced, un-researched tripe you want, attach a catchy title – preferably one that is foreboding so as to capture the reader’s attention – click “save”, then “print” and publish. Research is too hard. Asking questions of anybody who might provide some perspective, insight or knowledge is too difficult. Journalism is now apparently about going to the complainant or lobby group and taking their word as gospel – no matter how obtuse it may be -- and unleashing it on an angry and frightened public.

The newest public lobbying by interest groups now comes from the Calgary Transit Authority campaigning for tough anti-violence laws to protect transit employees.

http://www.calgarysun.com/news/alberta/2009/07/16/10152661-sun.html

They are asking to be treated just like police, firefighters and emergency responders when it comes to attracting charges in the Criminal Code of Canada. Mike Mahar, President of the Amalgamated Transit Union 583 is lobbying for “stiffer” penalties.

Now, there is certainly no concerns protecting transit staff from violent attacks. The problem is this statement:

"They would fall immediately under the Criminal Code as opposed to a misdemeanour. Currently, if one of our members is assaulted, for the police to pursue charges we're always instructed that the employee needs to press charges and that wouldn't be the case if the code was changed."

Firstly, “assault” is always a Criminal Code offence. Any person who assaults another person is liable for prosecution pursuant to s.266 of the Criminal Code of Canada. Transit employees are no different. Additionally, through the common law, criminal justice has long recognized the vulnerability of certain persons engaged in certain types of work. The Criminal Code has a specific charge for assaulting a police officer. Even though there is no specific charge for assaulting a taxi driver, the common law recognizes higher sentences for those assaulted during the course of their employment. Transit drivers are in no different a position.

Interestingly, the Criminal Code does not have a specified offence for assaulting a firefighter or emergency medical staff. Like transit employees, the charge is under s. 266.

To suggest that assaults against transit staff do not fall “immediately” within the Criminal Code is wrong. It is true to say that the staff member needs to provide information to the police capable of supporting a charge for assault. Police are responsible for investigating and pursuing charges. There is no change to the Criminal Code that will confer this responsibility on law enforcement – for they already have it. Having said this, police may not lay charges because they can’t locate the offender or they do not have sufficient evidence to justify charging the offender. Keep in mind, those who threaten or assault transit drivers probably do so and immediately flee the bus or C-train. The police can’t just charge for the sake of charging. Not only must an offence be made out, but the alleged wrongdoer must be identified.

On this latter point, I agree that transit vehicles equipped with cameras (like Taxi cabs) is a good idea. It may deter this type of behavior and when it happens, it may supply police with an investigative tool to find and charge the perpetrator.

To say that those who assault transit staff are not susceptible to “automatic criminal charge” is to leave the impression that assaulting your bus driver is presently legal sport. That is not true. If the police can identify the assailant and the evidence supports the charge, I am sure they will lay it.

David G. Chow
Calgary Criminal Defence Lawyer

http://www.calgarydefence.com/