Police Spokespersons Have A Responsibility to Properly Inform Public Debate

As trusted public servants police certainly have a duty to communicate with the public through the media. But in so doing, they also have a responsibility to communicate honestly, professionally, with integrity and ought not to improperly use the media as a mechanism for conducting trials or hearings in the court of public opinion. With this in mind, it is necessary to comment on irresponsible and arguably contemptuous communications by Calgary Police Staff Sgt. Gord Eriksson.

http://www.calgarysun.com/news/alberta/2009/08/26/10614291-sun.html

In the above captioned article, Sgt. Eriksson is quoted as saying:

"I don't want it to appear as though we're picking on Mr. Tran".
"The fact he is constantly arrested and re-arrested is his doing, not ours."

Suffice it to say, this is a misleading statement. According to various adjudicator rulings, previous arrests of Mr. Tran were not "his doing".

In March 2009, Mr. Tran was released for allegedly breaching a bail condition requiring him to live with his mother:

http://calgary.ctv.ca/servlet/an/local/CTVNews/20090327/CGY_Tran_Release_090327/20090327/?hub=CalgaryHome

According to the Immigration Review Board (IRB), the fact that Tran's mother was required by necessity to move to a different location was not his fault. In the words of the IRB adjudicator, Geoff Rempell:

"Your mother was put in a difficult position because Child Protective Services was not willing to allow your sister to remain in the same residence as you were living. In my view, your mother's decision should not impact you".

In November 2008 Tran was breached on allegations that he was out past his curfew.

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/calgary/story/2008/11/14/tran-tessler-custody-release.html

In this case police alleged they saw Mr. Tran out of his residence after curfew, but after hearing evidence from a person who testified it was him and not Tran, and after considering the police officer did not observe the prominent scar on the forehead of the person alleged to be Tran, IRB adjudicator Marc Tessler concluded it was a case of mistaken identity.

Therefore, Sgt. Eriksson was wrong to suggest the arrests were Mr. Tran's doing.

All of this information relating to Mr. Tran's previous IRB hearings was readily available and probably known by Sgt. Eriksson before he made the rather block-headed comment to the media on August 24th, 2009. Given Mr. Tran has twice been exonerated of police allegations, one might actually think there is information to support the proposition that the police are indeed picking on him.

I sometimes wonder why spokespersons for the police (such as Sgt. Eriksson) fail to take a more professional approach to addressing the media. For example, why not say, "Mr. Tran has been arrested for breaching his release conditions. We need to find out why this happened". After all, practically speaking, isn't it quite possible that Mr. Tran has a reasonable explanation? I mean, ordinary people, going about their everyday affairs miss work, school and appointments, and not all of them do so because they are lazy or without reasonable excuse. Maybe Mr. Tran was in a car accident? Maybe the electricity to his home went out and his alarm clock did not ring? Maybe he became violently ill? Maybe he thought the meeting was on Tuesday, not Monday? With this in mind, it is important to remember that breaching bail conditions is a mens rea offence. That is to say, it requires intentionality.

Now I am not saying Mr. Tran was not in breach. I really don't know whether he was or not. What I am saying is that citizens need to be more objective assessing information presented by the media. Additionally, citizens need to hold public officials (such as Sgt. Eriksson ) accountable for improperly conveying information informing public debate. Staff Sgt. Eriksson is more than an opinionated blogger voicing his thoughts on websites such as this. He is a public servant, whose very status in society carries considerable weight in the mind of ordinary citizens. As such, his responsibility demands more thoughtful comments than those delivered in this case.

David G. Chow
Calgary Criminal Lawyer

www.calgarydefence.com