Trial date set in civil suit naming RCMP, solicitor general and Minister of Public safety

A civil suit filed against 2 RCMP officers, the Minister for Public Safety and the solicitor general, will be moving ahead to trial in January 2012.

9 days have been scheduled for this trial, that stems back to an incident that took place in Surrey in January of 2007, where two RCMP allegedly assaulted Dwayne Washington while attempting to arrest his brother with an unendorsed family maintenance order. According to the court documents filed in defence by the ministry, the RCMP believed they had correctly identified the male named in their unendorsed warrant and proceeded to arrest Washington forcefully. He remained subdued and in cuffs until another RCMP constable arrived and determined the arresting officers had the wrong man and Washington was released. He went on to seek medical treatment and was found to have  a concussion as a result of the force used in the incident.

This Global news clip from 2008, details the allegations and injuries of the plaintiff, Dwayne Washington, whom RCMP wrongfully identified as his brother Cal.

RCMP did initiate a lengthy internal investigation and no charges were approved against the arresting officers, Constable Khan, and Constable Clemett, who did not have a Feeney warrant in their possession, only an unendorsed warrant.

You can read the court documents below:

Statement of claim of the victim : washingtonstatementofclaim

Statement of defence, minister of public safety, solicitor general: ministrystatementofdefence

Surrey RCMP have been in the news increasingly as of late, with the revelations that the RCMP officer named in the botched ectasy case, was also one of the officers charged in the Surrey Six case. The force has the second highest number of improper use of force complaints of any RCMP detachment in BC – 21 complaints in 2010.

25 thoughts on “Trial date set in civil suit naming RCMP, solicitor general and Minister of Public safety

  1. Donna

    The RCMP’s image is in tatters all across Canada. BC leads the pack for corrupt police.

    I’m afraid Dwayne Washington, is going to waste a lot of money. There is nothing in BC that isn’t corrupt, right from the top of the food chain, clear down to the bottom. The police have got away with, far worse crimes than wrongful arrest. Politicians have never had to pay for their crimes either. BC is a very, very sick province because, of the BC Liberals. Full of evil, corruption, thieving, lies, broken promises, dirty tactics and cheating to win. In BC, justice is for those who can afford it, or, it depends on who you are.


  2. Randy

    Hate to go there,but did the fact the man is of a dark complexion have anything to do with the confusion? The RCMP and ministers defence statement is a joke. So the officers did nothing wrong and anyone can come to your house and you have to do what they say? Is this is the law? Thank you for posting this or maybe we would have never heard more. Nice to know the Officers to watch out for.


  3. Laila

    Kim- These are public documents available to anyone online for a fee, there are no redacted copies- however the address listed as Dwaynes is the lawyers address and the address of the incident I am told is no longer valid -the date of the incident goes back to 2007.


  4. Norman Farrell

    RCMP misidentify and forcefully arrest a citizen and, in court documents, the Ministry claims:
    – “In initial conversation at the door, the Plaintiff appeared nervous, defensive. . . ”
    – his (Plaintiff’s) “voice was firm, loud and terse”;
    – “. . . that at all material times the Plaintiff’s conduct was reprehensible, criminal, illegal, immoral, and disgraceful . . .”
    Gee, immoral and disgraceful to be nervous and defensive while being wrongly arrested?


  5. Rick

    You do not have to stand for their BS.
    Section 39 and 42 of the Criminal Code.

    39.(1) Defence with claim of right–Every one who is in peaceable possession of personal property under claim of right, and every one acting under his authority, is protected from criminal responsibility for defending that possession, even against a person entitled by law to possession of it, if he uses no more force than is necessary.

    How much force is necessary against a police person? I do not advocate violence but it would appear we are permitted to protect our property from all comers.

    42.(3) Trespasser provoking assault–Where a person
    (a) having peaceable possession of a dwelling-house or real property under a claim of right, or
    (b) acting under the authority of a person who has peaceable possession of a
    dwelling-house or real property under a claim of right,
    assaults any person who is lawfully entitled to possession of it and who is entering it peaceably by day to take possession of it, for the purpose of preventing him from entering, the assault shall be deemed to be provoked by the person who is entering.

    Again I do not advocate violence but it would appear we are permitted to protect our property from all comers.

    My suggestion if confronted by a Police Officer(policy enforcement officer) would be to request a Peace Officer to attend and authorize him to protect your self and your property and especially to not resist if they are intent on arresting you as the have lethal weapons and have no morality holding them back from using them against you. Comply peacefully under protest and duress with all rights reserved and sue their ass off later.


  6. Bob


    A couple of observations:

    1. The Statement of Claim is vague in some key areas whereas the Statement of Defence is much more detailed.
    2. The Constables had a valid warrant and therefore had not only the right but the duty to determine Washington’s identity. His lack of cooperation plus his previous actions in personating his brother, which the Constables were aware of, gave them plently of grounds to arrest him. When you resist and fight the police you’re likely going to get hurt. He was the author of his own misfortune.
    3. If Washington was on the porch, no Feeney warrant is required.
    4. ‘Rick’s’ post is a classic example of a little knowledge being a dangerous thing.
    5. Regarding the 21 complaints of excessive force in a year, Surrey is the largest Detachment in BC and given the violence they deal with on a daily basis I’m frankly amazed the number is
    that low.


    1. Laila

      1.- can’t speak to the detail of the statement of claim, but clearly the police made the wrong call in assuming Dwayne was the correct person named on the warrant, which was his brother Cal. They were wrong.

      2. You are incorrect in stating ” his previous actions impersonating his brother” – the statement of defence for the ministry clearly states that on the first warrant attempt, Cal tried to impersonate his brother Dwayne, than admitted who he was and was arrested without incident.

      When the new arresting officers showed up on the second ( unendorsed ) warrant, they assumed wrongfully that Dwayne was Ca- the person on the warrant – l, again trying to impersonate his brother Dwayne, when in fact it was actually Dwayne who was an innocent man.

      3. ” If ‘ he was on the porch to be determined. They did enter his home at some point during this incident.
      4. Can’t speak to Ricks knowledge or lack thereof.
      5. I believe there exists the great likelihood that that actual number is far higher, as many people would likely not file complaints over fear of taking on the RCMP, or like in this case, no one willing to hear the complain initially. I can see no indication in this case that the incident was investigated impartially by an outside force, something I have an issue with.


  7. Bob

    I stand corrected on who did the impersonation but the fact that is was done entitled the Constables to a greater degree of suspicion and wanting to confirm that Dwayne was who he said he was isn’t unreasonable. I’m not shilling for the RCMP here but I think that in this case an arguement of ‘good faith’ will succeed.

    While some people might be skeptical of the complaints process I still find that number amazingly low (BTW, I do agree with you that these complaints should be handled by a completely independent agency)


  8. Laila

    I would think, Bob, that the least they could have done was go back to their car,or back off, until the constable who did know what Cal looked like showed up, which he eventually did- after all this happened.


  9. Julie

    The police have tarnished their own record. Decades upon decades, of lieing and covering up for each other, has turned thousands and thousands of Canadians against them. BC police have especially earned their bad name. They are not alone. A corrupt judicial system has let the police off, no matter what crime they commit. BC is the most rotten, corrupt province in Canada.

    When politicians of BC commit crimes, they get a SPECIAL PROSECUTOR, and get away with their dastardly deeds. Campbell’s theft and sale of the BCR trial, is a total asinine farce. Tried in a corrupt court. Presided over by a corrupt judge, who fully ignored the fact of the brain dead witness. Would we get away with being brain dead, in a courtroom? I very much doubt it. We would be in contempt of the court and fined. In fact, if a politician is totally corrupt in Canada, they are rewarded by a cushy job, such as a High Commissioner. Who said crime doesn’t pay. It sure in the hell does in Canada.


  10. Norman Farrell

    Julie makes an important point. In BC, as in most North American jurisdictions, there is a long history of special treatment for public servants, people who should be held to a higher standard. We see this happening in the vital cases that result in death or extravagant fraud but also in small cases like the young dog left in a police SUV while the dogmaster went fishing.

    I wrote about it at Northern Insights, asking, Has the RCMP ever admitted to mistake?


  11. Rick

    Yes Bob people having a little knowledge is a dangerous thing to the establishment and their policy enforcers. Probably a good reason why the actual truth of the sale, sorry, lease of BCRail, run of the river, BC Hydro, smart meters, HST, Water Act and the list is endless it seems does not get reported by the establishment’s lackey press. All the more reason for us to be as knowledgeable as possible as to our rights and to where the authority is actually derived. People seem to have for whatever reason let themselves be ruled and sold out by a group of people who have no mandate in the actual percentage of the population to sell or give away the commons. Government’s power is derived from the people it is time the Government did it’s job which is to run the Corporation British Columbia in favour of us the people who own Corporation British Columbia not for other Corporate souls but for us the alive souls.


  12. Sweet Bea

    Rick says we have a right to defend ourselves and/or our property. In theory, yes, maybe in some circumstances, but in reality — NO, not at all, especially in British Columbia. Here’s why.

    In BC, the Mental Health Act trumps all other laws re a person’s rights and freedoms, their very life and being. Until a few years ago, the BC Mental Health Act used to state that a person could be apprehended, detained and treated against their will “if they were a danger to themselves or others”, a law virtually identical to similar laws in all legal jurisdictions in most western countries. No more, not in BC.

    A few years ago the BC government made a small but very sweeping and powerful amendment to the MHA: that any person can also be apprehended, detained and treated against their will (paraphrasing, but only lightly) if the person giving the order (police, doctor, …) “believes that the person’s mental or physical health may deteriorate”. No proof or substantiation is required at that time or at any point thereafter… ever. If someone said they “believed” you might be coming down with the flu, you can be forcibly arrested, detained (committed), and held in a facility indefinitely.

    This is true. You can look it up. So, if anyone has a grudge against you, or wants to have you committed so that they can make off with your assets, this is the way to go. Good luck trying to escape, no one will be able to help you. This isn’t a rare occurrence, but most stories don’t get into the media.

    Think I’m kidding, or misinformed? This is happening in other provinces, ones that don’t have such a gestapo-like law as BC does, a person can very easily be incarcerated. Here’s a recent story from Macleans, one that illustrates “how easy” it is to have someone incarcerated, and to make off with their assets (this is in Ontario where they don’t have such a draconian law as we do here in BC).

    The Macleans story is also troubling in a different way. The article concludes by saying that the way people can protect themselves from having a family member incarcerate you under a false claim of mental illness and steal your assets is to sign over your power of attorney to…. lawyers or accountants!!

    Now that’s just asking for bigger trouble. In the U.S. the courts often appoint lawyers and accountants to manage the estates of people who’ve had their rights removed, and there’s a growing scandal about fraud committed by these “professional guardians”, who are often cronies of the judges.

    As for self-interpretation of the laws, don’t be foolish. Seriously. The authorities are the ones who get to “interpret” the law, even the most minor of authorities, like security guards. And there is virtually no meaningful, credible oversight of any of these organizations who wield powers over us on a daily basis.

    So, as for hiring lawyers to sue their **s off, I have one word of caution: DON’T.

    Don’t go anywhere near lawyers, at all. Lawyers often play both sides of the street, have alliances you’ll never know about, much less fathom, and ultimately protect themselves and their industry, and those who facilitate their game (police, government, political parties, other lawyers (even opposing lawyers), etc.). You’ll lose significant chunks of money before you realize you’re neck-deep in BC’s legal swamp land, lose years of your life and ultimately get nothing for it. So don’t even start.

    If you haven’t had a “close encounter” with corrupt authorities in BC, that’s only because of luck, not because we can count on any help from our “public” agencies or legal system in BC.


  13. Norman Farrell

    Sweet Bea says, “A few years ago the BC government made a small but very sweeping and powerful amendment to the MHA: that any person can also be apprehended, detained and treated against their will (paraphrasing, but only lightly) if the person giving the order (police, doctor, …) “believes that the person’s mental or physical health may deteriorate”. No proof or substantiation is required at that time or at any point thereafter… ever. If someone said they “believed” you might be coming down with the flu, you can be forcibly arrested, detained (committed), and held in a facility indefinitely.”

    Shocking, but true, and unlike many strange laws, this one gets used regularly in the field of elder care, or should I say elder abuse, particularly within institutions, public and private. I understand that a group of victims’ families are assembling information with a view to bringing the issue forcefully to the public’s attention.


  14. Sweet Bea

    I wrote my comment about Rick’s remarks before his most recent comment. My comments about how the laws are being rewritten to further curtail our individual rights and freedoms might be taken as overly negative, and invoke feelings of hopelessness. I merely want to wake people up to things that mainstream media works hard to keep hidden from us.

    However, I am not without hope and conviction that we must and we change change the direction our society and in particular BC’s society is being taken. I fully endorse Rick’s latest comment. And I also Julie and Norm Farrell’s comments about how BC authorities have become thoroughly corrupted.

    In my view Rick’s absolutely right about each of us having a responsibility to become more informed citizens, and to speak out to take back our communities, our country, our society.

    I would like to think that there are some good judges, good cops, good prosecutors, good lawyers out there (and even good media), and that one day soon they will rise and make their voices known. Otherwise these “good” people who occupy powerful positions in our society must be considered as corrupt as their more obviously corrupt colleagues.

    With power comes responsibility… and eventually there will be a day of reckoning for them. They have an opportunity now, before things get really ugly, to turn things around.


  15. Sweet Bea

    Sorry, left out a critical word above…. It should be:

    … I am not without hope and conviction that we must and we WILL change change the direction our society…


  16. Julie

    During Campbell’s time in office, the decay of BC rampaged right out of control. Anyone who opposed Campbell, lost their jobs. All the BC ministers, backed that evil, corrupt monster to the hilt. They allowed, the despicable minimum wage. Over 121,000, BC children living in poverty, while Campbell the crooked, gave himself a $60,000 salary hike. Everything Campbell and the BC Liberals touched, they fouled. Campbell thieved and sold our rivers, the eco damage is horrific. Our hydro destroyed, because of pure unadulterated greed and, Campbell’s silly little juvenile, vindictive games.

    I am really happy. Campbell’s dirty political record, has been sent to England. Campbell’s best buddy Harper, is already in Europe’s black book, for giving false statements, about the dirty tar sands. Harper is trying to sell, the dirty crude, as clean energy. The fact that Campbell signed in favor, of the dirty oil sands…He will not be welcomed. The Brits have already demonstrated at, the office of the High Commissioner. They are saying, NO, to the filthy crude. There is a lot of sickening info of the oil sands, on U.K. web sites.

    Politicians in England, who lie, thieve and cheat the citizens, go to prison. There are two M.P. doing time right now. Nor, is their paparazzi, muzzled and bought off.


  17. Pingback: Jadoo SEO

  18. I’d like to connect with this group, mentioned above (“I understand that a group of victims’ families are assembling information with a view to bringing the issue forcefully to the public’s attention.”). Can anyone tell me how? I’m dealing with a similar issue and thought maybe we could help each other.


  19. Jay

    Corrupt is starting to sound tired and used up. I would more so refer to the BC RCMP and other government agencies as evil. What more can be said? We are but a fallen nation.


  20. Prince George Citizen, Nov 2013:

    After seven years, a Prince George man’s legal battle with RCMP over a physical battle at a Surrey home has come to an end.

    Dwayne Washington and the RCMP came to an out-of-court settlement before a 21-day court hearing scheduled for the new year.

    RCMP E-Division spokesman Sgt. Rob Vermeulen said only “I can confirm that the matter has been resolved,” and provided no other comment.

    The terms of the settlement were not disclosed by Washington, although he confirmed there was a financial component and an official apology component.

    “The apology was no small thing,” said Washington. “The apology is meaningful. I felt it was sincere. I felt it was honest.”

    The incident between Washington and RCMP officers took place in 2007. Washington was alone at his brother’s house in

    – See more at:


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s