The British Columbia Supreme Court has rejected a bid to extend an injunction that led to the arrest of 16 Tahltan Elders in northwestern BC in September. Lawyers for two Ontario-based mining companies, Fortune Coal Ltd. and Fortune Minerals Ltd. had asked the court to ban interference with their use of the Ealue Lake Road near Iskut, B.C. for another year, purportedly to enable the companies to continue exploration activities in the area, which includes the “Sacred Headwaters”.

However, Mr. Justice Robert Bauman found there was insufficient evidence before the court to justify such an order, and awarded costs of the failed application to the Tahltan defendants.

Defence lawyer Cameron Ward characterized the application as a transparent attempt by the companies to use the civil litigation process to impose criminal sanctions of arrest and punishment on persons engaged in peaceful political protest, pointing out that many members of the Tahltan Nation feel that there has been inadequate consultation with repect to the industrial activities planned in their traditional territory.

The civil injunction and attendant power to punish for contempt of court have long been potent weapons designed to quell protest activities in BC. In 1994, some 850 people were arrested in Clayoquot Sound and convicted of contempt of court after disobeying an injunction order in a civil proceeding brought by MacMillan Bloedel Limited. Most of those spent several weeks in jail. MacMillan Bloedel’s court action was later dismissed for want of prosecution. More recently, environmental activist Betty Krawczyk spent nearly a year in prison after she sat down on a public logging road in violation of a court order obtained by Hayes Forest Services Ltd. in a similar civil proceeding. Like MacMillan Bloedel before it, Hayes took no further steps in the civil proceeding after securing the arrest and imprisonment those disrupting its industrial activity.

After waiting for more than fifteen months, Robert Bagnell’s family has finally received a police summary of the police investigation into his death, which occurred on June 23, 2004 while he was in Vancouver police custody.

Vancouver Police Department Chief Constable Jamie Graham has failed to comply with the law requiring him to deliver an investigative report summary to the Bagnell family. The Office of the Police Complaint Commissioner has confirmed that the summary was due September 28, 2005 pursuant to s. 57(1) of the Police Act.

Police Complaint Commissioner Dirk Ryneveld has the final investigative report and a 75 page executive summary of it, but he is refusing to show either document to the Bagnell family.

Robert Bagnell, 44, died on June 23, 2004. The VPD initially told his family that Robert died of a drug overdose, then a month later revealed to the media that they had Tasered him twice just before he died. Another month after that, the VPD acknowledged that he was not a threat to anyone and that he was not involved in the commission of a crime when they sent an ERT (SWAT) team into the washroom Robert was in. The police said Bagnell was shocked with 50,000 volts so they could “rescue” him from a “fire” in his building. Although the family doubts these claims, they have been unable to obtain copies of police or autopsy reports and they have been unable to get an inquest scheduled, though one is mandatory.

After enduring a fifteen month wait, the family of Robert Bagnell may finally learn something about how he died. The Victoria Police Department’s “external investigation report” was delivered to OPCC head Dirk Ryneveld and to VPD Chief Graham on September 14th. By law, Chief Graham must deliver a summary of the report to the Bagnell family by Wednesday, September 28, 2005.

Robert Bagnell, 44, died on June 23, 2004. The VPD initially told his family that Robert died of a drug overdose, then a month later revealed to the media that they had Tasered him twice just before he died. Another month after that, the VPD acknowledged that he was not a threat to anyone and that he was not involved in the commission of a crime when they sent an ERT (SWAT) team into the washroom Robert was in. The police said Bagnell was shocked with 50,000 volts so they could “rescue” him from a “fire” in his building. Although the family doubts these claims, they have been unable to obtain copies of police or autopsy reports and they have been unable to get an inquest scheduled, though one is mandatory.

In another recent development, the Supreme Court of British Columbia has dismissed the Bagnell family’s application for a Court order compelling the coroner to schedule an inquest and deliver relevant documents to the Bagnell family.

Read the decision.

After hearing submissions from lawyers representing the Bagnell family, the coroner, the Provincial government and the Vancouver Police Department, Mr. Justice Kelleher of the BC Supreme Court has reserved judgment on the Bagnell family’s application for an Order that a date be set for a coroner’s inquest and for an order that the coroner deliver documents to the family.

Robert Bagnell, 44, died on June 23, 2004, more than 14 months ago. The VPD initially told his family that Robert died of a drug overdose, then a month later revealed to the media that they had Tasered him twice just before he died. Another month after that, the VPD acknowledged that he was not a threat to anyone and that he was not involved in the commission of a crime when they sent an ERT (SWAT) team into the washroom Robert was in. The police said Bagnell was shocked with 50,000 volts so they could “rescue” him from a “fire” in his building. Although the family doubts these claims, they have been unable to obtain copies of police or autopsy reports and they have been unable to get an inquest scheduled.

Meanwhile, another death has been reported in Ohio, bringing to 153 the total number of North Americans who have died after being jolted by the “non-lethal” Taser.