On news that British Columbia Police Complaint Commissioner Dirk Ryneveld has received an “independent” report on TASER use from Victoria Chief Constable Battershill, we question whether Mr. Ryneveld commissioned a truly independent and impartial report.

Instead of obtaining a report from an expert in the academic or scientific community, Mr. Ryneveld has commissioned a report from a police chief whose department has had a long businbess relationship with the stun gun’s manufacturer.

The Victoria Police Department was the first police department in Canada to buy Taser weaponry. In 1999, one of Chief Battershill’s police officers wrote a complimentary report on TASER use that the company, Taser International Inc., has posted on its website for promotional purposes: www.taser.com. More recently, Taser International sponsored a gathering of the Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police, to which Chief Battershill and other Canadian chief constables were invited.

Mr. Ward brought his concerns to the attention of Mr. Ryneveld in a letter dated September 7, 2004. He wrote: “We question whether Chief Constable Paul Battershill is in a position to conduct an impartial investigation, given his police department’s association with Taser International, the manufacturer of the weapon. We note that a report authored by Sgt. Darren Laur, control tactics coordinator, of the Victoria Police Department appears as a testimonial to TASER use on Taser International’s website…In the circumstances, it is our view

that only a truly independent and impartial authority is in a position to investigate the concerns about TASER use.”

On September 29, 2004, Mr. Ryneveld wrote Mr. Ward to defend his selection of Chief Battershill.

We stand by our criticism. The Battershill report parrots the company line and is hardly an objective study. The Arizona Republic and the New York Times have published extensive reports documenting more than 70 deaths linked to TASER use by police officers in the United States. How can a police chief be qualified to express an opinion on the safety of a device that delivers up to 50,000 volts of electricity to the human body?

For more, go to www.azcentral.com.

Eminent B.C. lawyer David Gibbons, 64, died on August 27, 2004. He will be greatly missed. A public memorial service will be held on September 30, 2004 at 5:30 p.m. at the Vancouver Law Courts.

It has just come to our attention that Crown Counsel spokesman Geoff Gaul has suggested that Crown Counsel may be reviewing the results of the Coroner’s Inquest into the death of Jeff Berg. The following statements have been attributed to Mr. Gaul: “For example, whether we should reassess the matter on a charge assessment basis. It’s too early to say that we would embark upon that assessment.”

In the Berg family’s view, a thorough and objective reassessment of all of the circumstances surrounding Jeff Berg’s death is overdue. It must be performed by an independent prosecutor to avoid any appearance of bias, as was done in the case of the six VPD members who were convicted of assaulting three people they had taken to Stanley Park in the middle of the night. The family is urging the Ministry of the Attorney General to appoint an independent prosecutor immediately to reassess whether charges should be laid in repect of the force used to apprehend Jeff Berg and the lack of care and attention that was paid to him by the police as he lay restrained and unconscious.

While there is the prospect of such a reassessment, we and the Berg family will refrain from further public comment on this matter.

Jeffrey Michael Berg, 37, died on October 24, 2000 of injuries inflicted by VPD Cst. David Bruce-Thomas during the course of an arrest on Sunday, October 22, 2000.

On August 13, 2004, Vancouver Police Chief Jamie Graham spoke to the media about Jeff Berg, the Vancouver man whose death at the hands of Vancouver police was ruled a homicide. Although the three people Jeff Berg was with when he was accosted and killed were not found guilty of participating in a “home invasion”, Chief Graham suggested they were in fact guilty of that when they were found outside a home in the 4800 block Slocan St. on October 22, 2000. Among other things, Graham said that “Jeff Berg had been repeatedly involved in home invasions”, that “there is no doubt that he planned to tie [the occupants of 4870 Slocan St.] up with the cord” later found in his pocket and “the family fled Vancouver in terror and were not available to testify” a trial of the three people who were with Berg when he died. Graham concluded by saying “had he lived, Jeff Berg would likely be in jail today”.

Aside from the insensitivity he has shown to the family of a victim of a police homicide by blaming the deceased victim, Graham’s remarks are erroneous, disturbing, inappropriate and just plain nonsense.

Jeff Berg, 37, had no criminal record and there is no proof that he had ever committed a prior criminal act or that he had committed a criminal act on the night in question. One of his friends testified at the inquest that they were in the alley because they had stopped so Jeff could get some marijuana. The house at 4870 Slocan Street had been the site of an alleged marijuana trafficking operation and one of its occupants, Mo Thi Le, was facing criminal charges for allegedly growing and possessing marijuana for the purpose of trafficking at that location. This person was one of the “terrified” family members who “fled” Vancouver and supposedly couldn’t testify later.

Jeff Berg was unarmed and had no alcohol or drugs in his system when he was killed. According to police, a scissors and a piece of cord were retrieved from his pockets while he was on life support in hospital. So what? The officer who killed him saw no weapons of any kind and scissors and cord have a variety of innocent uses.

The officer who killed Jeff Berg was unharmed: not a scratch, not a bruise, not a hair out of place. On the other hand, Berg sustained a series of deep bruises and abrasions to his head, face and genitals, all as detailed in the autopsy report. If there was a fight between these two, as Graham suggests, it was completely one-sided. Berg’s injuries were consistent with the reports of civilian eyewitnesses who saw a police officer pistol-whip Berg after he had surrendered, then kick him repeatedly when he was lying motionless on the ground.

Cases should be tried in court. If Jeff Berg’s assailant had not been a police officer, he would have been tried and a court would have decided his guilt or innocence. It is not for Chief Graham or the police to play judge, jury and executioner.

The Coroner’s Inquest into the death of Jeff Berg while in police custody raises serious policy questions about the way the process addresses the interests of the deceased’s family.

A coroner’s inquest is a quasi-judicial administrative proceeding before a jury involving lawyers, witness testimony and the introduction of documentary evidence. It is conducted by a coroner, a person who may not have legal training but who relies on advice and submissions from coroner’s counsel, a lawyer retained by the Coroner’s Service. An inquest is mandatory in the case of any person who dies while in police detention or custody. The family of the deceased has standing to participate in the inquest with a lawyer.

However, the reality is that most people cannot afford to hire a lawyer to prepare for and attend an inquest, especially if it is lengthy. The police tend to be well-represented by counsel. In the Berg inquest, for example, three sets of lawyers represent the Vancouver Police Department, the VPD officer who kicked Jeff Berg, and all the other VPD members involved, respectively. All these lawyers and the coroner’s counsel are apparently publicly funded.

In my opinion, fairness dictates that public funding should be made available to the deceased’s family for the purpose of retaining legal counsel.

In the Berg case, Jeff’s sister Julie has written the Attorney General and the Solicitor General to request funding assistance, but she has received no response. She has also made a public appeal for help. For more information, see www.justiceforjeff.com.