Numerous delays in the investigation of a 2021 sexual assault in 黑马磁力, undertaken by the Surrey RCMP, are set out in
The ruling by Justice Terence Schultes was handed down in New Westminster Supreme Court on June 30, and released publicly in July. Schultes was ruling on whether the Surrey RCMP could continue to hold on to a cell phone they seized from the suspect as possible evidence.
In Canada, items seized by police as potential evidence eventually have to be returned to their owners, unless a court authorizes a longer detention. Police investigators have to go to court and convince the judge that they need more time and require the evidence to complete their investigation. Such rulings are one of the few windows into ongoing criminal cases, because police agencies seldom comment publicly on investigations, even after they are concluded.
This case involves a sexual assault in November 2021, which was reported to the Surrey RCMP. The alleged attack was originally thought to have taken place in Abbotsford, but apparently happened in 黑马磁力. The victim reported the incident to a Surrey RCMP officer named Const. Primeau.
The initial phase of the investigation moved quickly. Police arrested a suspect within days of the incident, and his phone was seized, as it was believed to contain evidence related to the assault.
Work on the case then slowed down, as Primeau "tried unsuccessfully to persuade the police agencies in the jurisdictions where the assault was believed to have occurred鈥� to take over the investigation," Schultes wrote in his ruling.
Although the Surrey RCMP had a Special Victims Unit (SVU) dedicated to investigation sexual assaults, Primeau remained the primary investigator. She was only seconded to the SVU unit for two days in 2022 to complete applications to continue detaining the phone.
Other than that, "she was left to continue the investigation on top of her regular duties of handling calls and conducting investigations as a general duty officer," according to testimony from RCMP officer Const. Chouinard.
Schultes described Primeau as a "junior" officer.
The first court order to detain the phone allowed police to hold it until November of 2022, a year after the assault.
"As a result of the burdens of her regular duties, Const. Primeau had some difficulty in preparing the information to obtain a search warrant for the data on the phone until October 2022," Schultes wrote. "She actually had to make two such applications, because the initial one did not describe the model of the phone correctly."
By December 2022, Primeau asked to be seconded to the SVU unit again to receive help from more experienced officers with the software used to access data on seized electronic devices.
There were several other delays during 2023. Primeau sent a report to B.C. Crown Prosecution Service, asking them to lay charges against the suspect, but they had further questions. Officers then had trouble locating both the victim and the suspect.
In September of 2023, about 22 months after the assault and report to police, Surrey RCMP SVU took over the investigation from Primeau.
There were several court orders in 2023 and 2024 allowing the police to continue to detain data from the phone as deadlines to release it came and went. At some points, the orders allowing police to keep the phone and its data lapsed and were not renewed by the courts for months.
In March 2024 another officer again put together a report asking Crown to lay charges. Due to further issues, including an officer taking medical leave, the report was not actually sent to prosecutors until November 2024.
This January, prosecutors said they would not be able to lay charges until they had a court order extending the seizure of the phone and its evidence yet again, which was the application Schultes was to rule on.
Schultes noted that in cases where evidence is being held for a long period of time, judges must weigh the rights of an accused versus the rights of the authorities and the public to have crimes properly investigated.
Lawyers for the Attorney General of B.C., arguing for extending the seizure of the phone, and said that the evidence on the phone is actually illegal to possess, so the phone can't be returned to the suspect at all.
A lawyer for the suspect argued that the case takes place "in the context of ongoing errors and delays by the investigators," Schultes noted.
"Counsel [for the suspect] also notes that the conduct of the police can be an important factor when assessing where the interests of justice actually lie, especially if there are no meaningful explanations for the delay and they have not devoted sufficient resources to the investigation," Schultes wrote.
Leaving Primeau to cope with the sexual assault investigation, despite her inexperience and on top of her regular duties, could be considered a failure to put sufficient resources towards the investigation, the judge said.
"In short, it is submitted that the phone owner has spent the better part of four years in legal limbo, deprived of an item of personal property that contains a large amount of private information, for no valid reason," the judge said in his ruling.
However, the judge found most of the police mistakes to be "routine human errors," such as mislabelling the model of phone.
Some portions of the affidavits Schultes relied on were redacted and are not detailed in his ruling.
He wrote that "it is clear from the redacted portions of the affidavit that, even if Const. Primeau had had the time and experience to move the investigation ahead much more promptly, the complexity of the overall investigation is such that it is unlikely to have been any further ahead than it is now."
Schultes ruled that the police could continue to keep the phone and its data. The scale and complexity of the case outweighs the suspect's right for the return of his phone and data, the judge said.
The seizure order was extended to Aug. 29.
According to RCMP E Division spokesperson Staff Sgt. Kris Clark, as of the week of July 28, the suspect in the case had not been criminally charged.
