B.C. man was legally entitled to withstand ‘illegal’ arrest: courtroom

A B.C. man has been discovered not responsible of assaulting two RCMP officers – with the courtroom discovering he was resisting an “illegal entry and arrest” in his house earlier than he was tasered, taken down and hauled away in handcuffs.

The choice within the case was handed down in provincial courtroom on April 3 and posted on-line Thursday.

“This case raises quite a lot of points associated to the lawfulness of arrest of an individual in a dwelling home,” Decide Harbans Dhillon wrote.

The courtroom heard that Gerald Gladue was charged with assaulting Const. Hutchins and Const. Craig Abraham in his Burnaby basement suite in August of 2021. There was no dispute that Gladue resisted the arrest, partially, by biting an officer’s thumb whereas police had been trying to cuff him.

“Police sustained minor however painful accidents, and Mr. Gladue sustained two episodes of electrical shock incapacitation and blows to his physique on being subdued for functions of arrest,” the choice says.

The choose defined that to convict somebody of assaulting a peace officer, the Crown should show that “on the time of the alleged assault, that peace officer was within the execution of his or her obligation.”

Gladue’s lawyer argued that this might not be confirmed on this case.

“The defence place is that law enforcement officials weren’t performing within the lawful execution of their duties once they entered the residence and not using a warrant, and the accused was entitled to withstand within the method during which he did,” the choice says.

“The regulation is nicely settled {that a} police officer unlawfully on premises just isn’t performing in the middle of their obligation and an individual lawfully in possession might resist the trespass,” the choose additionally defined.

The courtroom heard that on the day of the alleged assault, officers had been responding to a report of uttering threats. Gladue was the suspect, accused of getting threatened his roommate who police discovered exterior, sitting on the curb “a number of hundred toes away” from the house once they arrived on the scene.

After talking with the alleged sufferer, police approached the house the place they discovered a person who was in his underwear, in line with the choice.

“Mr. Gladue left the door of his residence open, with police standing on the threshold. Police didn’t search Mr. Gladue’s consent to enter and Mr. Gladue didn’t expressly and voluntarily invite the police into the unit,” it continues.

The choose famous that not solely did the police not have Gladue’s permission, in addition they didn’t have a warrant.

“The prohibition in opposition to a warrantless entry right into a dwelling home to arrest an individual of their house protects the freedom, privateness and safety pursuits of residents to be safe of their properties in opposition to state intrusion,” the courtroom heard.

Police can – in sure circumstances – enter folks’s properties with neither a warrant nor permission.

Nevertheless, these circumstances weren’t current on this case. There was no imminent danger to anybody’s security – together with the officers’, no concern that Gladue would try to destroy proof, and no “sizzling pursuit” into the house. As well as, the choose rejected the Crown’s argument that Gladue’s roommate gave or was ready to offer the legally required permission.

“The officers on this case engaged in an illegal, warrantless entry right into a dwelling home during which Mr. Gladue was current and the entry was for the aim of arresting him. Mr. Gladue resisted the illegal entry and arrest. Within the end result, the Crown has didn’t show an important factor of the offence of assaulting a peace officer within the execution of his obligation,” the choose concluded.

“I discover Mr. Gladue not responsible.”

The choice additionally says that whereas Gladue was charged with uttering threats, these fees had been stayed.