Police Chief responds to ‘bra removal’ incident

file000577601231

The Chief of the Chatham-Kent Police Service has issued a statement in relation to a “bra removal” incident, which has gotten local and national media attention.

“On Thursday July 14, 2016 Justice Lucy Glenn rendered her decision surrounding a charge of driving a motor vehicle with over 80 milligrams of alcohol in 100 millilitres of blood contrary to the Criminal Code of Canada, against a Chatham woman, which occurred on March 7, 2015,” Conn said in his statement.

“Her lawyer Mr. Ducharme commented and I quote, ‘He hopes that Chatham-Kent Police read this judgement carefully and that it seems to him that to force a female to remove her bra before breath testing, is truly unnecessary.'”

Reports say last Thursday, Justice Glenn mentioned a defendant being forced to give breath tests without her bra while seated alone with a male breath technician.

While announcing her decision to dismiss the charges against the woman, Glenn said she hadn’t heard of a policy where a women’s bra was removed by the Chatham-Kent Police Service, reports say.

Conn said a review of their policy has already taken place.

“In the spirit of being transparent and accountable to the citizens of our Community and in addition to further clarify our actions surrounding the removal of a charged woman‘s bra, I have this to offer,” Conn said.

“A review of our policy and procedure has already commenced. In this particular case, our primary concern was safety and the taking of clothing which could be used as ligatures for self-harm or strangulation. It should be further noted that our policy and procedures in respect to search of persons and persons in custody was approved by a Ministry of Community Safety and Correctional Services audit in 2011. Having said this, and on a quick provincial review, it appears that other Police Services within Ontario are assessing the removal of a bra for a person in custody on a ‘case by case’ basis. Based on this, we (CKPS) are comparing our policy/procedures to other Services, keeping an open mind to the amendment of said policy/procedures to be more in line with other Services.”

Chief Gary Conn
Chief Gary Conn

Conn said the woman has told the Toronto Star ‘they were monsters and the whole thing is a nightmare.’

“I will not try to profess or assert how she felt, as others have, by using words such as ‘frightening, humiliating and intimidating’ in reference to her treatment by our Service,” Conn said.

“I can assure her and everyone that this was not our intention and that our officers conducted themselves with professionalism and courtesy in providing her with the utmost dignity and respect during her time in custody. I have reviewed the booking video which projects a stark contrast to what the media has depicted in their portrayal of this event and I will gladly allow the media to view this video, once the appeal period of 30 days has transpired. In regards to the appeal process, this is a decision exclusive to the Crown Attorney.”

Conn said he wanted to address some of the headlines, for example, ‘Police force woman to remove her bra’.

“Let me be abundantly clear that at no time was there any application of force throughout this entire process,” Conn said.

“The woman was verbally directed to remove her bra as well as rings, bracelets and necklaces which she was cooperative in doing. This direction was provide to her by a female Staff Sergeant, who further conducted this search in a private non-videoed room, adjacent to the booking and breath room. During this same time, she was further provided by the female Staff Sergeant the opportunity to place a blue jump suit over her clothing, however she declined this offer and opted to continue wearing her long-sleeved brown sweater and track pants.”

Conn added: “In conclusion, although I can appreciate there being a level of anxiety associated with one being taken into custody, searched and charged with a criminal offence, I fully support the actions and professionalism taken by our officers during this particular incident.”

- Advertisment -