Steve Desjourdy, the Ottawa police officer who cut off Stacy Bonds’ bra while other officers pinned her to the ground in the cell block, was charged yesterday with sexually assaulting her.
Even though it’s good news, I rolled my eyes when I heard it. I don’t see it as a sign of real change. I think the SIU simply realized that it, too, was implicated in the whole police brutality scandal that erupted following the assault of Stacy Bonds, because of its history of almost always finding in favour of the police. Reporters started presenting the actual numbers of cases the SIU investigates, and the outcomes of those. A whole series of incidents (which included videotaped assaults of other prisoners in Ottawa, as well as the absolutely appalling videotaped behaviour of many anonymous police officers at the G8/G20 protests in Toronto) caused many citizens to start viewing allegations of police brutality very differently than they had previously.
After five months of investigating, the SIU has ruled that there are reasonable grounds to charge Desjourdy with sexual assault. (Potential charges against the other officers will be the subject of a separate investigation, this one by the OPP.)
Personally, I am skeptical that this is representative of any substantial change in how things are done. We still need a new, independent, unbiased, civilian body that investigates allegations of police brutality and other forms of police misconduct. Anything less is just more of the same.
Good post in an excellent blog. Glad I found you while, coincidentally, we were blogging about the same thing. (Shortlink: http://wp.me/p1gH0d-a4 ). Keep up the good work. We all need perceptive witnesses until we can be everywhere at once.
Drak
Drak, thanks for the comment, and also for the link. Your blog looks very, very interesting. I’ve added a link, and will be exploring it more soon.
Just remember what we learned from the Larry O’Brien trial: Reasonable grounds to charge has a much lower threshold than beyond a reasonable doubt (required to convict).
– RG>
Yes, that’s true. But it’s a good start, especially considering that the SIU almost always says the evidence doesn’t even meet the lower threshold.
Oh gosh, yes. Let’s all hold our breath waiting for a conviction on this one. Everybody? Big breath now. Hold it, hold it, hold it…..
It could happen. If I’m still unemployed, I think I’ll go to his trial.
What I can’t get over is this line:
‘But Carroll [the officer’s lawyer] said he saw nothing in the video that would warrant “any basis for any allegation of sexual assault,”
I understand he’s the lawyer, and he needs to make his client seem as innocent as possible and all that bull, but not seeing “ANY” basis for an allegation (not a conviction mind you, an allegation!), is a bit ludicrous in my mind.
It’ll be interesting to see how it plays out in court.
Carroll also said that he was flabbergasted by the charges.
He added: “This kind of action, on the part of the SIU, is going to send a chill through all officers who work in the cellblocks right across Ontario.”
I hope so.
Me too, Eileen.
Hey I found this qwop flash game at http://iflry.org/members/AntioneCottom.aspx