A retired Nova Scotia RCMP constable has been found liable for an unlawful arrest seven years ago of a man who sued the officer and the force after he said the Mountie injured his shoulder.
In a decision released last week, Nova Scotia Supreme Court Justice Ann Smith found Const. Daniel MacDonald, who retired from the force in 2023, did not have lawful grounds to arrest Sean Naugle in June 2018.
On June 3, 2018, MacDonald was responding to a 911 call about a fight at a home in Pictou County. He was the first police officer to arrive on the scene and placed one of the fighters under arrest. In the course of that arrest, MacDonald learned the man had concealed an axe in a nearby car.
It was as he approached that car that MacDonald encountered Naugle. What happened between them was at the root of the legal dispute.
MacDonald alleged that Naugle was obstructing his efforts to search the car for weapons and he placed him under arrest. Naugle said the arrest violated his Charter rights.
Excessive force?
In her decision, Smith said she had to determine whether MacDonald had lawful grounds to make the arrest and whether he used excessive force.
In addition to the civil lawsuit, Naugle also filed a formal complaint with the RCMP, which, according to the court decision, investigated the incident but took no further action. The investigating officer was one of the witnesses in the civil hearing, which was held in late January of this year.
Smith said she found the investigating officer, Cpl. Ronald Bryce, to be a credible witness, in part because he did not go out of his way to defend MacDonald's actions.
One example cited by the judge was Bryce questioning MacDonald's search for weapons. Bryce said he found it strange that MacDonald started searching in the front of the vehicle when the axe was reported to be concealed under a blanket in the trunk. The search eventually turned up both the axe and a replica handgun.
Bryce also admitted under cross-examination by Naugle's lawyer that MacDonald may not have been truthful when he told the corporal that Naugle had shoved him prior to the arrest.
'Fabricated' portion of evidence
The judge was also skeptical of MacDonald's account of when and where he spotted weapons in the car.
"When considering the totality of the evidence on this point, in my view, Cst. MacDonald's evidence that he viewed weapons in the rear of the vehicle prior to the search does not accord with the 'preponderance of probabilities,'" Smith wrote.
"Considering the evidence before the court, I conclude that Cst. MacDonald fabricated this portion of his evidence to justify and bolster his grounds for arresting Mr. Naugle."
The judge found MacDonald could not have spotted the weapons because they were concealed under a blanket. She also found Naugle was shouting about the legality of the search from about three metres away from the constable and so he did not obstruct him.
The judge found MacDonald lacked "probable and reasonable grounds" for arresting Naugle, and "is liable for tortious battery and the Charter breaches claimed."
"This case really highlights why the civil justice system is essential," said lawyer Mike Dull, who represented Naugle in his civil suit.
"You know, in this case, our court carefully examined all the evidence, even when it comes to the evidence of a police officer, and after doing that came to the conclusion that the police officer's version of events was not credible."
Dull said an agreement was made before the judge's decision that if Naugle was successful, he would be paid compensation. However, Dull said the amount of that compensation is confidential.
In a statement, the RCMP said it is still studying the court decision and has 25 days to decide whether it might appeal.
MORE TOP STORIES
Comments