|
-
Rehearing Request
rejected by the Police Deontology against the Assembly National Security 970729 970264?
|
|
-
|
- Comité de déontologie
- policière
|
-
- Comité de déontologie
- policière
- Office of the Clerk and of
- Administrative director
CERTIFIED
July 29, 1997
- Mr Serge Bourassa-Lacombe
- 103, street Crescent, #105
- Lennoxville (Quebec)
- J1M 2G3
-
SUBJECT: |
|
|
- Ask revision
- Our file: R-97-0961-1 (97-0264)
|
Dear Sir,
I transmit to you, under fold, the
final decision and without call of the Committee of police deontology.
Sincerely yours
The Clerk and administrative
director,
Yves Renaud, lawyer
- YR/sfd
p.j. |
Copy certified of the decision |
- Building SSQ - Turn of the St. Lawrence
- 2525, boulevard Bay-tree
- Bureau A-200, 2nd stage
- Sainte-Foy (Quebec) G1v 4z6
|
- Telephone: (418) 646-1936
- Telecopy: (418) 528-0987
- Email: comite.deontologie@secpub.gouv.qc.ca
|
COMMITTEE OF POLICE
DEONTOLOGY
(Division of the Safety of
Quebec)
QUEBEC |
MONTREAL, July 29, 1997 |
- FILE:
- R-97-0961-1
- (97-0264)
IN FRONT OF: |
Me Gilles Mignault |
GOES DOWN FOR HEARING
BEHAVIOUR IT: |
July 22, 1997 |
IN: |
Montreal |
Mr Serge Bourassa-Lacombe
C.
- Agent Herve Fortier
- Number 4563
- Agent Jacques Quinn
- Number 4516
- Members of the Safety of Quebec,
- Post of Quebec
- DECISION
COMMITTEE OF POLICE DEONTOLOGY
May 9, 1997, Mr Serge Bourassa-Lacombe
deposits at the committee of police deontology a request for revision of the returned
decision on April 22, 1997 by the Police chief with the police deontology.
This decision to him is notified on
April 28, 1997.
By this decision, the Police chief, Me
Denis Racicot, decides in accordance with article 65 of the Law on the police
organization, to refuse to hold an investigation for the following reasons:
" -in his writing that we received on April 11, 1997, Mr Serge
Joseph Adrien Bourassa-Lacombe tells this part of the day of March 21, 1997, where it went
to the national Assembly to attend a parliamentary debate.
With its departure, he was
challenged by the agent Herve Fortier which invited him to its office and where he
introduced his fellow-member Jacques Quin to him. The plaintiff says that he accepted the
invitation of the Fortier agent and that he lent himself readily to the maintenance which
followed, during which he was informed it that he was not in a state of arrest.
On his side, the plaintiff had the
occasion to explain inter alia the raison d'être of the foundation which bears its name:
"... to stop physical and/or mental torture in the medical field in addition to
convincing the good police to stop the bad one, good education to stop the bad one and
good medicine to stop the bad one... "
The complaint of Mr Bourassa-Lacombe
is with the effect that one of the two police officers would have telephoned his father,
little after this day of March 21, 1997, to require of him " if he had known me sick
mental for two years " the plaintiff pleads that one misused him, he asks "
public excuses " as well as a " flat-rate amount " being versed to the
foundation which bears his name, " in order to bring closer the good police towards
the good citizen... "
on the question of the payment of a
flat-rate amount to the foundation Serge Bourassa-Lacombe, it is part of the complaint for
which the Police chief does not have any jurisdiction. A complaint by way of compensation
comes under the civil field;
for the remainder, we want in no
manner of offending Mr Bourassa-Lacombe or of causing some injury to him that it is, but
surely that he will know that its character does not pass unperceived, as well by his
appearance as by his remarks, which is not badly in oneself.
In addition, for the police officers
who are responsible for the security of the national Assembly, Mr Bourassa-Lacombe is a
person which can represent a certain interest, at least to require a minimum of checks. If
it is exact that they communicated with the family of the plaintiff, this step was fully
justified, with the reason for the public interest.
We understand that the plaintiff
could be upset by this made phone call with his father, but it seems to us in the
circumstances that the police officers showed understanding in their behaviour."
OBJECT OF THE
REQUEST FOR REVISION
Mr Bourassa-Lacombe asks the
Committee to revise the decision of the Police chief for the following reasons:
" You of the
Clerk's Office,
which sat at the Committee of police deontology, as a President /Founder and Controller of
a foundation which bears my new name following the decision of the Director of the Marital
status Me Guy Lavigne N/r 1996 CN 1149 (July 12, 1996). I invite you to recognize at the
dawn of this third millennium that your police officers were equipped with common sense to
require a minimum of checks on my person. However, nothing justify, for a reason for
interest public, this step to contact a member of my family to him require " if he
know me mental sick for 2 year " I recall that the reason for my complaint is for
goal in other to " build rather than de destroy " for this purpose, I
remind you that I be President /Founder and Controller of a foundation which have already
be support by more than 30 000 person and you are invite to read and read again this letter of 24 April 1997 18:00 ---» Chicoutimi
175.43 $ provide in appendix of that here " (sic)
SUMMARY OF
THE PROOF
Before the Committee Mr
Bourassa-Lacombe explains the reasons for which he decided to
carry felt sorry for to the Police chief to the police deontology
like that for which he decided to ask the revision of the returned decision. All these
reasons take again in substance those stated in the complaint and the request for
revision.
Mr Bourassa-Lacombe insists
particularly on the fact that by way of President/Founder and Controller of a foundation
which bears his name, he wants to stop any criminality and repeats within the
company in order to build a better country. For this purpose, he hopes that the Committee of police deontology will join him in his action. He adds to
project the meeting of a biographical author who will be able to possibly decide to make a
film on his life, which will result in to lead people to cease treating him like a "
ass hole ".
Questioned on the relevance of his
allegations, Mr Bourassa-Lacombe concludes by
affirming at the Committee that he does not have anything any more to say and that he is not in a
hurry to receive the decision.
APPRECIATION
OF THE PROOF AND REASONS OF THE DECISION
Under the terms of article 77 of the
Law on the police organization, Mr Serge Bourassa-Lacombe has the obligation to
expose in writing the reasons called upon to the support of his request for revision as he
was informed by it by the decision of the Police chief.
May 9, 1997, Mr Bourassa-Lacombe deposits with the
Clerk's Office of the Committee his request for revision exposing the reasons for his
request. After having analyzed the allegations contained in this request for revision, the
Committee concludes that the called upon reasons do not cause to convince it that the
Police chief made a decision erroneous.
In accordance with article 79 of this same law, the
Committee must decide this request for revision starting from the file consisted the
Police chief. After having studied the file of the Police chief, the Committee concludes
that the decision of the Police chief is not erroneous.
Before the Committee, Mr Bourassa-Lacombe did not
present any new fact which, if it had been known of the Police chief in convenient time,
could have justified a different decision.
BY THESE REASONS,
after having studied the file of the Police chief, after having taken knowledge of the
request for revision and after audience on the request for revision, the
Committee of police deontology DECIDES:
- TO REFUSE the application of
revision;
- TO CONFIRM the decision of the
Police chief;
- TO CLOSE the file.
- Gilles Mignault
- Member lawyer
-
- COPY CERTIFIED
- The Clerk
- Yves Renaud, lawyer
|
- For the wrath of God is
revealed from heaven against
- all ungodliness and
unrighteousness of men,
- who hold the truth in
unrighteousness;
- Because that which may be
known of God is manifest in them;
- for God hath shewed it unto
them.
- Romans 1:18-19 (King James
Version)
|
|
|