Court lets RCMP off the hook: Woman sued police
>
>
> PUBLICATION: Vancouver Sun
> DATE: 2004.07.23
> EDITION: Final
> SECTION: News
> PAGE: A1 / Front
> BYLINE: Ai Lin Choo
> SOURCE: Vancouver Sun
> ILLUSTRATION: Color Photo: Ian Lindsay, Vancouver Sun / Bonnie Mooney
> hasbeen pursuing her case in the courts for eight years.
>
> ————————————————————————–
–
> —-
>
> Court lets RCMP off the hook: Woman sued police for failing to prevent
> ex-mate from maiming daughter, killing best friend
>
> ————————————————————————–
–
> —-
>
> The B.C. Court of Appeal Thursday dismissed a woman’s lawsuit that claimed
> the RCMP was liable for the actions of her estranged common-law husband,
who
> maimed her daughter, killed her best friend and then shot himself in a
> violent rampage in 1996.
>
> Bonnie Mooney sued the police for failing to protect her, for failing to
> prevent the death of her best friend and for the injury to her daughter.
>
> In April 1996, Mooney’s ex-common-law partner, Roland Kruska, broke into
her
> house carrying a sawed-off shotgun. After cutting power and telephone
lines
> Kruska killed Mooney’s best friend, Hazel White, shot Money’s then
> 12-year-old daughter in the upper arm, and set the house on fire before
> killing himself with the shotgun.
>
> Several weeks before the attack, Mooney went to Prince George RCMP to
report
> that Kruska chased her in his vehicle after an argument.
>
> The officer took a statement from Mooney and advised her to get a lawyer.
> Her case was then closed and left uninvestigated.
>
> Kruska was on probation at the time after serving 21 days in jail for
> choking Mooney and beating her with a cane. He had also been convicted of
> manslaughter in 1979, and of sexual assault in 1985.
>
> The appeal court panel ruling upheld trial judge Justice Ross Collver’s
> decision, which stated that the police are guardians and not guarantors of
> public safety. Collver found the police officer was negligent, but said
> there was no direct evidence to suggest the RCMP’s failure to investigate
> her complaint caused the violent outburst.
>
> “It’s been an eight-year battle and justice hasn’t been served,” Mooney
said
> after Thursday’s court decision was released. “Believe me, it ain’t over
> yet. We’re taking this to the Supreme Court of Canada.”
>
> The case has focused attention on how police should handle cases of
domestic
> violence, and whether they should be held accountable under private law.
> Mooney’s appeal is reminiscent of the so-called Jane Doe affair in
Toronto,
> when a female rape victim successfully sued police for failing to warn her
> and other women that a serial rapist was assaulting women in her
> neighbourhood.
>
> Mooney’s suit against the RCMP, the attorney-general of B.C. and the
federal
> Department of Justice was first argued in 2001. It went to the appeal
court
> last year where her lawyer argued that the 1996 shooting could have been
> prevented if the police officer had fulfilled his duty.
>
> On the night of the shooting, Kruska broke into Mooney’s Cluculz Lake home
> through a sliding glass door. Mooney, her two daughters, and Hazel White,
> her best friend, were asleep. When Mooney realized he was in the house she
> escaped through a window. Kruska shot Mooney’s 12 year-old daughter in the
> upper arm and shot White in the back, killing her.
>
> Mooney describes the ordeal as life-changing and says she and her
daughters
> still suffer psychologically and physically.
>
> “It’s ripped our family apart,” she said. “What does the decision say? It
> says Hazel’s life meant nothing.”
>
> Women’s groups said Thursday’s appeal court decision is deplorable and
argue
> Mooney’s case points to larger systemic problems surrounding police
> responses to domestic violence.
>
> “I think this judgement sends out a message that will further discourage
> women from using the police,” said Samantha Kearney of the Vancouver Rape
> Relief and Women’s Shelter. “Police protection is a simple request that
each
> and every woman in Canada should be entitled to.”
>
> The transition house was granted intervener status during the appeal
> proceedings, allowing it to tell the court why the case is an equality
> issue.
>
> The appeal decision was not without dissent. Justice Ian Donald, one of
the
> three appeal court judges, decided the circumstances of the case were
strong
> enough to allow the appeal.
>
> “In my judgement, the right to police protection in these circumstances is
> so strong and the needs for teeth in the domestic violence policy so great
> that the causal linkage must be found sufficient to ground liability,”
> Donald said in his decision.
>
> Mooney’s lawyer, Henry Wood, said that even though he’s disappointed with
> the dismissal, Donald’s dissent is encouraging, especially in light of an
> anticipated appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada.
>
> “The decision indicates that the issues are not straightforward and caused
> the court some difficulty,” he said. “It’s discouraging, but the [court]
> process is deliberately set up as a multi-stage one and it’s not over
yet.”

The Second Amendment IS Homeland Security!!!