HTTP/1.0 200 OK
Content-Type: text/html
Police Jumped Gun On Stating Woman Was
Pubdate: Thu, 13 Jan 2005
Source: Era-Banner, The (CN ON)
Copyright: 2005 The Era-Banner
Contact: http://www.yorkregion.com/yr/newscentre/erabanner/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/2678
POLICE JUMPED GUN ON STATING WOMAN WAS IMPAIRED
York Regional Police's statement Janette Montgomery was under the influence
of drugs the morning she crashed her car and died illustrates the dilemma
that can be caused by scientific advances.
Last week, the police service issued an apology to the obviously dismayed
Montgomery family.
The wealth of information police provide can create a dilemma for our
newsrooms as we wrestle with whether or not we should publish such statements.
The facts were clear: Ms Montgomery's blood contained levels of THC, the
active ingredient in marijuana, trace amounts of ethanol, a form of
alcohol, and benzoylecgonine, a metabolite of cocaine, according to a
toxicology report from the Centre for Forensic Sciences.
Yet the report never stated she was impaired. The amount of alcohol in her
blood was well under the legal limit and there is no legal level of THC
that indicates impairment. Police stated she was impaired, based, they
said, on the determination of a drug recognition expert, a breath alcohol
technician and a collision investigator.
Claiming police jumped to conclusions without scientific proof, Ms
Montgomery's family demanded officers retract the claim her daughter was
impaired.
The family was right.
It was raining heavily the morning she lost control of her car and struck a
second vehicle before her Cadillac left the road and hit a pole.
It's a big leap to conclude the accident was the result of impaired driving.
And while Chief Armand La Barge has personally apologized to the family,
the police service's refusal to retract the statement Ms. Montgomery was
impaired still leaves the family's emotional wounds open.
Her death seems tailor-made for the message York police is trying to convey
to residents.
As Canada's political system continues to debate the merits of legalizing
marijuana, our cops have toughened their stand on the drug's use.
Suggesting it opens the door for other criminal activities, the police
service's war on grow houses continues unabated.
Late last year, the first York officers graduated from a training program
that taught them skills to determine if motorists are under the influence
of illegal drugs.
Police want to hammer home the message driving while impaired by marijuana
can be fatal. A young woman's tragic death was used in an attempt to make
that point.
If only it were true, or at least, provable by scientific means.
Since it wasn't, making a public declaration was not only insensitive, but
also inappropriate.
Had Ms Montgomery survived and was charged with impaired driving, the
police couldn't have released the drug test results and we couldn't have
reported the details.
Doing so would open us up to the possibility of contempt of court charges.
Only after the details were presented in court could they be reported.
Ms Montgomery died.
No charges could be laid.
There was no law precluding us from printing the facts or the police
service's interpretation of them.
But just because we can publish all the details, should we?
It certainly gives us food for thought.
- ---
MAP posted-by: Beth