Monday November 24, 2014

Mountie charged with DUI


The RCMP has charged one of its own with impaired driving following a protracted investigation.

The single charge, levied May 30 on 13-year veteran Const. Alphonse Noey dates to a December 15, 2013 incident in which a server at a “licenced establishment” in Fort Qu’Appelle called an off-duty RCMP member at home to report another member whom she believed should not be driving.

According to an “F” Division press release, Noey, along with three other officers, including the one who received the initial complaint, are now the subject of internal Code of Conduct reviews.

“Due to the nature of the incident and the fact that it involved an RCMP member, we have taken steps to review the response to the initial complaint,” the release stated.  “The RCMP takes these types of situations very seriously which is why the reviews have been initiated.”

At a press conference June 11, reporters questioned Supt. Dave Fenson on a number of issues the media viewed as irregular, such as why it took investigators five months to charge Noey.

“Some investigations take longer than others to conduct and to complete, depending on what followup is required,” CTV News reported Fenson said Wednesday.

According to CTV, Fenson sidestepped the issue of why the server called the other officer at home rather than calling the detachment.

“Speaking in general, I can say that it is not uncommon for some of our employees to be well known in smaller communities, including where they live and to be contacted,” he said. “This means from time to time, that these members will receive calls at their residences.”

The press was also interested in why there was only the single count of impaired driving. In the overwhelming majority of impaired driving cases, defendants face two charges, the initial charge of impaired driving based on an officer’s observations and a second charge of operating a vehicle with a blood alcohol content (BAC) of .08 or higher levied after suitable breath or blood samples are taken.

According to the Regina Leader-Post, Fenson would not comment on whether breath samples were obtained and dodged the question of whether the review was initiated out of concerns over a cover-up.

“I can’t speak to the specifics of the review, but I can point out that Const. Noey was charged,” he said.

Fenson did not offer a timeframe or any other details about the internal investigation, but the June 11 press release enumerated the possible outcomes.

“As with all investigations, the RCMP will not be releasing the names of the members who are the subject of the internal review,” the release stated.  “If it is determined these employees contravened the Code of Conduct and informal disciplinary action is sufficient, this action is considered personal information as defined in Section 3 of the Privacy Act. If it is determined that formal discipline is warranted then a formal disciplinary hearing is initiated. The results of these hearings are open to the public and are available upon request (not through a formal Access to Information and Privacy request).  If there are additional statutory charges, the name of the member will be released through a media release.”



NOTE: To post a comment in the new commenting system you must have an account with at least one of the following services: Disqus, Facebook, Twitter, Yahoo, OpenID. You may then login using your account credentials for that service. If you do not already have an account you may register a new profile with Disqus by first clicking the "Post as" button and then the link: "Don't have one? Register a new profile".

The Yorkton This Week welcomes your opinions and comments. We do not allow personal attacks, offensive language or unsubstantiated allegations. We reserve the right to edit comments for length, style, legality and taste and reproduce them in print, electronic or otherwise. For further information, please contact the editor or publisher, or see our Terms and Conditions.

blog comments powered by Disqus

Quick Vote

Survey results are meant for general information only, and are not based on recognised statistical methods.



Lost your password?