Police officer Stéphanie Dorval, found guilty of assaulting an Aboriginal man during an intervention, was unsuccessful in her bid to have the verdict overturned. The Supreme Court of Canada refused to hear the appeal of the Sûreté du Québec (SQ) officer from Val-d’Or.
She was convicted in 2022 of grabbing a cell phone from the hands of a Cree man, John Andrew Fedora, at the scene of a possible domestic assault involving an injured woman.
At trial, the police and paramedics explained that the intervention in September 2019 took place in a climate of great tension, in a confined space with many people shouting around them. The police finally arrested a very agitated man, who was not cooperating. He was the complainant’s brother.
The complainant was filming the arrest
Once outside the home, the complainant stood very close to the patrol car to film the arrest and refused to move away, they explained. They feared he would intervene.
For his part, the man maintained that he was calm and was only filming to ensure that the police did not hurt his brother, he testified before the judge.
In the video filmed by a neighbour from his own home, and which was viewed in the courtroom, we see Officer Dorval approaching him suddenly. He is pushed, but does not put up any resistance. Officer Dorval tries to grab his phone from his hands: the device falls to the ground and she throws it into the police car.
According to the police officer, the actions she is accused of were taken to protect her teammates and to seize evidence. Her colleagues were attempting a difficult maneuver, namely to get an agitated man who was struggling into the patrol car. The complainant was too close to his colleagues, and she was afraid he would intervene.
That day, the man was charged with obstructing a peace officer, but he was acquitted. Then, he filed a complaint against the police officer, reversing the roles. This led to the laying of assault charges against M.me Dorval. This is a rather rare case of criminal charges being filed against a member of the police force for actions taken in the course of their work.
Excessive force in the circumstances
At the end of the trial, Judge Anne-Marie Jacques of the Court of Quebec indicated that it was not disputed that the actions taken by the appellant constituted assault in themselves. However, the police officer argued that she was authorized by law to use reasonable force to carry out her duties. In the event that this argument was not accepted, she also argued the defence of minimis non curat lexbased on the principle that the law does not concern itself with unimportant things.
Both arguments were rejected.
Judge Jacques held that the police officer justified her intervention with the complainant because of his threatening attitude and the warning signs of assault that he was displaying. But this is “unfortunately not supported by the evidence.” She ruled that the accused used excessive force “in the circumstances by abruptly removing, or even snatching, the cell phone from John’s hands and pushing him, without warning or prior request to give it back to her.”
“We must conclude that the actions she took were more those of a person who was exasperated by the whole situation than those of a person wanting to avert imminent danger,” the magistrate wrote.
The analysis of the whole leads him to conclude that there were alternatives that the police officer did not consider before using force to seize the cell phone. “Consequently, she cannot benefit from the protection offered by the law.”
Stéphanie Dorval was granted an absolute discharge, meaning she will not have a criminal record. She challenged the guilty verdict on appeal, but was dismissed. Her final attempt before the Supreme Court was unsuccessful, with the country’s highest court refusing to hear her case on Thursday.