A controversial made-in-Canada undercover police technique designed to draw confessions from suspects is here to stay.
The outgoing president of the Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police told reporters Monday that the so-called Mr. Big technique has been a “very effective tool” to catch killers and that most agencies have policies in place to prevent abuse.
Jim Chu, chief constable of the Vancouver Police Department, made his remarks just weeks after Canada’s top court ruled that Mr. Big stings can involve “powerful inducements” and “veiled threats” and possibly lead to unreliable confessions.
In a Mr. Big operation, officers posing as members of a criminal organization gain the suspect’s trust with money, booze and friendship. They get the suspect to carry out jobs and slowly involve him in staged criminal acts. Eventually, a meeting is set up with the group’s boss, Mr. Big, designed to get the suspect to cough up details of a past crime.
While the Supreme Court of Canada did not ban the use of the technique in a ruling last month, it said that Mr. Big confessions should be presumed to be inadmissible and set out criteria for determining when they should be allowed as evidence in court.
Trial judges will have to consider the extent of inducements offered and any threats made, as well as the sophistication and mental health of the accused. They must also examine the level of detail in the confession itself and whether the accused provided details of the crime that were not already public.
“The safeguards (the Supreme Court) said need to be established in court, I think the majority of police agencies were already following those,” Chu said Monday.
“When police agencies use that technique, we must present evidence that has corroboration … that prove the person could not just have concocted everything.”
But this past June, an Ontario Superior Court judge threw out all the evidence gathered by police in a Mr. Big sting against Alan Dale Smith, who was charged in a 1974 murder. The judge reportedly said that the sting carried out by Durham Regional Police elicited a confession from Smith with holes so big you could “drive a Mack truck” through them.
Donovan Molloy, Director of Public Prosecutions, speaks at the provincial Supreme Court in Gander, N.L., on Tuesday, Aug. 8, 2014. THE CANADIAN PRESS/Mike Wert
Earlier this month, the Association in Defence of the Wrongly Convicted called on federal Justice Minister Peter MacKay to conduct a systemic review of all confessions obtained using the Mr. Big technique.
But MacKay’s office said in a statement that the law already provides ways to address miscarriages of justice.
“The Supreme Court of Canada’s recent decision does not prohibit this investigative technique, but simply refines the law surrounding its use,” the statement said. “As such, we do not support a systemic retroactive review into all cases involving confessions obtained through this lawful technique.”
Developed by the RCMP in the 1990s, the Mr. Big technique has been used at least 350 times. RCMP Commissioner Bob Paulson, who was in Victoria for the police chiefs conference, declined an interview request from Postmedia News.
In a statement, RCMP spokesman Sgt. Greg Cox said some RCMP undercover operation policies already reflect the Supreme Court’s findings. “However, the RCMP will be reviewing its policies in place to ensure they are consistent with the Court’s latest findings.”
Cox also noted that 44 suspects were cleared after being the target of Mr. Big stings between 1997 and 2011.
