The assault on an officer from the Kelowna RCMP was revived on Friday, after it began last month.
Const. Siggy Pietrzak faces a single assault count related to a May 2020 arrest at the Kelowna center that was captured on video. The video shows Const. David Carter and Const. Regan Donahue fighting to arrest Tyler Russell in front of Const. Pietrzak hit the scene and hit Russell in the face several times.
After the video appeared, Pietrzak was placed in administrative service and then suspended for pay. The charge of assault was filed about a year later.
Last month, several agents involved in the arrest testified at the trial of Pietrzak, in addition to Russell. On Friday, Crown Attorney David Hainey worked to persuade Judge Mariane Armstrong to allow the sergeant’s “expert testimony.” Leonard McCoshen, but defense attorney David Butcher was reluctant to allow McCoshen’s testimony.
McCoshen, an Alberta homicide investigator, has more than 30 years of experience with the RCMP, including seven years of general work at the start of his career. He is now a member of the RCMP’s National Force Use Committee and has been described as an expert on “use of force” in previous trials with police officers.
He has also taught several RCMP courses since 2004 and is estimated to have trained nearly 1,000 staff.
During Friday’s consultation, where papers were presented to determine the admissibility of McCoshen’s “expert” evidence, Hainey argued that most, if not all, cases of “use of force” such as Pietrzak’s case includes the expert opinion of some kind of expert.
“It would be difficult to find a use case for Section 25 force that does not include the exact type of expert evidence that the Crown wants to present,” Hainey told Judge Armstrong. Article 25 of the Penal Code legislates the permitted use of force by agents during the exercise of their functions.
But Butcher spent most of the day Friday examining the sgt. McCoshen. Ultimately, Butcher argued that the veteran officer’s experience as a street officer is “very old” and that McCoshen’s testimony about his background is “exaggerated and exaggerated or irrelevant.”
“This man is unqualified and does not need to testify,” Butcher said. “Its evidence is quite historical and has far less substance than the 40-page curriculum might suggest.”
He suggested that the officers who had previously testified at the trial, Pietrzak’s co-workers, are equally qualified to talk about the proper use of force required during an arrest.
Hainey noted that Pietrzak’s defense had not initially objected to the admissibility of expert evidence on the use of force, but that has now changed. In his final findings on the matter, Hainey cited a decision by the Supreme Court of Canada on the matter.
“This is the Supreme Court of Canada that says it’s right, you have the right to hear expert evidence on the use of police force on the application of training and policy with a certain set of facts. This it is a determinant of this problem, “Hainey said.
Judge Armstrong reserved his decision on whether to allow McCoshen’s testimony for a later date. McCoshen has already written a “report on the use of force” on the Pietrzak case, but it is unclear what McCoshen’s opinion will be on Pietrzak’s arrest if he is allowed to testify.
The trial is set to resume on June 23 and 24. Near the end of Friday, Butcher and Hainey said they were unclear if they would finish within the last two days of the scheduled trial, and Judge Armstrong asked them to explore to find two more. trial days if necessary.