A Major Mistep In An Otherwise Stellar Period As Chief

Where's cop common sense?

Chief Blair says the law's too rigid to give shopkeeper David Chen a break

By PETER WORTHINGTON

Last week, Toronto Police Chief Bill Blair invited the media to his office to clarify that neither he nor the police cut a deal with a thief to get him to testify against the shopkeeper who was responsible for his arrest and conviction.

Fair enough. Until Chief Blair's clarification, it was assumed by many that the police were involved in a plea bargain to reduce Anthony Bennett's 90-day conviction for shoplifting to 30 days, on condition that he testify against David Chen, owner of the Lucky Moose Market who forcibly captured and tied him up before calling the police.

It seems it was the judge who reduced the sentence requested by the Crown, and Bennett himself who wants to testify against Chen.

So the chief's concerns in this area, while justified, have been corrected.

What also emerged in this curious question-and-answer meeting with local media was Chief Blair's insistence that the police were right to charge Chen with assault, kidnapping, forcible confinement and carrying a concealed weapon.

"Whether or not the evidence is sufficient to warrant a conviction, that's not for us to decide," he said.

"The police have to deal with the information and evidence that's before them at the time, and they've done that." Maybe. Maybe not.

It could be argued -- and I would argue it -- that there's also a common sense factor in this case, as there is in many cases. For example, it seems a ludicrous stretch to call the box cutter that Chen carried when he chased and caught the fleeing Anthony Bennett, who'd earlier stolen plants from Chen's store, a "concealed weapon."

Police surely are trained to make individual decisions in the course of their duties. The cop on the beat makes dozens a day, and an effective beat cop short-circuits and forestalls many crimes simply by his presence, his influence and how he deals with on-the-spot issues.

How many teenagers have been salvaged by a considerate cop?

The same with our rank-and-file soldiers in Afghanistan. Yes, they live by the book, which is a useful guide, but in daily dealings with people in a war zone they have to make decisions for which there are few precedents. Whether or not to pull the trigger.

Police and soldiers are not automatons. They size up situations and act accordingly. They may make mistakes, and when they do, these can become headlines. But for every headline, a situation has been resolved by the individual's judgment.

While "kidnapping" might be technically correct when someone is seized and tied up, it doesn't apply in Chen's case, where he merely was holding the person until the police answered his call. He wasn't ducking the law, he was depending on it.

Chief Blair seems to take the position that the law is the law and "the law doesn't change." Maybe not, but circumstances change all the time.

Anthony Bennett has a 33-year track record of crime. He is bad news for local merchants, who know him well and have rallied to Chen's defence -- for all the good it will do him, or them.

One of the great things about our police is that they are usually judicious in their dealings with people. They are adept at sizing up a situation, be it a traffic accident where those involved are blaming each other, or a case like David Chen's where an individual has been wronged and is trying to do the right thing, albeit not in the way society prefers.

Again, the "assault" Chen is charged with is not what most of us think of as assault. Again, judgment was out of kilter.

Chief Blair has little choice but to support his officers, but by leaving the impression that the law is so rigid that there's no room for nuance or judgment, he is doing a disservice to police officers who make choices and exercise discretion every day.