B.C. Judge Rules RCMP Interviews with Murder Suspect Inadmissible at Trial

A B.C. judge has ruled that conversations between an accused murderer, Jevon Daniel Smith, and RCMP officers were likely involuntary and cannot be used at trial. Smith, accused of the second-degree murder of Dakota Samoleski, was in a state of mental distress and physical discomfort at the time of the interviews. The judge found that Smith’s mental health issues, combined with being bear-sprayed and double-cuffed, made it unlikely for him to provide reliable information. The officers were aware of Smith’s history of mental health issues and should have taken special care to ensure he understood his rights.

During a pretrial voir dire, Smith’s lawyers argued that the recorded interviews with RCMP officers should not be admissible as Smith had asked for a lawyer and was not in a state of mind to provide accurate information. The judge noted that dispatchers had warned police of Smith’s mental distress, and some officers had previous encounters with Smith involving mental health issues. Smith displayed delusional behavior from the outset of his arrest, and the judge found indications that Smith did not properly understand his right to counsel at the time of the conversations.

Despite expressing a desire to speak to a lawyer, the officers did not discourage Smith from talking during the interviews. Smith was also in physical pain from being bear-sprayed during a struggle with the murder victim, and the judge expressed doubts about whether he fully comprehended what was happening. Smith’s complaints of pain and discomfort were not adequately addressed, as he was only given two ibuprofen on his second day in custody. The judge determined that Smith’s diminished capacity due to the bear-spray and previous mental health issues likely contributed to his rambling statements to the officers.

The judge ruled that the interactions between Smith and the officers were not voluntary and could not be used as evidence. Weatherill concluded that the officers knew Smith was likely in a state of diminished capacity, which impaired his ability to think clearly and provide reliable information. The judge did not make a judgment on whether Smith’s Charter rights were violated but emphasized that the officers should have been more careful in handling the situation. The ruling highlights the importance of considering a suspect’s mental state and physical condition when conducting interviews in police custody.

Overall, the judge’s decision underscores the need for law enforcement to be mindful of individuals’ mental health issues and physical discomfort during interactions with the police. The ruling in this case serves as a reminder of the importance of upholding individuals’ rights, particularly in vulnerable situations. Moving forward, it is essential for law enforcement to ensure that individuals in custody are treated with care and respect, especially when they have a history of mental health issues.