A judge has determined two Surrey RCMP officers used excessive force by applying Tasers on a trucker during an altercation outside a lumberyard on a hot evening in July of 2016.
As a result, the public is on the hook for a $317,120 settlement to Bradley Marvin Degen, 53, who brought the civil claim against the Ministry of Public Safety and Solicitor General.
“I have concluded the officers used more force than was necessary in tasering the plaintiff. This amounted to battery,” stated Justice David Crossin in a BC Supreme Court ruling dated March 31.
However, while Crossin ruled Degen had been “largely successful” in his claim against the Mounties, the judge did not offer punitive damages, given the circumstances of the incident.
“The officers displayed a lack of judgment; but their conduct was not such that can be characterized as offending the court’s sense of decency,” stated Crossin.
“I do not characterize this conduct, nor the surrounding conduct, deserving of rebuke and condemnation in the context of the principles of punitive damages,” added Crossin.
During the trial, which concluded in May 2022, Crossin noted he was left to judge what happened based on conflicting testimonies between Degen, the officers and expert witnesses regarding use of force as well as Degen’s injuries.
“Issues of credibility and reliability of witnesses played a significant part in this trial,” stated Crossin, who said he could not fully rely on Degen’s evidence.
Nevertheless, Crossin broke down what had occurred on the evening of July 25, 2016, when Surrey RCMP received a call from a member of the public concerning a semi-trailer truck that was parked outside a lumberyard with its motor running.
That evening Degen had fallen asleep with the air conditioning on. Someone believed he had been drinking, although the evidence ultimately did not result in such a conclusion.
When constables Jonathan Perkins and Sven Spoljar, who both had less than two years of experience, arrived at the scene they knocked on the truck doors several times. Eventually, Degen awoke and rolled down the window slightly. According to the officers, he told them they “have the wrong guy” and to “f*** off.”
Degen rolled his window back up and tried to go back to sleep but the officers wanted to pursue their investigation, informing Degen he was under arrest. Eventually, the officers broke his window and tried to remove him from the truck.
During the altercation the officers first punched Degen and that’s when they claimed he reached for something, possibly a weapon, at which point the officers deployed their Tasers (conductive energy weapon, or CEW).
“At this point in the incident, the officers had access to the plaintiff from both sides of the vehicle. Although, the plaintiff was in a position where he appeared ready to strike Cst. Spoljar, there was no suggestion in the evidence the plaintiff had retrieved, or was about to retrieve, or then possessed, anything on his person, much less a weapon,” stated Crossin.
“I am not persuaded that the use of CEWs was proportionate to the threat of a closed fist strike from the plaintiff. In coming to this conclusion, I am aware of the need for police to react quickly to situations. However, the level of force used in this circumstance was, in my view, disproportionate to the perceived threat. The officers had already gained access to the cab of the truck. The plaintiff was accessible,” added Crossin.
Otherwise, Crossin sided with much of the testimony of the officers, finding Degen had been uncooperative with them. Crossin defended the breaking of the window, as well.
“In my view, some urgency had developed. Communication was fruitless. The use of force in breaking the window was dramatic, but I conclude necessary pursuant to s. 25 of the Code, in order to properly effect the arrest of the plaintiff in all of the circumstances that faced the officers,” stated Crossin.
Degen was transported to the RCMP detachment in Surrey (where officers reported no signs of impairment) and ultimately charged with obstruction of justice and assaulting a police officer. These charges were later stayed.
Degen, who was born and raised in Alberta, was 46 years old at the time and had worked in the oil industry and as a trucker, for much of his working life.
Degen testified that he had had prior negative interactions with police, including in 2008 when he punched an officer inside his home and knocked them unconscious. He pled guilty to assaulting a police officer and was sentenced to time served in pre-trial custody, according to Crossin's judgment.
In another incident, following 2020, he was criminally charged with mischief for allegedly throwing rocks at his neighbour’s house. In addition, he was charged with assaulting a police officer.
Around this time, Degen claimed he had developed emotional issues as a result of the tasering, including episodes of anger, memory loss and “decreased situational awareness,” which all impacted his ability to continue driving. A psychiatrist subsequently diagnosed Degen with post-traumatic stress disorder and chronic pain, Crossin heard.
Crossin found some of Degen’s injury claims difficult to accept. Degen’s lawyer Thomas Harding sought $300,000 in non-pecuniary damages (pain and suffering) but Crossin only awarded $160,000. Degen also claimed $53,000 for lost income but Crossin only awarded $15,000. Degen was also awarded $132,500 for loss of future earning capacity.
