While Friday night's CounterAttack stop on Highway 16 in front of the Playhouse was still on, locals were on social media complaining about everything from the waste of time and resources, having to wait a few minutes to get through the intersection and why the cops don't do it every night of the year.
Catching drunks behind the wheel two weeks before Christmas was a secondary goal of Friday night's effort. The major takeaway - which is why The Citizen ran the photo on the front page - was to remind as many people as possible that the police are everywhere, they take drinking and driving seriously and they will throw the book at anybody they catch with booze on their breath behind the wheel.
It was also a reminder of the necessity of such stops. Four impaired drivers were caught this past weekend for booze and another five more for drugs. Six others were pulled over for impaired driving the weekend before.
Police officers would rather be out catching bad guys than taking away vehicles and licences from otherwise good residents who made the idiotic decision to get behind the wheel after partaking in holiday cheer. They are tired of attending car accidents and delivering next-of-kin notifications as the result of drunk drivers.
This isn't to say the police don't make mistakes of their own or their decisions shouldn't be criticized.
Late last month, Prince George RCMP sent out a release to local media asking for the public's help locating a young woman in connection with a recent invasion. The release include a photograph of the woman. The problem was the woman wasn't a suspect for the crime. She was termed a "person of interest." The Citizen briefly posted the story and her photo on its website and social media platforms before taking it down.
If she's not a suspect, why is the RCMP asking local news outlets to aid them in smearing a young woman's reputation by connecting her name and face to a crime she didn't commit and may actually know nothing about?
That crossed a line for The Citizen.
As a news outlet, The Citizen is happy to aid police in criminal investigations or to warn the public about criminal activity but helping the police track down a "person of interest" is a step too far. We have to be mindful of recent events in Canada, where an RCMP employee fabricated a response to a freedom of information request from a reporter, and the U.S., where police in California issued a fake news release to aid in an investigation. That is not to say that the Prince George RCMP is untrustworthy but that The Citizen can decide for itself whether a news release from the local Mounties is news worth reporting.
In the same way that The Citizen is under no obligation to publish, this young woman has the same rights that all Canadians have when it comes to refusing to provide information to the police. While she could be open to charges of obstructing a police investigation, police would have to be able to prove to a court that she possesses essential information to that investigation and that there is no other available source for that information.
That's why, from a legal perspective, if a police officer asks drivers questions at a CounterAttack stop, such as where they have been or where they are going, drivers are under no obligation to answer.
Replying "none of your damn business" is not a recommended reply, however, because the officer still has the legal means to haul drivers out and search their vehicle if he or she smells booze or pot (or conveniently thinks that smell is coming from the vehicle). If that search takes an hour and involves an assessment of whether the vehicle or its tires are street worthy, drivers get to cool off from the cozy confines of the back of a cruiser.
Like the Counterattack show of force Friday, the questions from the officers shining a flashlight into a driver's face hide the real agenda. The officers don't really care about the answers. It's the driver's ability to engage in conversation and to speak without slurring words that is important.
Holding up traffic for a while to nab anonymous persons of interest driving while drunk is fine. Singling out specific individuals because they may have seen or heard something in connection to a crime they are not suspected of committing, not so much.
-- Managing editor Neil Godbout
