MONTREAL LAKE – A Montreal Lake First Nation man who told his pit bull “sic’em” when an RCMP officer tried arresting him isn’t guilty of assaulting a police officer.
Judge Steven Schiefner said that even though he was satisfied beyond any doubt that William Bird told his dog to attack the officer it was unclear whether or not the words spoken by Bird were the cause of the dog’s aggression toward the officer.
Judge Schiefner, however, found Bird guilty of resisting arrest.
The officer had gone to Bird’s home at 1:05 a.m. on Jan. 6, 2020, after receiving a complaint that he assaulted someone.
“Mr. Bird was inside his residence and refused entry to the officer,” said Judge Schiefner in his written decision in Montreal Lake First Nation Circuit Court Sept. 2.
“The officer forced the door open and attempted to arrest Mr. Bird. While doing so, the officer was bitten by a family dog.”
During a trial in April, Bird testified that he was “brutally assaulted” by the police officer who came to arrest him and described the incident as a “home invasion.”
Bird recorded the encounter on his cell phone and live streamed it on Facebook, which prompted his family members and friends to come to his home while he was being arrested.
“Unfortunately for Mr. Bird, none of these individuals came to court to testify save one, and that person did not corroborate Mr. Bird’s testimony,” said Judge Schiefner.
“Furthermore, Mr. Bird was unable (or declined) to tender the audio/video recording as evidence. Much of Mr. Bird’s testimony was not believable. It was internally inconsistent and not corroborated by his own witness. It was littered with innuendo and unfounded accusations.”
During the trial the Crown told the court that it was dropping the charge of assaulting a police officer but was seeking a conviction for resisting arrest.
“The Crown’s decision to not seek a conviction on the assault charge was well grounded,” said Judge Scheifner.
“All witnesses agreed that the dog that bit the officer was in a state of agitation as soon as the officer entered Mr. Bird’s residence and it was unclear whether or not the words spoken by Mr. Bird were the cause of the dog’s aggression toward the officer.”
Bird told the court that, when he was on the ground, the officer punched him on the back of his neck. The officer then pulled William Bird’s arm behind him and placed him in handcuffs. Bird said, after the handcuffs were put on him, the officer punched him two more times on the back of the neck and then threw him in the back of the police vehicle.
When Bird was cross-examined by the Crown, he said the reason he decided to film and record his encounter with (the officer) was because he had heard that the officer had previously threatened other people, that he had a reputation for intimidating people in the community, and that he had “home invaded” seven other homes – meaning the officer had forcibly entered other houses by kicking in the door. Bird told the court that, when the officer forced the door open, he thought it was a “home invasion” because the officer was wearing all black clothing.
Bird denied applying any force to the officer during their encounter but admitted he is a big guy and the officer struggled to remove him.
Bird also testified that the pit bull had previously been aggressive and had attacked people but clarified that involved people who were dressed in all black and times when the dog was in heat. Bird said the dog was being more protective than aggressive.
Defence witness Ryan Bird testified that he was at William Bird’s home at the time of the incident and that a man dressed in all black entered the house. He said he later learned that the man was a police officer.
He said he didn’t know if the dog bit the officer and didn’t witness the officer assault Bird.
“Recent events around the world have reminded us that sometimes police officers exceed their authority and engage in unlawful conduct,” said Judge Schiefner. “During his testimony, William Bird made a number of serious allegations regarding (the officer’s) conduct and he did so for the purpose of undermining the officer’s credibility.”
He added that Ryan Bird didn’t corroborate any of William Bird’s allegations regarding the officer’s conduct.
“While Ryan Bird candidly admitted that he was intoxicated at the time, it is improbable that he would remember as many details as he did but forget that William Bird had been brutally assaulted by a police officer.”
In addition, Judge Scheifner said William Bird testified that he could see flashing emergency lights in front of his residence so the suggestion that he believed he was the victim of a home invasion “is hard to reconcile.”
