The RCMP officer involved in the 2008 collision that killed 21-year-old Orion Hutchinson is on trial, but the charges aren’t what you’d expect.
RCMP corporal Benjamin “Monty” Robinson is on trial in B.C.’s Supreme Court for obstruction of justice; the Crown alleges Robinson used his knowledge of legal procedures to beat impaired driving charges following the accident.
At the time of the accident, Robinson was driving his two children in his Jeep when he struck Hutchinson; according to CBC News, Hutchinson told a witness to the accident’s aftermath that he was going to take his children to his nearby home, then return to the scene. He handed his license to the bystander, walked off with his children, and returned a few minutes later.
According to a report in the Vancouver Sun, when he returned, Delta police constable Sarah Swallow testified that Robinson’s speech was slurred and his eyes were unfocused. When she asked him if he’d been drinking, Robinson said he’d had a couple of shots of vodka at home to calm his nerves.
She then told him his signs of impairment didn’t match that story, and he told her he’d also had a couple of beers at a friend’s Christmas party at 5:30 p.m., then corrected himself and said it was a Halloween party.
Swallow said she arrived at the accident scene at 10:24 p.m. When Robinson was administered a breathalyzer, he blew .12 first, then .10 a few minutes later; the legal blood-alcohol limit is .08.
Robinson’s lawyer says Swallow did not advise Robinson of his right to legal counsel before he told her of the vodka, so Swallow’s testimony should not be allowed.
At the trial, the Crown is alleging that Robinson beat a drunk driving rap with his knowledge of how the system works; Crown witnesses are expected to testify that in a 2005 training course, Robinson was instructed that it was possible to beat a drinking and driving charge if the driver consumed alcohol after the accident. The Crown prosecutor says one witness will testify that at a 2007 party, Robinson said the best way to beat an impaired driving charge is to leave your license at the scene of the accident to avoid charges of leaving the scene, and then consume alcohol.
Robert Dziekanski
This isn’t the first time Robinson has been surrounded by controversy. Robinson was the senior officer on duty when four RCMP members tasered and wrestled Polish immigrant  Robert Dziekanski at Vancouver International Airport. Dziekanski died at the airport after the incident, and following an inquiry, Robinson and three other RCMP officers are now facing perjury charges stemming from their testimony during the Braidwood Inquiry into the Dziekanski matter.
A Special Prosecutor indicated there was no reasonable prospect of conviction for any potential charge relating to the tasering itself but recommended the perjury charges in relation to their testimony before Justice Braidwood.  Jury selection in that charge is scheduled to begin in the fall of 2012.  The allegations remain outstanding and have not been proven in court.
[…] Suite à la collision avec Hutchinson, Robinson a laissé son permis avec un spectateur là où avait eu lieu l’accident. Il emmèna alors ses enfants à la maison, et se présenta à nouveau au site de l’accident, après avoir consommé de la vodka. Les procureurs de la couronne ont alors affirmé qu’il s’agissait d’une tactique pour masquer le fait qu’il avait conduit son véhicule avec les facultés affaiblies. La défence de Robinson ont alors répondu qu’il était alcoolique, et qu’il s’agissait d’une réaction normale dans les circonstances. […]
[…] After colliding with Hutchinson, Robinson left his license with a bystander at the accident, walked his children home, then returned to the scene after consuming vodka. Crown prosecutors said this was a planned attempt to cover the fact he’d been driving impaired. Robinson’s defence team said he was an alcoholic, and this was a natural reaction to the pressure of the situation. […]
[…] an RCMP corporal, is on trial in B.C.’s Supreme Court on charges of obstruction of justice; the Crown alleges Robinson drank vodka after the crash to […]
Scumbag cop. This is why (rather than infernal “Stunt driving” crap that both Ontario and BC have) there should be mandatory minimum penalties (like losing your license for 10 years) for being at-fault in a collision that killed someone, regardless of any other circumstances. Cell phone, drunk, or just plain ignorant, doesn’t matter. Kill someone? You’re done. Period.
Let me guess. He’s on paid leave? He can’t be on duty with the charges still outstanding, but they can’t cut him loose because he hasn’t been convicted of any wrongdoing?
And people wonder why many (including me) have such a jaundiced view of law enforcement. 4 years to bring charges! This P.O.S. is still on RCMP payroll too.
Disgusting.
No, the charges were virtually immediate. Its taken the remaining years to get to court. And he’s trying to get off on a technicality. I wouldn’t count on him ever donning a uniform again.
 As I recall the charges against him, for impaired operation causing death, were tossed out because of the fact he left the scene and then claimed to have had a few drinks, in order to “calm his nerves.” The judge stated that he couldn’t be tried for ‘impaired operation causing death’, because it couldn’t be proved he was impaired at the time of the crash, because of his actions after it. He could only be tried for obstruction. Now that is actually happening.
Some media outlets are reporting that, on previous occasions, he had advised others that this tactic could be used in order to beat an impaired operation charge. Having witnesses to that, and to his having received such knowledge in training, it should have been possible to proceed with the impaired operation charge and leave it to a jury. I was under the impression that, years ago, the ability to get out of a charge on this basis had gone the way of the dodo.
 Yea you’re right! Sweeping judgement that ALL police are bad because of this. Just like ALL people that ride motorcycles must be in a criminal gang. Note my sarcasm….. This guy is an idiot I agree, but don’t paint everybody with a uniform the same. We would expect the same consideration as motorcyclists.