REPORTING · 23rd June 2010
Although there has been no official RCMP news release at the time of this posting, we can report on many of the details surrounding the approximate 12 hour armed standoff on Tuesday, June 22, 2010. It began at around 8:30 am when RCMP received a call regarding a male who was distraught. Reliable reports confirm the male was suffering emotionally after his children were taken away by the mother. It was a custody/separation issue which had him wishing not to live.
Weapons (a knife and other objects) were involved however no firearms were part of this except those held by the officers who responded. It was widely rumoured yesterday in Terrace that the man had a gun this should be discounted. No other persons were involved and no other person was in the home.
The Terrace RCMP responded with their full tactical response team called the ERT (Emergency Response Team). The Canine officer and his dog were on hand and the Command Vehicle was brought in and parked on Scott Avenue. Approximately 12 officers were involved in this response, not the entire force as has been previously reported.
Telephone communications were established and the incident negotiator talked at length with the individual attempting to resolve the difficulties without any loss of life, in particular, the distraught male.
The two schools adjoining the backyards of Scott Avenue (next to the former Keystone Apartments) were advised to keep the students in for the entire duration of the incident. As it went on past the school day, parents were called to pick up their children from the front of the schools and officers and staff were stationed in the school grounds to prevent children from wandering north towards Scott Avenue.
Shortly after noon the individual came to the front door of his home and opened it. He communicated briefly and looked out and then shut the door again. No attempt was made to enter forcibly and the RCMP were simply preparing to wait the situation out. One officer at the scene commented they were prepared to wait a week and suggested they have waited almost that long in the past to resolve a similar situation in a peaceful and harmless manner.
Houses (the yards) on both sides of the man’s home were occupied by ERT members and Staff Sergeant Rob Prichett was on hand to assist and direct his members. Some were crouched behind bushes and cars and others hid just behind corner walls. Both camouflaged and in riot gear the men and women were prepared for a variety of potential situations. Various weapons were on hand to be deployed if necessary but nothing was required except the patience to let the man accept his situation and find a better way to deal with the loss.
At approximately 8:30 pm the man allowed the RCMP to conclude their evening and their day’s activities. The entire affair was wrapped up without any dramatic incident or harm to any person.
Comment by James Ippel on 25th June 2010
Ms. Sandecki hits the nail on the head. Fathers will always be portrayed as the bad guy, no matter the circumstances. The same hold true for spousal altercations. The male partner is deemed to be automatically guilty by the Police, Crown Counsel, and the Judiciary. It takes a damn good lawyer to prove otherwise (and a major expence for the accused).
The police deem the Man guilty because it is politically correct, Crown lays the charges because they know that 99% of the time the whipped Judges will rule against the male, again because it is politically correct, and really, do you want to upset your wife??
When it comes to child access by the father, and spousal differences, our Judical System leaves a whole lot to be desired.
Why would I say the above-33 years of observing the Legal System from the inside really opens ones eyes to the one sidedness of the system. Justice is not part of the picture.
Comment by c. sandecki on 23rd June 2010
I feel for fathers who are separated from their children either by court order or by mothers who abscond with the children because husband and wife no longer see eye to eye on anything.
Of course, I don't know the details of this case. One supposes the father is not only a loving father but has an equal right to be in his childrens' lives.
Parliament is being asked to pass a law in support of mandatory co-parenting. Unfortunately, in some households, no amount of laws will create fairness or happiness. Fathers will continue to be "the bad guy" simply because they are males.