While the incident took place on Jan. 6, 2024, the woman didn’t file a complaint until over a year later
Quesnel officers acted accordingly in attempting to help a woman under the Mental Health Act, stated a report released by the Independent Investigations Office of BC (IIO) on Wednesday, Sept. 17.
At 12:29 a.m. on Jan. 6, 2024, Quesnel RCMP received a 911 call from a help line operator about text messages received to the crisis line from an area resident who was drinking, self-harming, and intending to die. Officers were able to identify the person who sent the texts, a woman, and were able to locate her last known address.
While the woman was resistant, she was apprehended at the scene under the Mental Health Act, but suffered an ankle injury in the process.
According to the IIO, the woman went to the Quesnel RCMP detachment on Jan. 23, 2024, on crutches and wearing a boot cast. As she was injured in the incident, she had the complaint process explained to her, but at that time, she decided not to file a complaint.
However, more than a year later, on Feb. 3, 2025, she returned to the detachment, expressing her intention to file a complaint. Because of this, the RCMP obtained her medical records, which indicated she was taken to hospital following the Jan. 6 incident, where it was found she had suffered “a minimal displaced fracture of the distal fibula” in her right leg. Her records also indicated she never mentioned any ankle pain until she was placed in the hospital’s care after police left.
On Jan. 19, 2024, she underwent surgery for two fractures. They were repaired with a plate and six screws.
The woman was interviewed by the RCMP in 2025 after she filed the complaint, recounting her recollection of Jan. 6, 2024. She told the interviewer that “[the officers] tried to have a conversation with me to see what was going on, but I obviously was not compliant enough…” so three officers “grabbed me and took me down to the ground, tackled me to the ground, which resulted in a leg slash ankle break.” The woman stated she immediately told the officers she thought her leg was broken.
A month later, on Mar. 4, 2025, the woman was interviewed by the IIO, where she stated the first officer she dealt with “was trying to have a conversation with me for about five minutes” but she did not respond to him. Because she didn’t respond, she claimed the officer “rushed” towards her, and that she was grabbed, spun around and pushed to the ground with her hands behind her back by three officers.
She “guessed” those movements caused the multiple fractures in her leg as well as “lots of other injuries,” but then also stated she thought her leg might’ve just been “twisted.”
When she arrived at the hospital, per her request, a wheelchair was brought out to her.
In the IIO investigation, it was found that the 911 call and text message information gave officers reasonable grounds to apprehend the woman under the Mental Health Act.
Three officers initially responded to the scene. An ambulance was parked less than a block away per the RCMP’s request.
By 1:21 a.m., the first responding officer located the woman and called the two other officers to the location.
The third arriving officer told the IIO that upon his arrival, he found the first responding officer unsuccessfully attempting to get a response from the woman as she was not answering his questions. According to a third officer, the first responding officer told that woman that if she did not respond, the Mounties would proceed based on the information given to them and would apprehend her under the Mental Health Act.
The third officer went on to tell the IIO that the first responding officer reached to grab the woman’s wrist to apply handcuffs. However, she pulled away, stepping back into the second responding officer who was standing behind her.
“It was almost one fluid motion,” said the third officer. “And, the second responding officer just basically does a slight hip toss and the [woman] lands on her back on the ground.”
Both the first responding officer and third officer said the woman “did not show any physical sign of injury or pain and did not cry out or complain of pain at any point.”
The third officer added that if the woman indicated she was injured, there was no reason to call the paramedics because they already had an ambulance waiting less than a block away.
A fourth officer told the IIO he arrived at the scene just as the woman was brought to her feet. He was told to transport the woman to hospital for a psychiatric evaluation. He added that he parked about 10 feet away from the scene, and the woman walked normally to his vehicle. On the way to the hospital, the woman didn’t say a word, not stating any injuries.
Because the woman requested a wheelchair to transport her from the police car into the hospital, the IIO attempted to obtain surveillance footage from the hospital. However, because more than a year had passed since the incident, the Jan. 6, 2024, video recordings were no longer available.
According to IIO chief civilian director Jessica Berglund, it was unfortunate that the woman did not make a complaint to RCMP when she attended the detachment in January 2024.
“This may have led to confirmation of her injury sooner and expedited notification to the IIO. Perishable evidence, such as surveillance recordings, might have been secured.”
Berglund added the officers’ actions were not unlawful or unjustified based on the available evidence. The woman admitted she didn’t respond to the first responding officer after several attempts, therefore giving the Mountie the right to apprehend her under the Mental Health Act. While it appears the woman suffered an ankle injury during the interaction, she was taken down to the ground to be handcuffed due to her non-compliance.
“Despite the [woman’s] assertion she told the officers she was injured, the allegation is inconsistent with medical reports which state she did not complain of ankle pain at the hospital until sometime after arrival there, and after all police officers had left,” stated Berglund.
Also, when the woman was reiterating the incident in her interviews, she acknowledged that she consumed a significant quantity of alcohol on the night of Jan. 5, 2024, leading up to the early morning Jan. 6 incident. Because of this, she said it’s possible she didn’t feel the pain of the injury until the alcohol’s effects started to wear off a few hours later.
“The evidence does not establish any officer used excessive force in the [woman’s] apprehension and is not consistent with any officer improperly ignoring the [woman’s] complaints, on the night of the incident, about having been injured,” added Berglund.
Read more on Comox Valley Record
