SCANDALOUSLY SLOPPY HANDLING BY INTEGRATED HOMICIDE INVESTIGATION TEAM!

THE B.C. Court of Appeal has upheld the acquittal of Samandeep Singh Gill in the shooting death of Manbir Singh Kajla and the attempted murder of Kajla’s wife.

The ruling was posted on the court’s website on Monday and the summary reads: “In a murder investigation, police obtained a warrant to search a house where the accused resided along with members of his extended family. The warrant specifically authorized a search for the accused’s cellphone, but did not mention any other cellphones, nor did it refer to any surveillance devices.

“During the search, the police seized nine cellphones, without regard to whom they belonged to. They also seized a video surveillance device. When their authority to detain the seized items expired, they continued to hold them, deliberately refraining from seeking an extension.

“More than six years later, the police obtained authority to search the cellphone, and found, to their surprise, that it contained an audio recording of the murder.

“At trial, the Crown sought to tender the recording, other information derived from three of the phones, and surveillance videos from the seized surveillance device. The trial judge found that both the initial seizure and the retention of the phones and the surveillance device were unlawful and violated the accused’s Charter rights. He excluded the evidence, and the accused was acquitted.

“The Crown appealed. Held: Appeal dismissed. The trial judge made no reversible error in finding that the initial seizures were unlawful, as was holding them after authority to do so expired. The trial judge’s decision to exclude the evidence was within his discretion.”

THE VOICE reported on April 14, 2021: “The BC Prosecution Service (BCPS) are scrambling to deal with a veritable dilemma as a host of murder cases may well be in jeopardy after Samandeep Singh Gill, who had been charged in 2018 with second-degree murder in the 2011 death of Manbir Singh Kajla and attempted murder of Kajla’s wife, was acquitted last March.

“The RCMP told the media in 2018: “On the night of April 27, 2011, Mr. Kajla and his new wife, having only been married that morning in Canada, were driving along 68th Avenue and 128th Street, when a minor collision occurred between the Kajla’s vehicle and that of Samandeep Gill. When Mr. Kajla approached Gill’s vehicle, he was shot by a suspect, who then fled the scene. Mr. Kajla was found suffering from multiple gunshot wounds and later died in hospital.”

“The alleged audio of the shooting recorded on a cellphone that the police seized from Gill’s home was considered inadmissible because of violating Section 490 of the Criminal Code that stipulates that police need an additional court order for holding evidence beyond 90 days.

“B.C. Supreme Court Justice David Masuhara slammed the Integrated Homicide Investigation Team (IHIT) for doing so in spite of receiving legal advice. Evidence in Gill’s case was held unlawfully for nearly seven years.

“Masuhara said: “The IHIT policy of noncompliance amounts to systemic, flagrant disregard for charter protected rights … I find that IHIT, was at best, wilfully blind towards the charter implications of the policy.”

“He added: “The fact that the police, in this case, sought and received legal advice that explicitly deemed compliance mandatory makes these actions more egregious.”

“Gill’s lawyer, Matthew Nathanson, told Global News that the mandatory provisions of the criminal code are rules and not a loophole. He stressed the importance of police abiding by constitutional parameters and respecting people’s constitutional rights.”

The VOICE also said: “The judge noted in his ruling that a sergeant’s testimony indicated that there were “likely hundreds of files impacted by the blanket noncompliance policy while it was in effect from 2007-2014.””

IN April 2021, then-Attorney General David Eby announced in April 2021 that he had directed the B.C. Prosecution Service to retain Professor Craig Jones, QC, to review the B.C. Supreme Court oral ruling in the Samandeep Gill case, as well as several other rulings applicable to this matter. Jones was to provide an opinion on the viability of a Crown appeal in this case.

However, now the B.C. Court of Appeal has upheld the B.C. Supreme Court ruling.

Its ruling can have serious repercussions on a raft of criminal cases.

Ruling: www.bccourts.ca/jdb-txt/ca/24/00/2024BCCA0063.htm

From the B.C. Court of Appeal ruling:

“It does not appear that the police conducted any further investigations with respect to the seized items within the three-month period of authorized detention. They failed to make an application to extend the detention period. The evidence indicates that the failure was deliberate, and that it was IHIT policy at the time not to apply for extensions, so as to avoid tipping off suspects as to the state of investigations.

“In 2016, the file was transferred to the RCMP Unsolved Homicide Unit, but that unit did not immediately take any steps in respect of the seized items. In January 2018, a without notice application was made to authorize further detention of the cellphones and the SVAT device, and a two-year extension was granted. In argument, the Crown acknowledged that any extension would be without prejudice to Mr. Gill’s right to argue that the continuing detention of the devices from August 2011 until early 2018 had been unauthorized.

“On February 28, 2018, the police obtained an order to examine the iPhone. To their surprise, they found that it contained an audio recording of the shooting. The recording is one and three-quarter minutes in length. It includes the voices of two men (Mr. Gill’s voice was identified by his brother-in-law) and a screaming sound that appears to be from a woman. Several gunshots are heard. It is not clear how the recording came to exist, but the Crown theory was that the accused had both the iPhone and a Blackberry with him at the time of the shooting, and pocket dialled the iPhone from the Blackberry.

“The audio recording was crucial to the case, as it identified the accused as the person involved in the shooting. The SVAT data was also important, as it showed comings and goings from the home that were consistent with the iPhone’s transfers from one cell tower to another.”