Mike on Crime (17 page)

RCMP Cpl. Chris Blandford, a collision-reconstruction expert, told court he met with Bakema at the scene to discuss what had happened. Blandford said Bakema revealed a police officer had been responsible—and that drunk driving appeared to be the cause.

“He told me [Harvey-Zenk] was impaired; it was an attitude like ‘My God, what was he thinking?' He was very disappointed that this had occurred and a member of the Winnipeg Police Service was the offender,” said Blandford. Paramedics on the scene of the fatal crash reported smelling alcohol on Harvey-Zenk's breath, according to testimony at the Taman inquiry. But Bakema later testified he didn't believe Harvey-Zenk had been drinking.

Blandford said he shared his disappointment with Bakema as they chatted at the scene. He also credited the East St. Paul police for doing a good job in securing the crash site upon his arrival.

TUESDAY MAY 1, 2012

Was it an innocent conversation—or the sign of something nefarious? Details of a face-to-face chat between Harry Bakema and Derek Harvey-Zenk at the scene of a deadly crash were raising new questions. A pair of witnesses to the tragedy told court how they observed Bakema and Harvey-Zenk speaking around the same time firefighters were frantically working on the wreckage of Crystal Taman's crumpled car.

“They were having words back and forth. That interaction seemed to go on for a while. I wouldn't say it was a heated conversation,” said Garth Shaw. He was driving into Winnipeg for work that morning when Harvey-Zenk flew by him at high speed and smashed into Taman's vehicle. “I would say he was doing at least 80 km/h,” said Shaw. He rushed to check on Taman after the crash and realized there was nothing he could do. So he returned to his vehicle to call 911, then watched later as Harvey-Zenk and Bakema walked together to go speak on the side of the road. Shaw said Harvey-Zenk appeared to be walking “slow and deliberate.”

Another witness to the crash told a similar story of seeing the two men chatting as she was being checked out for possible injuries in the back of an ambulance. The woman had been driving a car that was hit by Taman's after the initial collision.

TUESDAY MAY 8, 2012

His former police colleague had just been involved in a high-speed crash that left an innocent motorist dead. Nevertheless, Harry Bakema seemed to quickly reject suspicion the off-duty officer may have been impaired despite conflicting reports at the scene.

Ken Graham, a former East St. Paul officer, told court he smelled a strong aroma of booze inside Harvey-Zenk's empty vehicle following the deadly crash, but Bakema didn't agree. “He stuck his head in and said he couldn't smell anything,” Graham said. Bakema had personal contact with Harvey-Zenk at the scene and told Graham “he could not smell any alcohol on him.” Graham never dealt with Harvey-Zenk to make his own observations, court was told.

Rolland Fontaine, a paramedic who responded to the crash, previously testified about a “very noticeable” smell of alcohol on Harvey-Zenk. Bakema also told Graham he had worked in the same Winnipeg police district as Harvey-Zenk before Bakema moved to East St. Paul. “He said this is a mess. We have a mother, a wife, who's been killed. He felt bad for the family and bad for the kids. And he said we have a Winnipeg police member who just screwed up his career,” Graham said. Bakema told Graham he was going to assign another veteran East St. Paul officer to take over the investigation because he didn't want to create any perception of bias based on his personal history with Harvey-Zenk.

Under cross-examination, Graham said Bakema would not have deliberately sabotaged an investigation. “Harry is not the type of guy to ask someone to change their notes,” Graham said. But he described Bakema as having a very poor memory, which seemed to be getting worse around the time of the fatality.

WEDNESDAY MAY 9, 2012

It was perhaps the most explosive piece of evidence yet. Jason Woychuk, a former constable with the East St. Paul police service, told court he was ordered by his boss, Harry Bakema, to exclude details of suspected impairment in his notes about Derek Harvey-Zenk.

Woychuk said a paramedic at the scene indicated that Harvey-Zenk may have been intoxicated at the time of the tragedy. But Bakema ordered him to keep those details out of his report. “I was told not to put that in my notes. I don't recall him giving me a reason why,” Woychuk testified. He said Bakema himself indicated that Harvey-Zenk was “impaired, or possibly impaired” as he brought the accused over to his cruiser car and placed him in the backseat.

Woychuk said he was also told by Bakema to write that he was transporting Harvey-Zenk to the ESP police station for the purpose of making a traffic accident report. In reality, he took him back there to be arrested. Woychuk claimed Bakema gave him these instructions in response to Woychuk's concerns they may have breached Harvey-Zenk's Charter rights at the scene by detaining him in a cruiser car without any formal charge or caution. “I felt there was probably a Charter breach,” said Woychuk. Woychuk told court how he signed an immunity agreement with RCMP in 2010—only to be arrested months later and threatened with charges including obstruction of justice and perjury. However, no formal charges were ever laid.

Under cross-examination, Woychuk admitted he never observed any signs of impairment on Harvey-Zenk. But he rejected suggestions from defence lawyer Hymie Weinstein that Bakema never commented about possible intoxication or that the paramedic didn't express an opinion about Harvey-Zenk's state of sobriety. “[The paramedic] made one of those motions with his hand tipped to the mouth, like he'd been drinking,” said Woychuk. He told court he doesn't believe the investigation was deliberately botched and agreed with a previous statement given to police in which he said there was “maybe a screw-up, but not a cover-up.”

THURSDAY MAY 10, 2012

An innocent woman had just died, and yet Harry Bakema was allegedly more concerned about the fate of the off-duty Winnipeg officer responsible for her death. Corrine Scott, a retired superintendent of the Winnipeg Police Service, told court about a puzzling call she received from Bakema immediately after the crash. “Harry was really focused on Derek Harvey-Zenk and not on the lady who lost her life. He was very concerned for Derek Harvey-Zenk's well-being,” Scott told court. “I was honestly a bit disappointed in Harry.”

Bakema called Scott directly from the crash scene, less than an hour after the deadly incident, to warn her about Harvey-Zenk's involvement in the tragedy. “Harry told me Derek had been drinking, he was at a party and smelled of liquor,” said Scott. She began the process of notifying other senior members of Winnipeg police. “I've never experienced an incident before where a member was impaired to the extent of causing this type of accident,” she said.

Harvey-Zenk testified earlier in the day and told court he had no memory of the events surrounding the deadly crash. He was asked numerous questions about the specific details of the case—including socializing at a lounge with fellow off-duty officers, partying at one of their homes overnight and then driving his vehicle directly into Taman's. But he claimed to only recall vague flashbacks, such as an arm-wrestling contest at the house party and feeling the brunt of the impact. The rest is a foggy blur, he said.

As for his consumption of alcohol prior to the tragedy?

“I don't have any recollection of that,” he said repeatedly. Harvey-Zenk said he also didn't recall ever dealing with Bakema, either at the scene of the crash or at the East St. Paul police station. “I don't really recall being at the police station,” he said. “I don't recall ever seeing Harry Bakema at the station.”

Harvey-Zenk admitted he previously worked with Bakema in the same Winnipeg police station before Bakema left to pursue the top job in East St. Paul. But he said there was never any personal friendship between them, although he did play in hockey games organized by Bakema.

Winnipeg police patrol Sgt. Cecil Sveinson added to the growing amount of alcohol-related evidence when he repeated testimony he previously gave at the Taman inquiry—that Bakema told him at the scene of the crash Harvey-Zenk was “pissed.”

Sveinson, who was cousin of Taman's, went to the crash scene to perform a ceremonial smoke ceremony for the victim. He said Bakema added they had to get Harvey-Zenk “out of there right away.”

FRIDAY MAY 11, 2012

He was the police officer left holding the proverbial bag when a high-profile prosecution fell apart. Yet the most senior former member of the East St. Paul police pointed the finger of blame at former chief Harry Bakema for the botched investigation of a deadly car crash. Norm Carter testified as the final Crown witness against Bakema. Carter was a sergeant at the time of the February 2005 incident.

Among Carter's discoveries were a set of “rough notes” from Bakema that hadn't been included in disclosure to special prosecutor Marty Minuk. Carter said he also noted Bakema continued to take witness statements despite the fact he wasn't the lead investigator. “He was chief of police. I didn't question that,” said Carter, who was later appointed East St. Paul police chief after Bakema was removed.

Bakema's lawyers tried to pin the blame on Carter, accusing him of making numerous mistakes with the investigation, including failing to get a warrant for a sample of Harvey-Zenk's blood at the request of the prosecutor. “I maintain to this day I did not feel I had the grounds,” Carter explained. As well, Carter admitted to an “oversight” in not forwarding a traffic reconstruction report to the Crown upon request. He also admitted to inadvertently writing that Harvey-Zenk refused a “blood demand” in his report, when really it was a “breath demand.”

THURSDAY MAY 17, 2012

It had been a compelling legal odyssey that had already cost a woman her life, a Winnipeg police officer his job and a municipal police service its status. Now the only question left to answer was whether the scandal surrounding a fatal car crash would also claim one final victim: the former East St. Paul police chief who headed up the controversial investigation. Harry Bakema sat stone-faced in court as Crown and defence lawyers vigorously debated whether he should be convicted of perjury, obstruction of justice and breach of trust. Provincial court Judge Kelly Moar reserved his decision following a full day of closing arguments.

Both sides presented dramatically different views of Bakema's role in the case. Crown attorney Ashley Finlayson told court there was no doubt Bakema deliberately overlooked compelling evidence that suggested his former police colleague, Derek Harvey-Zenk, was drunk at the time of the deadly crash. “Harry Bakema took no further meaningful steps to investigate Derek Harvey-Zenk. One can only speculate what might have happened after that,” said Finlayson.

Bakema's lawyer, Hymie Weinstein, argued the Crown had failed to prove there was any criminal intent on behalf of his client. He suggested several former police officers who testified at the trial were either mistaken or misleading the truth about what happened. At worst, Bakema was guilty of making unintentional errors, he said. “What was done was not done for any criminal intent,” said Weinstein. He argued other East St. Paul officers were also negligent in how they handled the case. Weinstein also pointed to the words of Bakema in a 2010 interview with the RCMP while urging Moar to find him not guilty.

“This was not an intentional cover-up to protect a Winnipeg member. I was not covering up impaired symptoms of Zenk. I did my job. I tried to make sure everyone does their job. I did not botch the investigation intentionally. I wouldn't throw my name away for nobody,” Bakema had said.

Weinstein took issue with the testimony of several witnesses, who had painted an ugly picture of Bakema's role in the investigation. The decision was now in the judge's hands.

FRIDAY NOVEMBER 1, 2013

A memorial still sits at the intersection of Lagimodiere Boulevard and the Perimeter Highway, serving as a constant reminder of a horror that unfolded more than eight years ago. Now, the family at the centre of the ongoing legal saga admitted they'd grown tired of fighting for justice after what may be the final chapter played out in a Winnipeg courtroom.

“It's time to move on,” a clearly frustrated Robert Taman said outside the downtown courthouse. “We're done.” Moments earlier, he had watched Harry Bakema walk free of any criminal wrongdoing for his role in the botched investigation surrounding the death of Taman's wife, Crystal. It was a decision Taman expected. But it didn't make it any easier to stomach. “Let's just say justice takes two steps backwards today,” said Taman. “I think when we all look at everything that took place over the last 8 1/2 years, it's pretty clear.”

Bakema, now 62, was found not guilty of perjury, obstruction of justice and criminal breach of trust. Provincial court Judge Kelly Moar said there was no doubt Bakema made several terrible decisions that fateful day “which he will have to live with the rest of his life.” But he ruled the Crown failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt Bakema intentionally sabotaged the case.

Taman's said it was “ridiculous” it took Moar 18 months to come up with the verdict. “Everyone should be embarrassed by that amount of time,” he said. Now the family planned to focus on the future and hoped nobody else would endure what they had. “When it comes to matters like this, we've learned that what's clear to the general public is sometimes foggy to the people that make the decisions and create our laws,” said Taman.

I
am a firm believer that every would-be driver should have to sit in at least one sentencing hearing for an impaired driver before they obtain their licence. The raw emotion that is present in every courtroom would impact them in a way that advertising campaigns simply cannot. Because let's face it: The current model is simply not working. Not enough drivers are getting the message. Increased sentences don't seem to be changing behaviour. And there's certainly no shortage of public awareness on the issue.