nelson final version rii

7/27/2019 Nelson FINAL Version RII

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/nelson-final-version-rii 1/8

C A N A D A

PROVINCE OF QUEBEC C O U R T O F Q U E B E C

DISTRICT OF MONTREAL

No: CAITLIN NELSON,student, domiciledand residing at 2209 Wilson, in the City

of Montreal, District of Montreal,Province of Quebec, H4A 2T4

Plaintiff

v.

CITY OF MONTREAL, having a placeof business at 775 Gosford, 3rd Floor, inthe City of Montreal, District of Montreal, H2Y 3B9

-and-

ALEXANDRE VIAU, police officer,having a place of business at 775Gosford, in the City of Montreal, Districtof Montreal, H2Y 3B9

INTRODUCTORY MOTION IN DAMAGES

PLAINTIFF DECLARES:

THE PARTIES

1. Plaintiff is student attending Concordia University;

2. Plaintiff is an Anglophone originally from Alberta living permanently inMontreal since the spring of 2012;



3. Plaintiff is also a photographer for Independent Media;

4. Plaintiff is a political activist, demonstrator and one of the administrator of the facebook group called “Liste du SPVM”;

5. “Liste du SPVM” is a facebook group which advises citizens on how tomake complaints against police officers;

6. Plaintiff does not have a criminal report and has never engaged in anyviolent behavior;

7. Defendant Alexandre Viau is a police officer employed by the City and isinvolved in many of the incidents involving Plaintiff, it is not alleged that heis the sole perpetrator but that his presence was very frequent;

8. The City of Montreal is the employer and is jointly and severally

responsible for the employees actions;

9. Plaintiff reserves the rights to add other police officers participating in theevents mentioned below;

THE FACTS

10. Since May 2012, P laintiff has been repeatedly and systematically ticketed,removed from events, arrested and detained for her political activism bythe Montreal police;

11. As soon as Plaintiff participates in any political or large social event,Plaintiff is systematically singled out, targeted and sanctioned;

12. The Plaintiff has experienced the following sanctions for her politicalactivism;

A. On May 13th, 2012, Plaintiff was charged by a horse belonging

to the riot police and slightly injured;

B. On May 19th, 2012, during a protest, Plaintiff was violently

searched by the police;

C. Towards the end of May 2012, Plaintiff asked a police officer

how to leave a protest which was turning into a confrontation



and the officer forced Plaintiff back into the crowd and shortly

after the riot police used tear gas;

D. In J une 2012, Plaintiff was ticketed and detained on numerous

occasions, during those events Plaintiff expressed that she did

not speak French but Defendants refused to speak to her in

English;

E. On J uly 30th, 2012, Plaintiff was searched and detained for a

short period of time;

F. Since J uly 30th, 2012, police officers started referring to Plaintiff

as “Katie”;

G. In the afternoon of August 8

th

, 2012, Plaintiff was approached bypolice and advised her frightened friend to give her identification

and that she did have to talk to the officer; this is when

Defendant Viau, ticked Plaintiff, questioned Plaintiff on her

political affiliations and told her to go back to Alberta;

H. In the evening on August 8th, 2012 , Plaintiff was followed while

walking on the street by police officers, they began cat-calling

her “Miss Alberta” ; Eventually Plaintiff received a ticket for

spitting; it is to be noted Plaintiff was spitting because she had

been tear- gassed earlier that day;

I. On August 14th, 2012, Defendant Viau ticketed Plaintiff for not

using the side walk during a protest;

J . On August 17th, 2012, Plaintiff was violently arrested for

expressing a political opinion, the officer used pain compliance

methods despite that Plaintiff was not resisting Plaintiff stated

she did not speak French and the officers refused to inform her

of the motives of her arrest in English;

K. On August 18th, 2012, Defendant Viau ticketed Plaintiff for not

using the side walk during a protest;

L. On August 23rd, 2012, during a nightly protest, Defendant Viau

shouted at Plaintiff “to go home because she was not from



here”, other officers started making kissing sounds at Plaintiff,

Plaintiff mentioned this was sexism, Plaintiff was later fined;

M. On August 29th, 2012, Plaintiff received four jay-walking tickets

from police officer Sylvain Brosseau, while her friend walking

with her only received one;

N. On August 31th, 2012, while attending a large protest, Plaintiff

was pushed violently on a fence and she injured her wrist;

O. In the summer of 2012, Plaintiff was quietly having a coffee in

the park with friends, when she was approached by the police,

the officers violently hand-cuffed, arrested put Plaintiff at the

back of a police car and drove her around for 40 minutes before

the officers decided let her go by throwing her things out of thecar;

P. On September 1st, 2012, Defendant Viau fined Plaintiff for

swearing in a park an event that had apparently taken place the

day before, Plaintiff was also fined because the ash of the

cigarette she was smoking fell to the ground;

Q. On September 4th, 2012, Plaintiff was fined and briefly

detained;

R. On September 5th 2012, Plaintiff was arrested and searched;

during the search, the officers looked at Plaintiff’s text

messages, her facebook, her emails, her twitter, her notes;

during that time Defendant threatened that handcuffed would be

used if she did not sit down on the ground, while detained

officers commented on her beautiful eyes and made other

comments on her looks; P laintiff was detained for 20 minutes;

S. Towards the end of September 2012, Police officers mocked

Plaintiff for filming a protest;

T. On October 22nd, 2012, Police officers started cat-calling

Plaintiff commenting on how she was dressed; Plaintiff was

arrested, an officer twisted her arm violently commenting “oh



you like it like that”, P laintiff was paraded and presented to other

officers as “Katie”, the officer made comments about Plaintiff

that she could not understand but by the reaction of others,

Plaintiff knew the comments were inappropriate; Later, Plaintiff

was officially arrested, physically searched in front of male

officers, Plaintiff was detained all night, for many hours she was

denied contact with her lawyer; while Plaintiff was sleeping in

the holding cell, officers amused themselves by waking Plaintiff

by cat-calling her; While Plaintiff was in custody, police officers

used her phone to call her contacts;

U. On October 26th, 2012, Plaintiff was verbally attacked and

detained for 35 minutes for walking with a friend whom was

holding a black flag;

V. On November 9th, 2012, Plaintiff was ticketed for shouting;

W. On November 14th, 2012, P laintiff was ticketed and called “a

Bitch” and other words she does not understand by various

police officers;

X. On February 9th, 2013, while participating in a protest, officers

implied to other protesters that she had snitched on them during

her October 22th, 2012 arrest;

Y. On February 26th, 2013, Plaintiff was followed by police officers

and told to go back to Alberta;

Z. On March 15th, 2013, Plaintiff was followed and harassed

throughout of the city by the same officers;

AA. On March 19th, 2013, while being kettled, the police mocked

her by pointing at her and chanting “Katie”;

BB. On March 22nd, 2013, Plaintiff was verbally abused for

posting pictures on the “liste du spvm” facebook page; the

police continued following her shouting “Katie”;



CC. Later on March 22nd, 2013, during a protest Plaintiff was

arrested, searched and questioned about her facebook page

and why she had filmed police officers;

DD. On April 5th, 2013, police officer asked Plaintiff’s roommate

personal and inappropriate questions about their type

relationship;

EE. On April 21th, 2013, Plaintiff was ticketed and arrested by

Defendant Viau; Defendant Viau put Plaintiff at the back of a

police car and ordered other officers to driver her around;

Plaintiff was released 35 minutes later;

FF.On May 1st, 2013, after the police had kettled protesters and

were in the process of loading them on the bus, when it cameto Plaintiff’s turn to board the bus, the officers told her she would

be the last one to leave; Plaintiff waited outside in the sun for

hours, she was denied water, Plaintiff began to feel unwell and

asked to see a medic but the officers refused; later a female

officer lifted Plaintiff shirt during a search exposing her upper

body in front of male officers, While P laintiff was exposed the

males officers laughed loudly, As a result of being denied water,

Plaintiff was treated by an ambulance technician for

dehydration;

GG. In J une 2013, Plaintiff was walking by a police car and the

officers kept calling her name “ Katie remember me Katie”, later

that day, the same officers kept screaming “ ca va Katie, ca

va?”;

HH. Plaintiff attended the Grand Prix 2013 celebration on

Crescent, she was followed by the police for a significant

distance, Plaintiff feared for her safety and tried to leave,

Plaintiff was later arrested for no apparent reason;

13. The list of tickets, fines and other documents is attached en liasse, thedocuments are filed as Exhibit P-1;



14. The high frequency and the systematic nature of these events make itstatistically impossible for the source of these sanctions to be anything butpolitical profiling or a personal vendetta;

15. Despite that some of the events occurred more than six months ago, the

fact that the profiling and vendetta continue makes this a single fault inwhich no part is prescribed; in any event the last six months cannot beprescribed;

16. Moreover, the extend of the profiling became apparent gradually and theevents of March 22nd, 2013 made it particularly clear;

THE FAULT:

17. Plaintiff has been systematically harassed, targeted and sanctioned byDefendants because of her political activism; while Defendant is clearlythe most responsible many unidentified police officers took part in theseactivities;

THE DAMAGES:

18. Plaintiff is entitled to $24 000 in damages;

19. Plaintiff suffered important moral damages, has felt great stress, anguish

and insecurity;

20. Plaintiff considers herself unjustly targeted for her political belief and tosome extend gender;

21. Given the importance of the damages suffered by P laintiff, Plaintiff isentitled to $20,000.00;

22. Moreover, Plaintiff is entitled to $4,000.00 in punitive damages given that

Defendants intentionally violated Plaintiff fundamental rights;

ACTION

23. Defendant Viau’s action are clearly actionable;



24. Moreover, the City of Montreal is the employer and is jointly and severallyresponsible for all of the employees’ actions and for the delicts committedby the police;

PROCEDURE

25. A mise en demeure was sent to each of the Defendants on August 15th,2013, and is filed under Exhibit P-2;

WHEREFORE MAY IT PLEASE THIS HONORABLE COUR TO:

ALLOW this action;

ORDER Defendants jointly and severally to pay the Plaintiff the amount of $24, 000.00, with interest at the legal rate, plus the additional indemnity

provided by law, to accrue from August 20th

, 2013;

THE WHOLE, with costs.

Montreal, this 22nd day of August 2013

GREY CASGRAIN, s.e.n.c.

Attorneys for Plaintiff

nelson final version rii

Documents