Barbora Klima Bratova
667 Karlsfeld Road
December 8, 2021
Re: Review Request for OIPRD complaint #210013558
I write this letter for my self and on behalf of Petr Klima who is my husband and father to our son, Eduard Klima. I am privy to the decision by the Waterloo Regional Police Service (WRPS) made on November 18, 2021 dismissing my complaint against the conduct of the WRPS Officers with respect to the events of June 2, 2021 and thereafter. I am aggrieved by the said decision and wish to tender my review request as contained hereunder.
Firstly, I categorically wish to state that I disagree with Officer Hawkins’ determination that my complaint was unsubstantiated.
I request a review based on the following:
- On or about December 1, 2017, our then 8-week-old baby, Eduard Klima, suddenly and without warning collapsed for reasons unknown to us at the time. We immediately called 911 and an ambulance was urgently dispatched to our home. Our son was soon rushed to Grant River Hospital for treatment and was wrongfully diagnosed as being the victim of child abuse. This is not and has never been the case as both my son and his twin sister have been afflicted with health issues. Both of our children have suffered from a metabolic bone disease of infancy (infantile rickets) and at the age of 8 weeks, our son developed Disseminated Intravascular Coagulation (DIC), a condition that caused clotting in his brain that led to his collapse. Furthermore, our developed seizures while receiving treatment at the hospital. The precise nature of our son’s medical condition is further explained in the attached expert medical reports (Attachment #1 Dr.Scheller’s report, Attachment #2 Dr. Turner’s report, Attachment #3 Dr.Hyman’s report summary – the whole report is over 100 pages long and available for review. These expert witnesses also testified at the criminal trial.)
- Sometimes in January 2018, the false allegations of child abuse led to criminal charges against my husband. This was a devastating accusation that threatened to destroy what little paradise we shared as a family. Thankfully, the wheels of justice did not fail and he was fully exonerated of all charges on March 30, 2021 and moved back home on the same day.
- Following my husband’s acquittal, our attorney requested that the WRPS Officers close the case file against my husband. Sadly, the request was not complied with in a timely manner. Instead, WRPS approved the file be closed on May 14, 2021 (Attachment #4), but failed to close the file up until July 27, 2021 (Attachment #5).
- On June 2, 2021, at approximately 10:00 pm, our son started having a seizure. My husband went to another room to retrieve the phone and call 911, while I attended to our son. The seizures did not occur often but we had always been prepared to respond should the need ever arise. Our son had visited a neurologist and was taking anti-seizure medication. He also has a Lorazepam prescription for emergency situations.
- This time the seizure was different because our son was gasping for air as though he was having difficulty breathing. Franticly, I immediately alerted my husband of the situation. I unknowingly confused my husband because I responded to the pressure of the situation by shouting out information both in English and Czech (in Czech – Volej 911, “Eddie divně dýchá” = Call 911, Eddie’s breathing is weird as “Eddie nedýchá” = Eddie doesn’t breathe). After a while my husband joined us and the phone was placed on a loudspeaker so we could better communicate with the emergency personnel.
This is verified by Officer Bradley Reinhart’s witness statement (71, p.23 of Officer Hawkins’ report): “The father advised he was in the other room when his wife yelled that something was wrong. The father again advised the son had a history of seizures.”
- During the seizure and our interaction with the 911 emergency personnel, our son was fully conscious as his eyes were open the entire time. The same information was communicated to the 911 personnel. However, this fact was gravely misrepresented in Officer Hawkins’ report which states (133, p.32): “Officers spoke to Mrs. Klima Bratova and her husband who advised that at approximately 10:05 pm their son was sleeping and then spontaneously woke up and began having a seizure. Ms. Klima Bratova then contacted emergency services and began CPR as her son was unresponsive.” “Upon emergency services arrival the Complaian’s son regained consciousness but was still having trouble breathing”. (134, p.33).
- I object to this description of events as the same is not accurate. Our son was sleeping when he started seizing. I shouted at my husband in the other bedroom to call 911, because our son’s “breathing is weird”. He never lost consciousness.
- During the almost 8-minute 911 call, it was clearly communicated to the operator that our son has a history of seizures and that the regular pattern of gasping is likely a presentation of a seizure. We informed her that we gave our son the anti-seizure medication Lorazepam, prescribed by his neurologist.
- It was also clearly communicated that our son did not stop breathing and that he continued to have a pulse. He was not unresponsive, blue-grey or lifeless (a presentation of his respiratory arrest in 2017). Despite this, I was instructed by the operator to start performing chest compressions, which I did. I was distressed and not in the state of mind to dispute her instructions.
- In her witness statement, Officer Cul Sac states “I was advised; via my dispatcher that CPR was being performed on the child, indicating that the child’s vital signs were absent. In this occurrence, the number of officers that attended were deemed necessary for multiple reasons as determined by supervisors and communications staff.” (38, p.18).
- My contention is not the quantity of the Officers called to our home, but rather the quality of the WRPS repsonse and the fact that upon receiving the 911 call, the Officers had been allerted about the previous false child abuse accusations and came to our home ready to investigate potential abuse/neglect.
- The police responded to the call by sending an officer from the Special Victims Unit to answer our emergency call, yet clearly our son was not a victim of any crime. Under the circumstances, I strongly urged to believe the police were acting on information that should have been previously updated.
- Officer Gillert wrote in his statement that prior to arriving at our house he was aware of “YPU prev involved in 2018 for 9 week old with unexplained injuries”. (Officer Hawkins’ Report, 82, p.24)
- Officer McIntyre wrote that “[o]fficers were aware of previous occurrences at this address involving physical abuse by the father.” (132, p.32)
- Officer MacMillan wrote in his statement that “[t]he responding patrol officers were concerned that the child’s current medical state may have been caused by parental neglect or abuse”. (118, p.30). However, He fails to explain the reasons for his abuse or neglect concerns.
- “Acting Sergeant McLean reviewed the previous reports located on the WRPS Niche Records Management System. This confirmed information provided by police dispatch the WRPS Youth Protection Unit had conducted a prior investigation involving Independent Witness 1” (172, p.42).
- The nature of the 911 call was a medical distress call not arising from the commission of an offence. The Police invited themselves into our home not with intention to ferry our son to the hospital, but with intention to investigate an offence with no diagnosis or supporting evidence to allege commission of an offence. The Police sought no authority and provided no explanation to request to entry into our home. The door had been left ajar for the paramedics. Upon my question whether they were there to help, the officers just told me that paramedics were on their way.
- Officer Gillert describes that he “entered via the open door, shouted into the house to determine where they were, entered the room, assessed the immediate needs and explained that additional help was on the way” (Officer Hawkins’ report, 97, p.27).
- He does not describe asking to be allowed to entry or explaining why they were there.
- “10:10 update “3YR old male, awake, breathing” (Officer Hawkins’ Report, 152, p.35) The officer should have stayed any unauthorized entrance by any police officer into the house.
- I urge that you supply me with a written explanation as to why the police entered our house without seeking consent or explaining their presence.
- When the paramedics arrived and were helping our son, I stayed in the same room, but stepped aside to the farthest corner. I was repeatedly asked by Officer Cul Sac, badge #1521, to step out of the room to speak to her. I repeatedly refused. She made me step outside and speak to her anyway. She reiterated questions that had previously been answered by my husband (what happened and my name and DOB). I was under no obligation to speak to her and I found her conduct disrespectful. In her testimony, she described my behaviour as “aggressive”, which I strongly object to. I was not aggressive verbally or otherwise. I was, distressed and worried for our son.
- Officer Gillert states that “Mrs.Klima Bratova continued to cause problems in the room where the first responders were trying to lay out their equipment and personnel for the child’s care”. (89, p.25)
- I strongly object to the accusation that I caused any problems. I very respectfully stood in the far corner of the room, about 1.5m away from the paramedics.
- Officer Reihart writes in his statement that “[t]he father provided his wife’s name and date of birth and the information aforementioned.” (Officer Hawkins’ report, 79, p.24)
- My son was taken to the Emergency Room (ER) at Grand River Hospital in an ambulance. I was allowed to follow in the ambulance and not in the same ambulance with our son. Before my arrival to the ER, Officer Cul Sac, badge #1521, had informed the ER staff that there was a previous occurrence of abuse with our son. I found the information to be irrelevant and likely to cause bias in the minds of the medical personnel when attending to our son.
- Officer McIntyre claims that “due to the nature of the occurrence detectives attended the hospital to aid in the investigation”. (135, p.33)
- The nature of the occurrence was medical, specifically a seizure. There was no reason for detectives’ presence in the hospital or the other measures taken against our family in our house. No report or diagnosis was produced by the Hospital to suggest anything beyond medical distress.
- I questioned why Officer Cul Sac stood guarding the door to the ER. I was curious about the presence of the police in the hospital when only issue at hand was my son having a seizure. (40, 0.18)
- The gist of the issue is that a child or any other person for that matter, having a seizure is not a reason for police presence in the ER.
- MacMillan: “During the incident, the patient, mother, EMS and police all arrived at the same time and the hospital area was very busy.” (31, p.16)
- This is not true. As I have stated above, I was not allowed in the same ambulance as my son. When I arrived, Officer Cul Sac had already arrived and my son had been stripped of his clothes, which were later that night returned by Officer Cul Sac. I was not in the ER at the same time as everyone else and learned about the false statements later.
- The ER report written by Dr.Walia specifically reads that he was provided with the information that “Dad had conviction due to assault and shaking of the child” [bold BKB]. (Attachment #6)
- Officer Cul Sac further claims that prior to my arrival, she did not speak to the ER physician, author of the ER report, only to the ER nurse. Officer Cul Sac did not deny saying anything about conviction, assault or shaking. She merely stated that she had no recollection saying the father had been convicted or anything about the child being shaken (Officer Hawkins report, point 57, p.21).
- “10:52 pm message from acting Sergeant McLean to Constable Cal Suc to update the hospital about the previous incident” (Officer Hawkins’ Report, 157, p.36).
- I find it hard to believe that the ER nurse or the ER physician would make up specifics like “Dad had conviction due to assault and shaking” based on their own imagination.
- Upon discovering the transaction of information above, we began to worry that the incident which my husband was exonerated of all charges was not over. Despite such acquittal, the police continued to react in a biased manner towards my husband and I. Constrained by the conduct of the police officers, we immediately instructed the law offices of Millars Lawyer to draw a cease and desist letter dated June 16, 2021. WRPS received the letter but still continued to rely on out-dated information (Attachment #6).
- According to Officer Hawkins, “[t]here is insufficient evidence to support Constable Cul Sac provided inaccurate or slanderous information to medical staff about Mrs.Klima Bratova or Independent Witness 1 [my husband, note BKB]” (Officer Hawkins’ Report, 269, p.60). I strongly disagree.
- At the ER, the topic of possible abuse came up and I explained to the physician that there was no abuse or shaking and charges brought against my husband were baseless as he was fully exonerated of all charges in March 2021. I also shared with him the specifics of my child’s diagnosis following the December 1, 2017 collapse – metabolic bone disease and DIC. I also requested that the expert medical reports by Dr.Scheller, Dr.Turner and Dr.Hyman be part of my son’s GRH file to avoid further victimization during possible future ER visits. Those reports are now a part of my son’s file at GRH.
- I was utterly shocked when the doctor shared the slanderous statements made by Officer Cul Sac. I verified to the physician that the father of our son was never convicted. Our children were subjected to further medical examination and diagnosis. It was then concluded that nothing out of the ordinary was in play and my husband was fully acquitted of all charges.
- It is worrying that I should find myself in the position that I need to contradict slanderous statements by a police officer while my son is in the ER with a seizure. The false and slanderous information tendered by Officer Cul Sac states: “Dad had conviction due to assault and shaking and living with them for the past month”. (p.8)
- Officer Hawkins summarized that I identified this information as concerning (p.5): “??? police officer telling us that the Dad had conviction due to assault and shaking of the child, but dad is acquitted on criminal court and currently lives with them for the last month”.
- I was victimized in the ER based on WRPS’s failure to update their records and by slanderous statements to the ER staff tendered by Officer Cul Sac.
- Officer Hawkins states that “[t]here is insufficient evidence to support Constable Cul Sac provided inaccurate or slanderous information to medical staff about Mrs Klima Bratova or Independent Witness 1.” (269, p.60), however he also states that “[w]iter told by WRPS #1521 that previous occurrence of abuse” (264, p.59).
- According to Officer Hawkins’ report (point 264, p.59), the ER nurse captured the following information in her medical report (SCAN exam report from 00:16 am June 3, 2021, Attachment #5):
- “WRPS badge #1521 presented with patient asked for patient clothing and belongings and told staff WRPS investigating for possible abuse. Writer told by WRPS #1521 that previous occurence of abuse [bold BKB] with child that presented similar with patient seizing. As per WRPS patient living with both parents”.
- “Civilian Witness 4 [ER physician] confirmed they did not speak with Constable Cul Sac. The information documented in the report [ER report attached, note BKB] was second hand information provided from Civilian Witness 3 [ER nurse, note BKB].”
- The issue is not whether the information was second hand or not. The issue is that Officer Cul Sac, upon arrival to the ER, informed the ER nurse that “there was previous occurrence of abuse”, which is a slanderous statement. The ER report then read that “the dad was convicted of abuse and shaking”, which information the ER physician had no access to save through the Officer Cul Sac. That specific information about “shaking” must have been provided by Officer Cul Sac – through the ER nurse- as well. There is no other way the ER nurse and ER physician would have had such information upon my arrival to the ER.
- The fact that Witness 4 [ER physician, author of ER report, note BKB] confirmed they did not speak directly to Constable Cal Suc and received the information second hand from Civilian Witness 3 [ER nurse, nore BKB] is irrelevant, given that the Nurse herself stated that “Writer told by WRPS #1521 that previous occurrence of abuse with child that presented similar with patient seizing”. (215, p.50)
- The WRPS Officer Cul Sac never explained to me why she was in the ER. When I inquired on the same, the response was “because you have a history of this”. She did not inform me that she was there to assist detectives because an investigation had been started. She also failed to inform me that my husband is disallowed from using his cell phone at home and has no information about what is happening with his son and wife.
- The Police further secured our bedroom and the entire house as a potential crime scene, with no indication as to what exactly is the cause of the investigation. They also took my son’s clothes for evidence and my husband was disallowed from using his cell phone to contact anyone (until 1:11 am on June 3, 2021).
- Officer Hawkins stated that “[p]olice officers have to assess situations, confirm people receive medical attention and preserve evidence for investigations if there are concerns of child abuse or neglect.” (242, p.56)
- I also object to Officer Hawkins’ advocacy of the WRPS’ officer’s actions to “preserve the evidence if the incident was deemed to be suspicious and required further investigation”.
- A seizure is a medical occurrence, not a suspicious “incident” over which a house needs to be treated as a crime scene and parents not allowed to reach each other
- Officer Hawkins further states that “[t]he prior incident of suspected child abuse in conjunction with a young child in medical distress requiring CPR, warranted further investigation by police to ensure there were no new issues of child abuse or neglect.”
- “The Investigator reviewed the Procedure of the Waterloo Regional Police Service for Child Abuse and Neglect”. The following information from the procedure applied to the incident on June 2, 2021:
- Neither the definition of abuse, child abuse, necessities of life or neglect applies to a child having a seizure.
- The Investigator’s advocacy for investigating seizure as an “incident” of “neglect or abuse” lacks basis thereof.
- “Due to the medical incident on June 2, 2021 and the report of alleged abuse from 2017, further police investigation was required to ensure there were no current concerns of child abuse or neglect”.
- It was the laxity and failure of the Police to properly update their records and prevent this incident from occurring. The allegations of child abuse arising in 2017 were proven to lack substance and all charges failed. Instead of apologizing to the family and updating their file as requested by the lawyers, the police acted on their previous false accusations more than 3 years later in the case of our son having a seizure. That is unacceptable conduct.
- The Investigator, Officer Hawkins, fails to explain how the procedures regarding abuse or neglect apply to the medical emergency from June 2, 2021. A written explanation of the same should be in order to clear the air on this issue.
- I would like to get a written explanation as to how suspected child abuse from almost 4 years ago that was proven to be false and a child having a seizure warrants further investigation by police. What concerns of child abuse or neglect were there were on June 2, 2021 that led to police starting an investigation?
- My husband was restricted from using his cell phone. With respect to the police officers, my husband asked the officers at our house to pass along a message to me in the ER, but the same was denied. Instead, they suggested that he uses another form of communication such as the internet. I did not have access to the internet at the time and was not able to check for potential communication even if my husband was able to send a message. During this time, my husband was in complete darkness on his son’s current state of health until after the investigation was closed at 1:11 am on June 2, 2021 and the police vacated our house.
- At 11:42 pm, about 45 minutes after my son’s arrival to the ER, the WRPS officer MacMillan reported the medical distress to the Family and Children’s Services (FACS) (as per his statement in Officer Hawkins’ report, 120, p.30, even though the ER staff had advised that our son was having a seizure and was responding to anti-seizure medication as expected. It was clear that our son was not a victim of harm or abuse.
- Officer Hawkins states that “[p]olice have a duty to report suspected incidents of child abuse or neglect to Family and Children’s Services (FCS). Detective Constable MacMillan notified FCS as per his obligation as a police officer and to make ensure there were no outstanding concerns or investigations involving the family.” (250, p.57)
- WRPS officers had no right to share information about my son with FACS when there was no indication of neglect or abuse. That the entire incident was intended to further frustrate our efforts to seek honest medical attention for our son.
- “When an incident of child abuse or neglect is suspected officers must notify Family and Children’s Services to confirm any outstanding issues […]” (204, p.47)
- Detective MacMillan had no right or obligation to contact FCAS, as there were no concerns of abuse or neglect raised by the ER staff. On the contrary, the physician and the paediatrician clearly stated and reiterated that our son was suffering a seizure and there were no concerns for neglect or abuse.
- Officer MacMillan ought to have sought authority to obtain or report any information on potential open files with the FACS with respect to concerns of abuse or neglect.
- The SCAN report from 00:16 am on June 3, 2021 ordered by WRPS officers states that patient is aware of FACS was contacted. I wish to state that such information was never provided as the patient was a minor and no communication was made to the guardian of such minor.
- The SCAN report reads: Risk that likely to suffer physical harm present: Yes
- Also – no voiced concerns from Dr.Allie (emergency physician), no voiced concerns from Dr.Walia (pediatrician)
- There was no basis to support the allegation that our son was under risk of suffering physical harm. No diagnosis was made to indicate danger to the minor through his guardians. Further, the assessment of risk of suffering physical harm was based on out-dated information which the WRPS was obliged to update. There was no present danger to the minor on June 2, 2021 or ever before.
- I was not made aware of the fact that WRPS reported to FACS until after I unexpectadly found the investigation records pertaining to the June 2, 2021 seizure within the documents I had requested from FCAS before, regarding their previous involvement following the false child abuse accusations.
- WRPS called FCAS Waterloo. Officer Cul Sac’s witness statement says that “I did not contact Family and Children’s Services in regards to this occurrence. While at the hospital in the emergency room, I was handed a phone by hospital staff and told it was Family and Children’s Services. At that time, I spoke to Family and Childrens Services at their request. I cannot speak to the policy of the nursing staff at Grand River hospital or to what information they had that led them to call.” (48, p.19)
- FACS were called by WRPS, just not by Officer Cul Sac, but by Officer MacMillan, as per the statement in 120, p.30.
- Based on this call, FCAS opened a file on our family, investigating potential abuse. This investigation will always be a part of the documentation about our family, despite the fact there were no signs of abuse in the first place and in such a situation, there is no duty to report by WRPS Officers.
- Officer MacMillan stated that “whenever police have concerns regarding a child’s safety and wellbeing, Family & Children’s Services are notified” (Officer Hawkins’ Report, 129, p.32).
- “Police officers have a duty to report incidents involving children when there are concerns for their safety” (168, p.38)
- None of the “reasonable grounds” listed in 168 applies to a child having a seizure.
- I asked other families I know with medically fragile children whether after a 911 call when their child had a medical emergency, FCAS was ever called by the police. Noone has this experience, and the children of the families have children with seizures multiple times more frequent than our son.
- I would like to get a written explanation of what exactly the concerns regarding a child’s safety were on June 2, 2021 that led to WRPS to call FACS and request information about our family.
- Upon the request of WRPS at 00:16 am on June 3, 2021, my son was subjected to a SCAN exam for signs of abuse, including a chest X-ray, without my consent or knowledge (Attachement #7). The exam showed no concerns, which was the narrative of the ER staff all along.
- Officer MacMillan stated that “Upon receiving the doctor’s assessment, I approached Mrs Klima Bratova […] I offered to explain why police were present and to have a conversation with her addressing any concerns she may have”. (Officer Hawkins’ Report, 126, p.31)
- This is a conversation that should have happened in the very beginning, as the police entered our house, started an investigation, accompanied us in the ER and waited at the door for hours without speaking to me.
- In the ER Officer MacMillan did not offer to explain their presence, apologized for the stress this incident caused or wished my child a fast recovery. He simply said that he wanted to speak to me, but I declined to engage him without a lawyer present.
- I would certainly appreciate a written explanation for starting an investigation and an apology by the WRPS for the stress they caused our family with their actions on June 2, 2021.
- Supplementary report by Det.Cst.McMillan, badge #1210 from 2021/06/03 01:40 says:
- “On June 2, 202, the Special Victim’s Unit was requested to attend Grand River Hospital regarding 3-year-old Eduard KLIMA (2017/09/26) who had a seizure. Concerns were raised due to previously reported incidents where the father was accused of assaulting the child as an infant in 2017. The father, Petr KLIMA (1979/02/22) had previously moved back into the family home in May 2021.
- The father moved back home right after the trial was done on March 30, 2021.
- There were no incidents – plural – where the father was accused of assaulting the child as an infant in 2017.
- Officer MacMillan fails to add the crucial inforamtion, that the accused was fully exonerated of all charges and at the time of the June 2, 2021 incident, the records pertaining to that, should have been destroyed (as per point 3 of this Review request).
- Hence, when my son had a sezure, concerns should not have been raised and Special Victim’s Unit not called.
- According to police records, Officer Cul Sac, badge #1521, report time: 2021/06/29 06:58, reported the incident from June 2, 2021 as follows:
- “On June 2, 2021 at approximately 10:09 the complainant, Barbora KLIMA contacted emergency Services for her son, Eduard KLIMA who was having a medical emergency.
- Cst.REINHART, Cst.GILLERT and Cst.CAL SUC attended the residence located at 667 Karlsfeld Road in the City of Waterloo. Officers were aware of previous occurrences at this address involving physical abuse by the father, Petr KLIMA towards his children. (WA19172129)
- Officers spoke with Petr and Borbora who advised at approximately 10:05 Eduard was sleeping and spontaneously woke up and began having a seizure. Borbora then contacted emergency services and began CPR as Eduard was unresponsive. Upon emergency services arrival Eduard regained consciousness but was still having trouble breathing. Eduard was transported to Grand River Hospital by ambulance.
- Due to the nature of the occurence detectives attended the hospital to aid in the investigation. It was determined through speaking to the ER physician that the medical emergency was caused by Eduard’s medical condition.
These statements highlighted in her report in bold are untrue.
- I did not contact emergency services, my husband did while I was tending to my seizing son
- Cst. REINHART, Cst. GILLERT and Cst. CAL SUC arrived at the residence located at 667 Karlsfeld Road in the City of Waterloo. They entered our house without asking for our consent through the door open for the paramedics. At no point did they ask if they are allowed to enter or explained their entrance without our consent.
- The assertion that there were multiple occurrences at our residence is false.
- There was ONE previous occurrence, when our son Eduard, suddenly collapsed and was rushed to the hospital. As the last caretaker, my husband was criminally charged and FULLY EXONERATED of all charges on March 30, 2021.
- (WA19172129): On December 1, 2017, my son collapsed due to a medical condition called Disseminated Intravascular Coagulation that caused him to have clots in his brain that caused hemorrhaging. His condition was entirely medical.
- My husband was fully exonerated of all charges on March 30, 2021 and moved back home right after the trial was done (not in May 2021).
- Waterloo Regional Police Service failed to update my husband’s records until July 27, 2021 (letter attached), while they have approved his request for file closure on May 14, 2021.
- My son did not wake up and started having a seizure. He was asleep and started seizing. He had a pattern of gasping for breath. He never stopped breathing or become unconscious.
- I gave him emergency antiseizure medication Lorazepam prescribed for these cases by his neurologist and my husband called 911.
- I did not begin CPR by myself, as he always had a pulse and breathed. I only did CPS chest compressions upon the instructions of the 911 dispatcher.
- Eduard did not regain consciousness upon arrival of the paramedics, because he never lost consciousness in the first place. He was still gasping for breath upon their arrival, same way as when the sizure started.
- “Due to the nature of the occurrence detectives attended the hospital to aid in the investigation” – the “nature of the occurrence” was a seizure, a medical emergency, that did not require the presence of the police in the hospital or an investigation.
- Officer Hawkins misunderstood the basis of my complaint when he stated that: “On June 2, 2021 it is alleged that Officer Cul Sac neglected her duty as police officer when she responded to a medical call involving the son of Mrs.Klima Bratova”. (236, p.55)
- The above statement does not truly capture the basis of my complaint.
- My complaint was regarding the conduct of the officers in our house (entry without asking, no explanation for presence, house kept as a scene, no possibility to use phone to contact wife in the ER, involvement of Special Unit – all based on bias due to previous false child abuse accusations as opposed to any signs of abuse or neglect), Officer Cul Sac’s slanderous statements to ER staff about shaking and assault as well as to me “you have a history of this”.
- “Mrs Klima Bratova was concerned inaccurate information had been provided to the hospital staff by Constable Cul Sac.” (230, p.54)
- On the contrary, I was concerned with Officer Cul Sac’s slanderous statement that “there were previous occurrences of abuse” in the form of “assault and shaking”.
- “Mrs.Klima Bratova had concerns with police being in her residence. Section 529 of the Criminal Code of Canada authorizes police officers to enter a dwelling without warrant when exigent circumstances exist.” (220, p.51)
- I did not complaint about the police entering our house without a warrant, but they entered without asking or explaining their presence
- “exigent circumstances” exists where “there is an imminent danger of the loss, removal, destruction or disappearance of the evidence if the search or seizure is delayed.” None of this applies in case of a medical seizure. The officers acted on bias based on porevious false child abuse accusations from 2017.
In summary, I am deeply bothered – for the reasons stated above and the evidence attached – by the fact that neither Investigator Officer Hawkins, nor Inspector Lackovic of WRPS Professional Standards Department, found my complaint unsubstantiated and I ask for a review of all materials.
Our family wishes to move on from the trauma inflicted by the events of this incident and the false abuse charges. It has wreaked havoc on every single member of our family for over three years. We wish to be able to comfortably reach out to 911 emergency services and to receive fair and just services like any other citizen. I do not want to fear reaching out for help in case our medically fragile child, or any other member of our family, happens to need medical attention. We ask that WRPS owns up to their own errors and stop to continuously victimize us for unsubstantiated allegations.
At Legal writing experts, we would be happy to assist in preparing any legal document you need. We are international lawyers and attorneys with significant experience in legal drafting, Commercial-Corporate practice and consulting. In the last few years, we have successfully undertaken similar assignments for clients from different jurisdictions. If given this opportunity, The LegalPen will be able to prepare the legal document within the shortest time possible. You can send us your quick enquiry ( here )