The dismissal hearing for former constable Alan Murdock has been delayed a week so he can hire a lawyer to help him sort through the voluminous amount of information against him.
Hearing officer Jay Watson, along with police lawyer Destiny Gibney and a court reporter, heard Murdock’s appeal for an adjournment during an Aug. 26 teleconference.
The hearing was supposed to start Monday, Aug. 31 at 9 a.m. at Grant Hall and run for three weeks, but Watson eventually ruled that the hearing would start on Tuesday, Sept. 8 from Monday, Aug. 31, to give Murdock time to meet with a lawyer.
The former officer’s main contention was he is entitled to legal representation under The Police Act, regardless of when he makes his request. Furthermore, he wanted more time to prepare because the Moose Jaw Police Service sent him a large folder of additional disclosure 11 days before the hearing was to begin, including the full 43-person witness list.
Murdock also pointed out that police Chief Rick Bourassa allegedly didn’t know what information to send him until he had submitted an updated notice of appeal. Yet, the former officer said, Gibney said during the Aug. 21 hearing that the timing of his notice wouldn’t have made a difference since the police’s evidence would have been the same regardless. Instead, he could have received all the information months ago.
“Eleven days is nowhere near enough time to argue the statement of facts and prepare motions to exclude the vast amount of frivolous and unnecessary material they tried to overwhelm me with,” continued Murdock.
Murdock added that he has spoken to a lawyer but has not hired one yet. He only started looking for legal counsel on the day he sent Watson his request for an adjournment.
While Bourassa had no problem with Murdock acquiring legal counsel — which is his right — the police chief objected to the fact the former officer had been given enough time to secure a lawyer, Gibney said. Murdock shouldn’t have been surprised about the volume of material since he knew about it for almost a year.
While Murdock was concerned about the additional information and the witness list being given to him 11 days before the hearing, that amount of time is allowed in the act, she continued. The police service told him five times between June 8 and Aug. 6 that it would rely on the regulations in the act, a fact he about which expressed no concern. He said nothing about the witness list, either.
Bourassa disputed the notion that the information given to Murdock was frivolous and unnecessary, Gibney said. The police chief also disagreed that the information was a large amount, as it fit into a large envelope, compared to the initial box of documents Murdock received.
“We have maintained all along that it is our duty to provide relevant disclosure when we become aware of it,” she remarked, “and we have advised Mr. Murdock of the same on six different occasions … .”
Gibney encouraged Watson to deny the request for a delay, since the longer this goes on, the longer it would take for the MJPS to re-establish trust with the public, among other things.
Watson acknowledged that Murdock was entitled to legal counsel under The Police Act, even though he could also represent himself.
While he was willing to adjourn the start date to Sept. 8 from Aug. 31, Watson allowed Murdock’s potential counsel to make another appeal for adjournment as long as it was before Thursday, Sept. 3. They would then schedule another phone hearing to discuss the need for another delay.
