MIDLAND – The response to media inquiries about charges laid against a Southern Georgian Bay OPP officer last week raises disturbing questions about police accountability and openness.
Const. Mark Lund, an OPP officer for 27 years, was charged with obstruction of justice June 16. The OPP issued a bare-bones press release – just 116 words in total – that was remarkable for its lack of detail.
Typically, such a document outlines the alleged actions that led to a charge being laid. For impaired driving, police will explain where and when the motorist was stopped, whether he or she exhibited signs of impairment, and the results of the breathalyzer test.
In the Lund case, however, police revealed no information that might have shed light on the case – well, except that the accused was off duty at the time, which seems a self-serving, exculpatory tidbit in light of how little else was divulged.
But outstanding questions remain. What precisely is Lund accused of doing? How was justice allegedly obstructed? Does it have something to do with the sexual-assault case involving Lund’s son Shayne?
The OPP would not even confirm that father-son relationship. In fact, they refused to provide an answer to any question posed, explaining they could not comment on a case currently before the courts.
Except they do so all the time. News releases from the police are never just a point-form list of name/date/time/place/charges. Relevant details about the allegations are always included.
What is different here? Well, one hesitates to say Lund is being shielded because he is a cop, but it is hard to see this as anything but a double standard.
Circling the wagons in this way not only makes it difficult for the media to do its job, but it also risks reporters appearing complicit in not reporting the information.
Playing such games, therefore, diminishes trust in two institutions that should strive to be above reproach.
http://www.simcoe.com/opinion-story/673 ... questions/