Lawyers finish final arguments in RCMP officer’s assault trial

An RCMP officer on trial in Iqaluit will have to wait a little longer for a judge’s verdict after lawyers finished making their cases in court Thursday.

Const. Luke Tomkinson is charged with assault with a weapon and uttering threats.

Defence lawyer David Butcher and Crown prosecutor Yoni Rahamim made their final arguments in a trial that began more than a year ago and was delayed for several months while lawyers argued about whether a pair of incident reports Tomkinson filed were admissible evidence.

Tomkinson’s charges stem from a Feb 15, 2020, incident while he was deployed as a relief officer in Arctic Bay.

That morning, he and Const. Jesse Byer were called to help a woman who was overdosing inside the home of Andrew Muckpa. Upon entering, the pair were drawn into arresting another person, which was filmed by Muckpa’s son.

Tomkinson is accused of pointing his conducted energy weapon, also known as a stun gun, during the scuffle and shouting a threat at Muckpa, who was seated about two metres away.

Const. Jesse Byer, left, and Const. Luke Tomkinson arrest Ivan Oyoukuluk in Arctic Bay on Feb. 15, 2020. In this screenshot from a video, Tomkinson appears to be pointing his stun gun toward Andrew Muckpa, who is seated out of the frame. (Screenshot from Devon Muckpa/Facebook)

“This is an unusual case,” Butcher said, because the allegation of assault revolves around Tomkinson displaying his stun gun but not actually discharging it.

Tomkinson’s actions were justified and in line with RCMP training, Butcher argued.

He said Muckpa was threatening Tomkinson and gesturing as if he were going to get off the couch and interfere with the arrest.

By displaying his stun gun and using profane language, Tomkinson prevented the situation from escalating and helped save the woman who was overdosing, Butcher said.

Butcher also scrutinized Muckpa’s testimony, drawing on his admission that he had previously been aggressive toward police and pointing out what he said were inconsistencies in Muckpa’s recollection of events.

Rahamim, though, argued that Tomkinson “lost his cool.”

“This was an overreaction to an insult,” the Crown lawyer said, referring to Muckpa calling the officers a derogatory name before Tomkinson reached for his stun gun.

Rahamim said Tomkinson’s testimony was not reliable, pointing to discrepancies between his testimony and what he wrote in his reports more than four years ago.

For example, Rahamim said, Tomkinson couldn’t fully recall which part of Muckpa’s body he was pointing the stun gun toward, as well as when and how many times Muckpa uttered “I’ll kill you.”

Rahamim also argued that Tomkinson’s actions, especially his use of profanity in his threat to Muckpa, were not in line with RCMP training and policies.

Rahamim said Tomkinson should have told Muckpa to remain seated and not interfere. Instead, he said, the officer warned “I’ll get you right in the [expletive] face,” while pointing the stun gun at Muckpa.

Butcher briefly responded, saying Rahamim is “playing Monday morning quarterback” over the way Tomkinson should have acted in response to a perceived threat.

“You’ve done a fine job on both sides presenting your case,” Justice Christian Lyons said after both lawyers spoke.

Lyons said he has a lot of material to consider before he can make a decision but that he doesn’t want to let the case linger on.

The verdict, he said, “will be out before Christmas so everyone can move on.”