ST. JOHN'S, N.L. — “Constable Snelgrove, NCO office,” came a transmission over RNC. Const. Doug Snelgrove’s radio at 3:16 a.m. on Dec. 21, 2014.
At 3:17, having received no reply, the staff sergeant sent another message.
“Constable Snelgrove, NCO office.”
“Go ahead, sorry,” Snelgrove, Royal Newfoundland Constabulary badge No. 623, radioed back. His last contact with the RNC communication centre had been five minutes earlier, when he had radioed to say he had left the downtown lockup, where he had brought a man for being drunk in public.
“When you get a chance, can you give (an RNC phone number) a call? Give me a shout there,” the staff sergeant said.
“10-4, copied,” Snelgrove replied.
At the time, Snelgrove was about to park outside the east end home of a 21-year-old woman, who later told the RNC that the officer had sexually assaulted her after picking her up downtown.
After an investigation that included the assistance of the Ontario Provincial Police (OPP), a review of the RNC’s vehicle GPS systems on the night in question, the extraction of Snelgrove's DNA in a biological substance on the woman's couch and interviews with the woman’s friends, Snelgrove was charged with sexual assault and suspended without pay from the police force.
He pleaded not guilty to the charge and is on trial for the second time: he was acquitted by a jury in 2017 before a new trial was ordered.
Prosecutor Lloyd Strickland closed his case against Snelgrove in Newfoundland and Labrador Supreme Court Monday afternoon. Over the course of three days, Strickland had called eight witnesses to testify in an off-site courtroom at the former School for the Deaf, which offers enough space to allow for social distancing. Among those who testified were police officers, friends of the complainant, and the complainant, now 27 and no longer living in St. John’s.
The woman told the court she had spent the night with friends, first having drinks at a friend's home before heading to a nightclub downtown. At a certain point, she realized she was “too drunk to be out,” she said, so she left the bar and walked toward Water Street to try to hail a cab.
Snelgrove, on duty and in his RNC vehicle, put down his window to ask if she was OK and if she needed a ride home, she testified.
“I thought it was safer to go with a police officer if he was offering me a ride,” she told the court.
The woman said her memory of the night was hazy on account of her intoxication. She remembered arriving at her apartment and not being able to find her keys, then Snelgrove getting a window open so she could climb inside, she said. She remembered letting the police officer in through the door and kissing him. She remembered sitting down on her couch because she felt too drunk to stand.
“The next thing I remember, I came to and he was having anal sex with me,” the woman told the court. “In the drunken state I was, I don’t know if I gave consent or not.”
Strickland explained to the jury in his opening remarks that a person cannot legally give consent if they are severely intoxicated or if they are unconscious, and they can’t legally consent to sexual activity with someone in a position of authority or trust who abuses that position to induce the consent. All sexual activity without consent is a crime.
Strickland told the jurors his position is that Snelgrove had seen the young woman, drunk and looking for a ride home, and had taken advantage of the situation to sexually assault her.
On the witness stand Monday, three of the woman’s friends told the court they had been drinking with her that night, and all described her as having been drunk.
On cross-examination, defence lawyer Jon Noonan asked one of the witnesses why she had told police in an interview, “I don’t know what (the complainant) was drinking, but she seemed good.”
“The entire time I was giving that statement I didn’t know what it was about,” the woman replied. “(The investigator) told me there was a cop involved and I didn’t know why. I thought there was no reason for the police to be involved since there hadn't been any fighting or anything. She never told me until the end that it was about a sexual assault. When I said she seemed good, I was talking about behaviour-wise.”
Retired RNC sergeant Tim Hogan also testified Monday. He had been the lead investigator in the case for three months, before handing it over to the OPP. He had concerns about objectivity in a situation of the RNC investigating one of its own, he said, and his superiors decided to call in the Ontario police to do it instead.
Hogan reviewed the communication centre logs for the court and spoke of the RNC’s unwritten policy for officers, when transporting a female, to call in with their location, destination and mileage. Once at the destination, officers call in again with an update.
“It’s basically what I’ve seen, what I’ve heard and what I’ve done myself over the years,” he explained to Strickland of the policy. “Did I see it on paper? No.”
Noonan asked Hogan if the policy was enforceable, or if he had ever seen consequences for an officer who didn’t follow it. Hogan said no.
Noonan pointed out the RNC’s vehicle GPS systems would have been tracking Snelgrove’s every movement.
“There’s no way for an officer to hide from the communications centre and turn off the GPS, is there?” Noonan asked.
“Correct,” replied Hogan.
Noonan asked Hogan if the GPS in Snelgrove’s vehicle had placed him outside the lockup, then turning east on Water Street when he left. Hogan said yes, it did.
The complainant had testified Snelgrove was in his vehicle, parked west of the lockup when she met him.
Hogan said, in response to Noonan’s questions, the RNC communication logs tracked police tasks and conversations between the centre and officers. Just because there’s silence over the radio doesn’t mean an officer isn’t working, he explained.
Snelgrove will take the witness stand when court resumes Tuesday morning. After that, Noonan and co-defence Randy Piercey will call one more witness before closing their case. At that point, Justice Garrett Handrigan will deliver his final instructions to the jury, who will then be sequestered until they reach a verdict.
