Person involved in B.C. crash must wait longer to get their blood back

Judge extends blood seizure order as police conduct Surrey impaired driving investigation

A person involved in a Surrey traffic crash in 2017 will have to wait longer to get his or her two vials of blood back from the government after a B.C. Supreme Court judge granted an extension of the seizure order as police continue their impaired driving investigation.

Justice Robert Jenkins decided so on June 15 in New Westminster, finding it difficult to imagine for what possible reason the individual might need their tubes of blood returned to them.

The Crown had applied for a “Judicial Authorization for an Order for the Further Detention of Things Seized” concerning two vials containing the blood of a “potential accused” that was taken while that person, whose name has not been made public, was in hospital following a single-automobile crash in Surrey on Feb. 19, 2017.

A Mountie armed with a warrant seized the blood, which was drawn by hospital staff, on Feb, 24, 2017, at Royal Columbian Hospital related to an impaired driving investigation.

READ ALSO: Crown recommends 150 years for Quebec mosque shooter

READ ALSO: B.C. Christian school mulls covenant, future of law school after court ruling

A justice of the peace granted the initial detention order for the blood samples on March 1, 2017, allowing for them to be held until May 23, 2017.

An affidavit by Constable Dharm Prihar indicated the blood was to have been analyzed by the RCMP Forensic Assessment Centre within that period, “however the submission of the exhibit to the lab and analysis took longer than expected.”

“I believe that further detention is crucial because of its evidentiary value,” Prihar told the court.

Jenkins granted the Crown an extension of up to 18 months from the date the samples were seized.

“The ‘things” which are the subject of this application are vials of blood taken from the suspect,” Jenkins noted in his reasons for judgment. “There is no reason given in the matter before me of ‘the exact nature of their need for return’ and it is difficult to imagine what possible need the suspect may have for the same. The items which are the subject of detention could not possibly be needed for any purpose such as if a cellular telephone, a vehicle or other object had been seized which may be used on a regular basis by its owner.”



tom.zytaruk@surreynowleader.com

Like us on Facebook Follow us on Instagram and follow Tom on Twitter

Just Posted

VIDEO: Walking to fight MS

Annual event draws 150 participants

VIDEO: Langley walk to fight Alzheimer’s took place outdoors and in

Second annual fundraiser at Chartwell Langley Gardens Retirement Community

VIDEO: Inaugural township-wide garage sale rated a success

‘It went extremely well,’ said veteran garage sale participant

Police say it’s “impressive” no arrests were made after Raptors celebrations

Toronto will play the Western Conference champion Golden State Warriors next

Semis catch fire at wrecker off Highway 1 in west Abbotsford

Crews called to scene at around 2 p.m., finding up to six semis that had caught fire at the wrecker

Social media giants in hot seat as politicians consider regulations in Ottawa

Committee members will also grill representatives from Facebook, Twitter

Wildfire crews watching for dangerous wind shift in High Level, Alta.

The Chuckegg Creek fire is raging out of control about three kilometres southwest of the town

UN urges Canada to take more vulnerable Mexican migrants from Central America

The request comes as the United States takes a harder line on its Mexican border

Mistrial declared in Jamie Bacon murder plot trial

Bacon was on trial for counselling to commit the murder of Person X

B.C. VIEWS: Money-laundering melodrama made for TV

Public inquiry staged to point fingers before 2021 election

Canadian homebuyers escaping high housing costs by moving to secondary cities

In British Columbia, exurbs have grown in the Hope Valley and Kamloops

Most Read