Questions about the custody order were raised in Jackson's kidnapping trial

Article content

When RCMP officers broke down the door of a home in Carievale, SK on November 26, 2021, they were looking for a man and his child.

The RCMP had a court order in place and the officer who called to enter Michael Gordon Jackson's home believed that order gave him the authority to use any means necessary to arrest the seven-year-old girl. When they searched the house, neither the man nor his child were there.

Article content

Article content

But was the order in effect?

Since Jackson's trial began Monday in Regina's Court of King's Bench, a jury has heard two officers testify that they believe so. The jury also heard how the 55-year-old defendant, acting as his own lawyer, questioned their beliefs.

Earlier in the trial, Jackson pleaded not guilty to one count of kidnapping in violation of a custody order and intermediate December 6, 2021 and January 21, 2022. The trial continued on Tuesday.

Crown prosecutor Zoey Kim-Zeggelaar told the jury she wanted to show that Jackson had “driven his daughter away” and had intended to do so.

On Monday, the prosecutor asked Const. Derek Dyck, why he entered Jackson's home on November 26th.

He replied that the entry was in the hope of finding the child and “bringing him to safety.”

Jackson later pressed Dyck, who said he couldn't remember Jackson ever being arrested for harming his daughter before.

On Tuesday, the court heard from Sgt. Warner Ignatiuk, who was Dyck's supervisor at the time.

Under cross-examination he was questioned about a report he had written about the saga involving Jackson, who was eventually arrested in Vernon, B.C

Article content

Article content

Jackson asked if the officer would agree that he had stated multiple times in his report that there was “no danger whatsoever” to the child.

“Based on my research, I would agree with that,” Ignatiuk said.

The court heard that the court order giving police the power to arrest Jackson's daughter was suspended at one point, meaning the order was suspended and did not take effect. However, it is still unclear when exactly the postponement was issued. Ignatiuk testified that after the stay, he left a telephone message for Jackson to contact him and reassure him.

Under questioning, Jackson told Ignatiuk that the message contained an assurance that police were aware of the suspension and that they would not come to “harass” him while they awaited the outcome of an upcoming court date.

However, the police came to visit on December 1, 2021. Twice, according to Dyck, who said RCMP heard that locals had spotted Jackson in Carievale, so he and another officer went to the defendant's home but did not locate him. He also testified that the RCMP detachment received a call from Jackson telling him he was scared, hiding and thought the Carnduff RCMP officers were “up to something.” Police attended a second time and eventually spoke to Jackson through a second-story window, he said.

Article content

Jackson didn't leave the house to talk to officers, but he did speak to Ignatiuk on the phone, the court heard.

The sergeant testified that he agreed to a vote of trust between them that included an assurance that police would not execute a warrant for Jackson's arrest until a December 2021 court date that Jackson planned to attend.

He said Jackson later informed him of the outcome of the court hearing (the stay of the court order was lifted, giving police the authority to arrest the child) and “pre-warned” that he and his daughter would not be home when the police would take a look.

When Ignaituk was present, the defendant and his daughter were nowhere to be found.

They were in Vernon in February 2022.

The trial is scheduled to continue on Wednesday.

[email protected]

Article content