Jump to Navigation
Being Accused of a Crime is Incredibly Stressful.  We Understand the stress that any charge brings and will do everything possible to reduce the weight on your shoulders.  At Mines & Company we will explain strategies, answer your questions and present you with options that will provide the best possible outcome for you.

Mines client successful in Skytrain Police assault case

Mines client successful in Skytrain Police assault case

Teacher taking SkyTrain cops to civil court

VANCOUVER COURIER
By Mike Howell-Staff writer

A 27-year-old teacher who claims two SkyTrain cops tackled her last fall and hit her in the eye with a flashlight is furious with the justice system after learning the Crown decided not to proceed with charges against the cops.

Christy Logeman, a special education teacher in Vancouver, required facial reconstructive surgery after last November's incident, near the Stadium SkyTrain station, said her lawyer Michael Mines.

Vancouver Lawyers Criminal Law - MinesLaw imageVancouver Lawyers Criminal Law - MinesLaw image


Logeman learned Wednesday the assault charges had been dropped, but a message left Thursday for Crown counsel spokesman Geoff Gaul was not returned to the Courier before deadline to explain the decision.

"She's irate," said Mines, who's launched a civil suit against TransLink and the special constables on Logeman's behalf.

According to Mines, the two SkyTrain special constables rushed Logeman from behind, pinned her to the ground and then one of them struck her with a flashlight in the face.

At the time, Mines said, Logeman was chasing her boyfriend after he stole her wallet and keys. The boyfriend, who had a court-imposed no-contact order with Logeman, took her belongings after she refused to allow him to go home with her, Mines said.

She was tackled just after she took a swing at her boyfriend with a shopping bag containing sandals. Logeman suffered a broken bone around the eye and continues to receive medical care for her injury, he said.

Mines noted his client was initially charged with assaulting the SkyTrain cops, but the charge was dropped after the SkyTrain cops couldn't prove to Crown how Logeman specifically suffered the injury. The boyfriend was not charged.

In a rare court procedure, Logeman was then successful in getting provincial court judge Jocelyn Palmer to approve assault charges against the SkyTrain cops.

The Crown, however, decided not to proceed with the charges based on a recommendation from a Vancouver city cop investigating the incident. No
date has been set for the civil trial.

TransLink spokesman Ken Hardie said Mines' purpose in contacting the media is to simply seek publicity and get Logeman's name published in the Courier.

"If she's going to proceed with the suit, why is she looking for publicity as well?" Hardie said. "TransLink and the special constables will deal with this where it should be, and that is in court."

Hardie wouldn't comment on the incident, but cautioned that Logeman's story is simply based on claims at this point. He did, however, say SkyTrain cops often don't know who is the "bad guy" or "good guy" when responding to an altercation.

"All we know is that there are two people going at each other, and in some cases it's necessary to simply separate them and treat everybody the same way."

TransLink employs about 70 SkyTrain cops, the majority of them retired RCMP and city cops. With about 52 million boardings a year on SkyTrain, Hardie said his office receives about 10 complaints a year of alleged wrongdoing regarding SkyTrain cops.

The New Westminster police department has an agreement with TransLink to investigate all complaints against SkyTrain cops-unlike the province's municipal police departments, who are investigated by the Office of the Police Complaint Commissioner.

New Westminster police continue to investigate the allegations against the SkyTrain cops in the Logeman incident, Hardie said.

Recent Successes | Click to View
  • April 17, 2012
    R. vs. B.H. - North Vancouver Provincial Court
    Charge:Assault Causing Bodily Harm (domestic).
    Issue:Whether the evidence was sufficient to prove bodily harm.
    Result: Mr. Mines was able to persuade Crown to proceed on the lesser charge of simple assault. After hearing Mr. Mines' submissions, the Court granted his client a conditional discharge. No conviction.
  • April 13, 2012
    R. vs. B.M. - Vancouver Provincial Court
    Charge: Assault.
    Issue: Whether it was in the public interest to proceed with a criminal charge.
    Result: Mr. Mansoori-Dara was able to persuade Crown Counsel to stay the criminal charge upon his client entering into a Peace Bond. No criminal conviction.
  • April 12, 2012
    R. vs. J.T. - Vancouver Provincial Court
    Charge:Extortion (x4); Uttering Threats.
    Issue:Whether there was a substantial likelihood of a conviction.
    Result: After considering Mr. Mansoori-Dara's representations with repect to the credibility of the complainants, Crown counsel entered a stay of proceedings. No criminal record.
  • April 12, 2012
    R. vs. R.B. - Vancouver Provincial Court
    Charge: Driving While Prohibited; Failing to Attend Court.
    Issue: Whether it was in the public interest to proceed with the charges.
    Result: Mr. Mines was able to persuade Crown Counsel to proceed on the lesser charge of driving without a licence and to stay the FTA charge. No criminal record. No driving prohibition.
  • April 2, 2012
    R. vs. A.A. - Vancouver Provincial Court
    Charge: Criminal Harassment.
    Issue: Whether it was in the public interest to proceed with the prosecution.
    Result: The Crown had originally sought a jail sentence, however Mr. Mines was able to persuade Crown to stay the criminal charge upon his client entering into a Peace Bond. No criminal conviction.
  • March 28, 2012
    R. vs. L.D. - Richmond Provincial Court
    Charge: Theft Under $5000 (shoplifting).
    Issue: Whether, given the circumstances, it was in the public interset to proceed with a criminal charge.
    Result: Mr. Mines was able to intervene at the earliest stage of the prosecution, He persuaded Crown Counsel to approve no charge in this case. No record
  • March 27, 2012
    R. vs. V.T. - Richmond Provincial Court
    Charges: Extortion.
    Issue: Whether the Crown would be able to prove the Extortion offence.
    Result: Mr. Mansoori-Dara was able to persuade Crown Counsel to stay the Extortion charge and to proceed on the lesser offence of criminal harassment. Crown originally sought a significant jail sentence, but agreed to make a joint submission for a conditional discharge. No jail. No conviction.
  • March 26, 2012
    R. vs. P.S. - Vancouver Provincial Court
    Charges: Sex Assault; Assault.
    Issue: Whether Crown would be able to prove that there was no consent given, resulting in a conviction for sex assault.
    Result: Mr. Mines was able to persuade Crown to stay the sex assault charge and proceed only on the lesser charge of common assault. The Crown originally sought a significant jail sentence, but agreed to a joint submission of one day (less time served) and probation.
  • March 9, 2012
    R. vs. J.Z. - Vancouver Provincial Court
    Charge: Breaking and Entering; Possession of Stolen Property.
    Issue: Whether, given the circumstances of this commercial property offence, it was in the public interest to proceed with a criminal prosecution.
    Result: Mr. Mines was able to persuade Crown to allow his client into the Alternative Measures Program. No criminal record.
  • February 15, 2012
    R. vs. C.S.F. - Vancouver Provincial Court
    Charge: Theft Over $5000 (from employer).
    Issue: Whether the Court would impose the one year jail sentence the Crown sought in this $100,000 theft from employer case.
    Result: After hearing Mr. Mines' submissions, the Court granted his client a Conditional Sentence Order. No jail.
  • February 15, 2012
    R. vs. S.N.K. - Vancouver Provincial Court
    Charge: Assault Causing Bodily Harm.
    Issue: Whether, in the circumstances, it was in the public interest for Mr. Mines' client to receive a conditional discharge.
    Result: Though the Crown sought a jail sentence due to the degree of injury sustained by the complainant, the Court, after hearing Mr. Mines' submissions on his client's behalf, granted a conditional discharge.
  • February 14, 2012
    R. vs. A.A. - North Vancouver Provincial Court
    Charges: Criminal Harrassment; Threatening.
    Issue: Whether the Crown would be able to prove the criminal charges.
    Result: Despite his client having a prior related record, Mr. Mansoori-Dara was able to persuade Crown Counsel to stay the criminal charges upon his client entering into a Peace Bond.
  • January 31,2012
    R. vs. E.B. - Richmond Provincial Court
    Charge: Assault Police Officer.
    Issue: Whether, in the circumstances, it was in the public interest for Mr. Mansoori-Dara's client to be granted a conditional discharge.
    Result: After hearing Mr. Mansoori-Dara's submissions, the court granted his client a conditional discharge. No conviction.
  • January 25, 2012
    R. vs. V.K. - Richmond Provincial Court
    Charges: Theft Under $5000 (from employer).
    Issue: Whether it was contrary to the public interest for Mr. Mines' client to be granted a conditional discharge.
    Result: After hearing Mr. Mines' submissions, the Court granted a 9 month conditional discharge. No criminal conviction .
Michael Mines - Profile Reza Mansoori-Dara - Profile
Free Initial Consultation

Bold labels are required.

Contact Information
disclaimer.

The use of the Internet or this form for communication with the firm or any individual member of the firm does not establish an lawyer-client relationship. Confidential or time-sensitive information should not be sent through this form.

close