Good afternoon. I would like to thank you for having invited me here today.
I have been working as a police officer at the Service de police de la Ville de Montréal, or SPVM, for 19 years, and have spent almost 15 of those years on sexual exploitation investigations. Today I have decided to speak to you about what is happening on the ground, to give you an overview of how human trafficking works and what tools Bill C-452 could provide to us.
What we have to understand is that victims of human trafficking do not come to the police. What is of note in this type of situation is that we have to conduct proactive investigations to find victims of human trafficking. That has to be our main concern. The section on human trafficking and Bill C-452 do not limit these victims' freedoms. Quite the opposite; they give police the tools they need to be proactive and save these victims. These people are victims of serious crimes that often are similar to torture.
It's very clear that people who have been raped, held captive, abducted and burned are afraid for their safety and for their lives. The victims are unanimous: when they finally agree to come to see us, they are terrified of dying. What they are most concerned about is not whether the individual who did this to them will be arrested; they want to be assured they will be protected if they speak out. The first reflex people have when they have lived through such atrocities for so long is not to go to the police. Instead, it is to try to get away, to try anything, but not to speak out.
This explains why, in 80% of the cases we handle, we go and meet the victims, but they refuse to speak to us or to provide a statement. The statement never happens because they are terrorized, or, from another perspective, because they don't consider themselves to be victims, based on the cycle. It is a long cycle, it was mentioned earlier that victims are manipulated, desensitized and seduced until they meet with the more violent aspects of human trafficking.
It is extremely interesting to note that the bill provides for presumption. I want to assure you that presumption does exist in investigation on the procuring of persons. It is already there but it does not give carte blanche to the police. It does not free us from having to produce proof beyond a reasonable doubt.
Here is an example of what presumption would allow us to do on the ground. Let's say that a trafficker controls six girls at the same time but that one of them manages to escape and does in fact agree to file a complaint. The other five will be terrorized, or not consider themselves to be victims, and will not want to do so. However, if there is presumption, we can use it and the testimony from the first victim as well as other investigation techniques to press charges regarding the other five victims. This is the kind of tool presumption would give us.
In other cases, we know that a trafficker controls a young woman. I could tell you about this kind of case all afternoon. If the young woman refuses to work, she will be locked up in the trunk of a car for an entire day or be made to kneel on an open rice bag in a living room somewhere all afternoon. We have the information; we know the woman works as a prostitute every day to bring in money, but we cannot build a case if she does not speak to us. However, with presumption and various investigation techniques, we would be able to press charges.
Human trafficking is a crime perpetrated over a long period, day after day, and it is often associated with other serious crimes such as kidnapping, forcible confinement, sexual assault, assault and death threats.
When human trafficking charges are laid, the charges that I have just described apply to 80% of the cases. Without making light of the seriousness of any crime of any type, we are not talking about a bank holdup. We are talking about predators who plan the exploitation of individuals, treat them as merchandise day after day, and take every possible step to make as much profit as they can, using these people.
Indeed, consecutive sentences for such serious crimes that have gone on for so long are clearly a deterrent. If you will recall the first part of my statement, when I mentioned that 80% of the victims will never come to see us, and when you think of the five- or six-year sentences that are given, and the fact that the victims want to be protected, you will understand that this will be extremely useful. I should also tell you that nearly all of the victims who finally agree to talk to us want to withdraw their testimony at some point in the process. Once again, it is for the same reasons; it is because they are afraid, scared, etc.
In one of the most recent cases where an individual was found guilty of human trafficking, the victim had to go back to court 15 times to be cross-examined by the defence in a way that defies description.
I apologize, I am somewhat emotional, but that is what I wanted to tell you. As for the rest, I would be happy to answer your questions.