It all began with a grainy, soundless cellblock video.

Its release sparked controversy — and soon after, charges of sexual assault against Ottawa Police Sgt. Steven Desjourdy, who’s captured snipping off the petite prisoner’s shirt and bra with scissors.

It was the heart of the trial where neither he nor the woman took the witness stand.

But the judge who saw it over and over found Desjourdy justified in cutting off the “volatile and assaultive” woman’s clothes and not guilty of sex assault.

“On all of the evidence, I am satisfied that he cut off (the woman’s) top and bra for a valid law enforcement objective which was to complete a reasonably necessary search of (her) for weapons and contraband,” Judge Tim Lipson ruled Wednesday.

“I am left in reasonable doubt that Sgt. Desjourdy cut off the bra and shirt in order to punish and humiliate (her). I am also satisfied on all of the evidence that there was no sexual context to Sgt. Desjourdy’s conduct.”

The police didn’t escape criticism from the judge. He said the woman’s arrest for public intoxication was illegal and she should never have been left topless in urine-soaked pants for hours.

The woman, who said in a statement entered into evidence that she felt “absolutely humiliated” and “sexually violated,” left court without comment.

The yelling woman, who’d slipped a cuff, is seen struggling to turn during a search by Special Const. Melanie Morris who “understandably” feared she’d spit or bite, the judge said.

Another special constable put her in a wrist lock while Morris, feeling her lunge, delivered knee strikes — standard techniques to control resisting prisoners, Lipson found.

Morris starts searching, her hand slipping into the woman’s pants as she struggled, then the woman lashes out with mule kicks that leaves Morris in obvious pain.

Two officers ground the woman for her and their own safety. Lipson found their suspicion she was hiding something — anything from a razor blade to a crack pipe — was reasonable.

Desjourdy holding the woman facedown with a shield was reasonable, too, Lipson said.

He then snipped her clothing from behind.

“Sgt. Desjourdy never physically touched (her),” Lipson said. “He used safety scissors designed and kept in the cellblock for the purpose of cutting clothing. He cut her shirt and bra quickly. Sgt. Desjourdy and other officers made sure that the cut clothing covered (her) breasts.”

The “strongest evidence” that Desjourdy was trying to punish and humiliate the woman is that she was left topless for more than three hours, Lipson said.

He heard it was up to special constables to issue jumpsuits but “no plausible reason” for the “demeaning” treatment.

“I am driven to conclude that (she) was either the victim of unacceptable indifference on the part of the cellblock officers or, worse, was being punished for her earlier assault,” he said.

Desjourdy reported that he cut off the woman’s clothes so he could search her upper body and she wouldn’t hang herself with them.

Lipson said there was little reason to think the woman was suicidal and that wasn’t a reason to strip search her.

Lipson also concluded the woman’s arrest was a breach of her Charter rights.

It was after officers spotted her drinking a beer at 5:30 a.m. on Rideau St. One testified she was so belligerent he feared she’d get into a fight on her way home.

That’s a “self-serving and speculative excuse,” Lipson said, noting she was drunk, angry and profane “but that did not make her a threat to herself or anyone else.”

It was more likely because she had the “temerity” to challenge being stopped, Lipson said.

megan.gillis@sunmedia.ca

Twitter: @ottawasun_megan

Twitter: @ottawasun_megan

