A “cop hater” ticketed for chirping his tires in a noisy truck has lost his appeal to the Nova Scotia Police Review Board where he claimed the officer who pulled him over in July 2023 had been stalking him due to his involvement the year before in a protest at the province’s border with New Brunswick.
Thomas Everett asked the three-member panel to review a decision made last spring by the chief of the Amherst Police Department dismissing his complaints against Cpl. Derek Hebert.
The officer, a 16-year veteran on that force, testified he was called in as back-up on July 24, 2023, to help with a traffic stop.
“During the short time he was at the scene, Mr. Everett drove by, travelling in the opposite direction. According to Cpl. Hebert, Mr. Everett slowed his vehicle as he proceeded by, then sped up, loudly revving his engine (with a loud, after market muffler, designed for noise) and ‘chirped’ his tires as he continued on his way,” said the recent decision.
The high-pitched squeaking caused by stomping on the gas caught the attention of a couple walking by, according to the officer.
“Cpl. Hebert also testified that the acceleration posed risk to a vehicle ahead of Mr. Everett,” said the decision.
“Mr. Everett denies that he ‘chirped’ his tires, although he agrees that he slowed, then sped up, and that his truck is equipped with a loud, after market muffler.”
Everett argued that Hebert had already “characterized him as a ‘cop hater,’ arising out of Everett’s possible involvement in some sort of citizen protest at the Nova Scotia/New Brunswick border in 2022.”
The decision doesn’t delve into the nature of the protest and the officer’s lawyer said Monday that wasn’t at the heart of the case.
“Hebert was aware of (the protest), and at some point, heard the expression ‘cop hater’ describing Mr. Everett. He testified that he had never met him before, but knew where he lived, and what he looked like,” said the review board decision.
After the tire chirping incident, Hebert followed Everett’s truck and pulled him over.
“Portions of the traffic stop were recorded on the dashcam in the police vehicle,” said the decision. “As well, Mr. Everett’s wife recorded the interaction on a phone, which was intentionally live streaming the events to some Facebook group.”
When the officer asked for Everett’s licence, insurance, and registration, the driver handed over a plastic envelope containing the paperwork, said the decision, dated Aug. 8.
The officer asked him to remove the documents from the envelope, but Everett “declined to do so, several times, and so Cpl. Hebert, remaining by Everett’s truck, removed the documents one at a time, and then tossed them back into Mr. Everett’s lap.”
Hebert then handed Everett a ticket. “There was no overt aggressive, or angry, behaviour visible by either Cpl. Hebert or Mr. Everett.”
Tossing the documents back into Everett’s lap, “which may have been born out of frustration, does not amount to conduct that could be considered a disciplinary violation,” said the decision.
“We also have to bear in mind that Mr. Everett was live streaming the interaction, making this something of a performance piece, intended for an audience in a Facebook world.”
Everett testified Hebert was “stalking” him on June 14, 2023. “He relates this to the idea that Cpl. Hebert saw him as a ‘cop hater.’”
For his part, Hebert said he was patrolling Amherst’s Mission Street that day, when he thought he heard someone call out to him from a social gathering beside Everett’s duplex.
“He reversed, and video evidence shows a woman quickly coming from the Everett side of the building, shouting at him,” said the decision.
“She was angry about a traffic ticket that he had issued to her, saying that he had reported the ticket matter to her social worker. There was little interaction between Cpl. Hebert and the woman, and none with Mr. Everett who was apparently part of the social gathering.”
While the two men didn’t interact that day, Everett argued that “the mere presence of Cpl. Hebert was improper, and was part of the ‘stalking,’” said the panel’s decision.
“While Mr. Everett sees his minor (if any) involvement in a citizen protest in 2022 as making him a target, and subject to surveillance by APD, we disagree. There is no evidence that Mr. Everett had any prior involvement with the criminal justice system, or otherwise with APD. It seems very highly unlikely that Cpl. Hebert, or the APD, would have any interest in the activities of Thomas Everett. He hardly seems to be a crime figure, or even a ‘serial protester,’ if a protester at all.”
The review board rejected “any possibility of Cpl. Hebert targeting Thomas Everett.”
Hebert “had a valid reason to be on Mission Street,” said the decision, which notes he was looking for someone wanted by police.
The panel also found “there was no misconduct” relating to the chirping incident. “We reject any suggestion that there was any targeting of Mr. Everett underlying that event. It was within Cpl. Hebert’s discretion to respond to the actions of Mr. Everett on that occasion by issuing a ticket.”
Our website is the place for the latest breaking news, exclusive scoops, longreads and provocative commentary. Please bookmark nationalpost.com and sign up for our daily newsletter, Posted, here.
