Driving while Black, a hasty phone call, an unlikely envelope, and a revealing admission

The Colossally Irrational Report for June that asks "what about the racism?"

My Scottish/Irish ancestors arrived on the east coast of so-called “Canada” in the late 1700’s or early 1800’s and were part of several waves of genocidal colonization of the Indigenous people who were already here. We arrived uninvited on the traditional unceded territory of the Wəlastəkewiyik (Maliseet) whose ancestors along with the Mi’Kmaq / Mi’kmaw and Passamaquoddy / Peskotomuhkati Tribes / Nations signed Peace and Friendship Treaties with the British Crown in the 1700s. I like to start every new post by explaining my family’s history and keeping this foremost in my mind (and my writing) at all times. I know I have benefited as a result of colonization, and I find the history deeply troubling. It is what motivates me to understand the true history and advocate for real reconciliation. As a child in the 1970’s, I moved west with my family and am grateful to be writing this newsletter now in Moh’kinsstis, and the traditional Treaty 7 territory of the Blackfoot confederacy: Siksika, Kainai, Piikani, as well as the Îyâxe Nakoda and Tsuut’ina nations. This territory is also home to the Métis Nation of Alberta, Region 3 within the historical Northwest Métis homeland. I recognize that the land I now work and live on was stolen from these nations (truth) and I support giving the land back as an act of reconciliation. Lands inhabited by Indigenous Peoples contain 80% of the world’s remaining biodiversity. Indigenous Peoples’ traditional knowledge and knowledge systems are key to designing a sustainable future for all.

There are media stories that - for some reason or another - just don’t get the attention they deserve. 

The Law Society of Alberta’s hearing into former Alberta Justice Minister Kaycee Madu’s 2021 traffic violation is one of those stories. 

It seems to me that the story the media covered was focused mainly on one aspect while other equally concerning angles were given less attention. This is likely due to the fact that this most recent hearing dealt directly with Madu’s conduct. Yet, the underlying facts it revealed about policing in Alberta, are shocking. 

To recap the situation, the Edmonton Journal reported in its coverage of the law society hearing on June 19 that Madu was pulled over while driving his blue F-150 pickup truck in a school zone.

According to Edmonton police officer Ryan Brooks, “he very clearly was holding a cellphone in his right hand at approximately 3 o’clock of the steering wheel.” 

The self-described “least bit of political” police officer Brooks also wrote in his notes that Madu mentioned he was the justice minister at least four times. Madu’s lawyer did not deny that he had introduced himself to Brooks as the justice minister but disputed that he repeated it multiple times. 

He says it was done more in the spirit of providing his resume for scrutiny, rather than as an exercise of authority. But, it could also be seen as an act of self-protection, when viewed through the lens of anti-Black racism, something Madu would certainly be aware of. 

The CBC reported on the phone call Madu made next to Edmonton Police Chief Dale McFee, who decided to take the call even though he was on vacation. He quickly jotted down some notes on an envelope at the hotel in Canmore where he was staying.

What hotel does not have a proper notepad? Come on.

Not the real thing: an envelope re-enactment.

Back to the hearing, where Chief McFee explained Madu was concerned about the ticket he had just been given.

"[Madu] had to be sure, in light of these issues, that it was not a result of carding, not somehow related to what was going on in Lethbridge at the time," Madu’s lawyer explained in the hearing.

So, let’s just pause here and consider this bombshell. 

Picture the Alberta Justice Minister calling the police chief from a Superstore parking lot because he thinks he was either being racially profiled or singled out (or both). Keep in mind the story had just broken about the Lethbridge police officers who used surveillance to try and intimidate Opposition MLA Shannon Phillips.

Madu admitted he had doubts about racism and/or considered he might be a victim of intimidation by his own police service.

That’s a pretty shocking confession. And it does coincide with the facts reported by Charles Rusnell in The Tyee that the problem of racial profiling was indeed being investigated by Madu.

“Madu, as Alberta’s first Black justice minister, had also heard from many non-white constituents from all over the province about carding and racial profiling and was actively working on policy to address it at that time.”

Of course, it didn’t help that Madu’s testimony at the law society hearing wasn’t the best, according to Rusnell in the The Tyee story.

“...Madu undermined his own credibility and that of his defence through rambling testimony that was often repetitive, confusing and contradictory. In sharp contrast, other witnesses provided evidence, underpinned by notes, that was credible and entirely plausible.”

Rusnell’s article shows a better-prepared attorney calling into question a Black man’s experience with police.

He gets zero sympathy from the other side during this hearing and it sounds like he was completely destroyed under cross-examination. This became the story.

That doesn’t change the fact that Madu, who was a powerful cabinet minister responsible for justice and police prosecutions, still felt afraid. 

Police propaganda and anti-Black racism are terrifying

This points to the media not understanding racism and what role it might have been playing in this situation and in the hearing. This oversight is unacceptable.

Madu admitted he didn’t quite trust the police. Enough to pick up his phone and call the police chief to express his concerns. Alarm bells!

McFee’s response to Madu over the phone was less than reassuring.

"I said, 'I highly doubt this is going to be profiling over a traffic ticket.' 

Translation: “I mean, if it was a more serious offence, then maybe?”

Even Chief McFee didn’t entirely dismiss the possibility of racial profiling in his brief conversation.

The main focus of the media narrative was Madu’s possible misconduct (we are still awaiting a ruling from the Law Society) but there was little said about the fact that Madu had a lack of trust in his own police force. 

This is an admission about racism with potential implications for many people. Yet, the fear of abuse of power by police was effectively swept under the rug. 

Now, I’m not saying the minister of justice trying to bully his way out of a ticket is not a worthwhile story. It is. But there’s more.

He feared the Edmonton police could also be pulling him over because of the incident in Lethbridge. This is suspicion of a conspiracy much bigger than just local. Red alert!

According to the Alberta Serious Incident Response Team, the Lethbridge police did, in fact, abuse their authority and the agency did recommend prosecution. But in a revealing plot twist, the current justice minister’s crown prosecution office has decided NOT to pursue any charges against those officers.

What is happening here? And why are the police not getting more media scrutiny over statements about possible racism coming from a senior official in the justice ministry at the time? And why are the Lethbridge police not being prosecuted? 

I’m leaving you with this quote by Lewis Raven Wallace, author of The View from Somewhere, Undoing the Myth of Journalistic Objectivity, in an interview with Kelly Hayes in the podcast Movement Memos:

"And so this idea that police and safety are equivalent, which is just a straight-up lie. But I think that’s the result of a lot of very successful propaganda on the part of police and police organizations over, now, many decades." 

"...sometime around the 1920s, people started talking about journalism as almost like the science of news that you would go out and objectively study. And the problem with that was, is, always has been, that these assumptions about what is a neutral question? What is an unbiased approach? What two sides should be included in a both sides story? Those questions have always been inherently biased by the status quo." 

"So normalizing the experience of white, straight, cisgender men and often excluding and ignoring the experiences, and importantly, I think, the ideas, of Indigenous people, Black people, queer people, gay and trans people. And as objectivity became a more central framework for journalism in the United States, it was almost immediately used to suppress organizing, silence voices of color and Black voices and gay and then later on trans voices."

“Keep up your grades, clean up your fade
Make 'em all laugh, take a seat and behave
You need to be brave.
We still afraid though.”