Do arrests show up in the background check outside of charges?

[GreenBob]

F.I.P. file. You could do an A.T.I. request to see what yours says. <-- this!

Welcome to the ATIP Online Request

To be eligible to make a request under the Access to Information Act or the Privacy Act, you must be a Canadian citizen, a permanent resident of Canada or an individual or corporation currently present in Canada.

https://atip-aiprp.apps.gc.ca/atip/welcome.do

[MoMoney]

F.I.P. file. You could do an A.T.I. request to see what yours says. <-- this!

Welcome to the ATIP Online Request

To be eligible to make a request under the Access to Information Act or the Privacy Act, you must be a Canadian citizen, a permanent resident of Canada or an individual or corporation currently present in Canada.

https://atip-aiprp.apps.gc.ca/atip/welcome.do

Thanks. I'm going to fill this out later this week regardless! Very interested to see what they've deemed interesting about me.

Updates:

Called the CFO. My file is with an officer for final approval or whatever. I have passed the reference check stage, none of my references or spouse will be called.
They said the incident is indeed showing up. She said she can't tell how the specific officer that'll be handling my case will feel, but said if I told her the whole case (I did) she doesn't feel I'll be contacted at all, let alone contacted for any kind of interview or in-person interview.

Opened up about the brass knuckles and all. The agent on the phone literally just laughed about it. Said if it was some one-time incident, it wont be a problem. Even if it was a bigger issue, it would likely be an interview and then approval.

Sounds like I'm clear. Will update next week when I'm either approved or have an interview set up.

[MoMoney]

Now I'm all curious about what kind of criminals in Canada still qualify for a PAL/RPAL. I don't mean in a "wow, bad, giving criminals guns!" way, I had always just assumed that any infraction or charge would result in a license not being issued.

Do they only care about weapon offences & assault charges? If someone had been in jail for fraud or drug trafficking or something, but stayed away from weapons, would they realistically be able to get their PAL?

Not that I'm for or against it, just me thinking... the wording on the phone really seemed to insinuate that if it's not weapon related, it's fine. I think aside from drug kingpins or something though, that probably makes sense anyway. I guess you could say I'm pleasantly surprised that there's a bit of logic when it comes to determining if a charge is worth rejecting your application over. I'm sure certain firearm officers are a little harsher though.

[drbnsn]

You can request that your fingerprint records be destroyed. Non-conviction information is retained in the National Repository of Crime Records: a) until it is requested destroyed and that request is approved (you must make the request through the originating police force), b) until you recieve a record suspension (moot given those are the new versions of pardons thus you need to be convicted) or c) until you are 125 years of age (that could take a while).

Obviously option a) is the most reasonable option. Usually the originating police force has a time period you must wait before making the request. If the request is approved it is then passed onto[ the RCMP National Repository for destruction.

Note however, this does not include non-criminal records of "adverse" interactions found within internal police databases such as PIRS, PRIME-BC, PROS etc. These are not criminal records. Usually adverse records in these systems have a purge date of a few years however, currently the RCMP systems have the purge dates set for an arbitrary date in the mid 2000s as part of the National Inquiry into Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls even if it is unconnected. It's essentially a moratorium on purging. There is no way to request destruction of these records at this time. If you do a full crim check after destruction of your non-conviction record, the 4th box on the RCMP form will indicate an "adverse" record in a police database but the first 3 boxes will indicate you do not have a criminal record/non-conviction record

[tiriaq]

Thanks. I'm going to fill this out later this week regardless! Very interested to see what they've deemed interesting about me.

Updates:

Called the CFO. My file is with an officer for final approval or whatever. I have passed the reference check stage, none of my references or spouse will be called.
They said the incident is indeed showing up. She said she can't tell how the specific officer that'll be handling my case will feel, but said if I told her the whole case (I did) she doesn't feel I'll be contacted at all, let alone contacted for any kind of interview or in-person interview.

Opened up about the brass knuckles and all. The agent on the phone literally just laughed about it. Said if it was some one-time incident, it wont be a problem. Even if it was a bigger issue, it would likely be an interview and then approval.

Sounds like I'm clear. Will update next week when I'm either approved or have an interview set up.

While you were on the phone, you should have asked about getting an ATC for self defence against "wilderpeople".

[MoMoney]

While you were on the phone, you should have asked about getting an ATC for self defence against "wilderpeople".

LOL. One step at a time my friend! That's next months battle. Let's make sure I win this one first before I stir that pot..

[tiriaq]

Given that CGN is monitored by the powers that be, you might already have stirred that pot...

[MoMoney]

Alright alright, let me rephrase. I'll win this battle before I bring that pot to a boil. It can simmer for now! Either way, my interest in an ATC has died after overwhelming outreach around it being an endless battle and money dump even if I wanted to bring it anywhere. I still plan to follow through and at least inquire.. but without me finding any set precedent from the past, I don't have the energy, time, or money to become that precedent as unfortunate as it is to admit.

Unfortunately with what I've learned about this process, my energy would be better spent ensuring I can't be located by any "imminent threat" rather than set myself up for protection from said threat. It's unfortunate, but seems to be the reality. Anyone threatened by someone enough to qualify for an ATC would likely have to seek publicity to win their case, which would be counter-intuitive if there's some kind of threat against them.

Did I mention that everything I post is actually fiction? It's just roleplay!

[Trimmer 905]

Hey everyone,

I have no worries about being rejected, but the longer I've been waiting the more I'm wondering about how incidents outside of charges show up in their background checks, or if they do at all? And if they do, what threshold hits a "red flag" where it goes to someone else or results in a delay?

Do only charges show up?
Do arrests show up if nothing ever made it to court? If so, do they generally care or do they figure if you weren't charged it's not a worry?

About 4.5 years ago I was arrested. I think I had a pocket knife on me, and there was a replica paperweight brass knuckles in my car that they had taken (was sold at pawn shops at the time as paper weights, was a cool novelty.. lol). No charges ever came from it as it was essentially a misunderstanding, but I did spend the night in jail and had some paperwork drawn up for me for some initial court date. The day after that I got a call that they weren't pursuing anything and that court was cancelled. Never heard of it again.

3 years ago I asked one of the RCMP involved (yup, unfortunately it was RCMP and not city or provincial police) if I had a record or anything on there. He said nothing at all, there was never a charge but that if an officer searched my name, something would show up in general about the incident.

So long story short, would any of that even show up if I wasn't charged? I told my course instructor about the whole incident in a bit more detail and he said he didn't believe any of it would even show up, let alone be an issue. But I've learned over time the guy was misinformed about a lot of things, so now I'm curious if it would show up.

I know it wouldn't be enough for them to reject my application (I think anyway?) but would it be enough to get flagged? Or will only a real charge or court appearance do that?

Thanks everyone!

A CPIC check will show a "hit" as "File Opened on such-and-such date" with little info except the occurrence number. A cursory check of the occurrence # will show particulars. With "No Further Action" noted,it'll be ignored and normal processing will continue. Relax,it's all good.