Incident that left man with permanent brain damage being referred to RCMP for review: B.C. police watchdog


An interaction with officers that left a man with permanent brain damage won't be referred to Crown counsel for possible charges, but will be referred to the RCMP for a review, B.C.'s police watchdog says.


The Independent Investigations Office released a report Tuesday on its review of an incident that happened in Kamloops on Feb. 5, 2021.


The IIO said police were called that day about a man who appeared to be in mental distress. The initial report to officers was that the man had gone three days without sleep, was underdressed in below-freezing weather and was "shouting at people about 'Satan'" in the street.


The man reportedly threw a rock at a vehicle and a snowball at an ambulance. He also allegedly tried to "pull a fast-food delivery driver from his car," the IIO's report said.


The interaction between the man and police was captured on video, which the IIO said "must be considered the most reliable evidence" when justifying the officer's use of force.


'EXTREMELY UNFORTUNATE'


According to the IIO's report, officers can be heard in the video shouting at the man to "get on the ground," which he does not do. Instead, he apparently can be seen taking "several large steps" towards an officer. The sound of Taser is then heard in the video, and it appears the man walks "quickly backwards," the IIO's report said.


The IIO's report described an officer following the man and deploying a second conductive-energy weapon, causing the man to go "completely rigid" and fall "backwards onto the roadway." Another officer is then apparently seen using pepper spray on the man as he lay on the ground.


The IIO said in its report the video evidence "is not entirely consistent" with witness accounts from officers. For example, according to the watchdog, one officer reported the man was "trying to dash (towards an officer) a few times." Another officer reportedly said in his statement only one conductive-energy weapon was used.


The IIO said paramedics found the man "lying on the ground in handcuffs, his legs being restrained by an officer," adding the man "was in cardiac arrest, not breathing and with no pulse." He was apparently bleeding from the back of his head.


Police were told to take the handcuffs off the man and he was given CPR for about 30 minutes before a pulse was felt again. He was then taken to hospital.


"He was found to have injuries to the back of his head and to his left hand. He was subsequently diagnosed with renal failure and an anoxic brain injury secondary to the cardiac arrest, which was prolonged," the IIO's report said.


"He now has permanent brain damage, which causes tremors in both hands."


NO CRIMINAL OFFENCE: IIO


Even though video evidence and witness statements differed, IIO chief civilian director Ronald MacDonald said officers still had "significant reasons to be concerned" by the risk to themselves and the public in this situation. MacDonald said the conductive-energy weapons don't "generally cause serious harm," so while the man's injuries were "extremely unfortunate," they weren't reasonably predictable.


As a result, MacDonald said he didn't feel there were reasonable grounds to believe the officers committed an offence.


However, MacDonald said the "inaccuracies" in the witness statements "are concerning" as they were used to justify use of the Taser.


"It is also worth noting that when re-interviewed, officers generally seemed unwilling to acknowledge the obvious discrepancies and to revise their accounts," he wrote.


"It is not unusual for eyewitnesses to a dynamic incident, whether civilian or police, to remember events differently from each other, and not unusual for witness accounts to differ from objective evidence such as video recordings. Significant leeway has to be given to a witness, therefore, before concluding that the witness is being untruthful rather than mistaken."


MacDonald said he still didn't believe the officers committed an obstruction offence that needed to be referred to Crown counsel, but said it would be formally referred to the RCMP for a professional standards review.


CTV News Vancouver has reached out to the RCMP for comment. 

Post a Comment

Previous Post Next Post