ASIRT update on EPS June 2019 range incident

[RandyBoBandy]

https://www.alberta.ca/release.cfm?x...423C5AB26F6297
Discuss and try not to BASH

Partial:On June 7, 2019, members of both the EPS Tactics Training Unit and Firearms Training Unit were finishing their day at the EPS Constable William Nixon Memorial Training Centre located at 12950 9 Street NE in Edmonton. Officers were sitting in a bullpen area, debriefing and making plans for an evening graduation ceremony. At the time of the incident, approximately 10 officers were in the bullpen area.

[fordtruckin]

Well, that is quite a read.... I can say that there was quite a lapse of judgement on several officers part, a lot of policy likely broken, a very lucky officer, a very embarrassed officer, remedial training likely received, and demotions and punishments likely given. At the end of the day, someone is very lucky to be alive!!

on a side note, HAHA Love how the serious damage to the battering ram was immediately evident...lol

[Dubious]

Never mix training aids and live, This is why.

[lannie]

I think more damage is done by this being published for the general public than good that will be gained. Some things are better off being held "in house". The police force has to eat too much crap as it is.

I am sure the entire police force learned from the mistakes made.

[ghostguy6]

So ASIRT says under "All of these scenarios would give rise to serious criminal offences." yet the officer wont be charged. Whether intentional or not an officer from the Firearms Training Section pointed a firearm at another person and pulled the trigger. How is he not being charged?

I've said it many times before" To Serve Summons and Protect Themselves"

[brendan's dad]

Originally Posted by ghostguy6

So ASIRT says under "All of these scenarios would give rise to serious criminal offences." yet the officer wont be charged. Whether intentional or not an officer from the Firearms Training Section pointed a firearm at another person and pulled the trigger. How is he not being charged?

I've said it many times before" To Serve Summons and Protect Themselves"

You may want to read the report again

ASIRT concluded a criminal offence occurred, Crown made the decision not to charge.

Also the statement you quote was in relation to 1 possible scenario where the officer intentionally discharged the firearm to either scare or kill the other officer. ASIRT determined this was not a reasonable or probable scenario in relation to what occurred and the evidence gathered.

[cody j]

Originally Posted by lannie

I think more damage is done by this being published for the general public than good that will be gained. Some things are better off being held "in house". The police force has to eat too much crap as it is.

I am sure the entire police force learned from the mistakes made.

Held in house? Like what the RCMP was trying to do with the Nova Scotia shooting? I don't think so.

[elkhunter11]

Originally Posted by cody j

Held in house? Like what the RCMP was trying to do with the Nova Scotia shooting? I don't think so.

Exactly! If you want the public to trust the force, transparency is required. If there is an incompetent officer, who commits a criminal act, then the public, who pay the officer's wages, have the right to know about it.

[Pioneer2]

Doesn't apply to some it appears.

[bat119]

I question why a loaded pistol with a round in the pipe was in a training scenario in the first place?

Do police have a procedure to unload their service pistols when not on active duty?

[C2C3PO]

Originally Posted by bat119

I question why a loaded pistol with a round in the pipe was in a training scenario in the first place?


Do police have a procedure to unload their service pistols when not on active duty?

It wasn't a training scenario. This occurred at the end of the day in the office area between the officers who work in that Section.


Yes, weapons are loaded/unloaded at the beginning and end of each shift in the locker room area at safety-unloading stations that are present throughout. However these officers were still on active duty albeit ( by the sounds of it ) near the very end of their shift.

[urban rednek]

Well, they answered that question once again.
Nobody.

Anyone that would draw their service weapon and fire it at a team mate, either in anger or as a joke, doesn't have the necessary mental faculties to be an armed LEO.
All the remorse in the world won't stop a bullet once the trigger is pulled.
"I'm sorry" doesn't fix the underlying problem.

[Mulehahn]

The problem is that this behaviour is not uncommon and instead of trying to address it they make no real change. It came out last week that in response to being teased an officer in Kelowna stood up, drew her pistol and pointed it at another officer. Neither of these officers faced any real repurcussions.

Does anyone honestly believe that in either of these scenarios if anyone besides a police officer was involved he/she would have not been charged, let alone kept their jobs?

[Surly]

Originally Posted by Mulehahn

The problem is that this behaviour is not uncommon and instead of trying to address it they make no real change. It came out last week that in response to being teased an officer in Kelowna stood up, drew her pistol and pointed it at another officer. Neither of these officers faced any real repurcussions.

Does anyone honestly believe that in either of these scenarios if anyone besides a police officer was involved he/she would have not been charged, let alone kept their jobs?

There is a completely different set of rules and standards of behavior for members of any law enforcement organization than those which are applicable to the civilians.

They withhold information, lie and cover for each other all while demanding to be patted on the back and commended for serving as the "pillars" of our society.

Their ignominious actions won't ever be reprimanded as the professional review process is a joke. A joke which is meant to create an impression of action being taken while allowing their business to carry on as it has done before.

One way or the other, I bet that it's the legalized marijuana industry that is responsible for the situation at hand...

[Off in the Bushes]

I personally would not want this individual to possess a firearm. It was clear that they were not thinking it through. Everything between the side arm and the trainer are different. Was is a lapse in judgment? If they can’t make a good judgement call, in that environment what makes you think they are going to make one in a split second, in hostile environment. It’s unfortunate for this individual, but they should be terminated. If not they should be finically responsible for the cost of the investigation.

[JULIUS]

It seems to me there was a lot of bad judgement going on in that room. Why when not in a training environment was anyone pointing a firearm ( training weapon or not ) at another person. Childish behavior by this group certainly led to the event in some way. I fully support the finding of asirt that criminal charges could be laid. As far as the crown decision on not laying criminal charges I have no opinion that I can substantiate.
How many times do people have to see that playing with guns leads to injury or near injury before they grow up and treat firearms with the respect they deserve. This type of situation does no good to the firearms user in any situation be it leo or target shooter or hunter.

[ghostguy6]

Originally Posted by brendan's dad

You may want to read the report again

ASIRT concluded a criminal offence occurred, Crown made the decision not to charge.

Also the statement you quote was in relation to 1 possible scenario where the officer intentionally discharged the firearm to either scare or kill the other officer. ASIRT determined this was not a reasonable or probable scenario in relation to what occurred and the evidence gathered.

From the article

Based on the whole of the evidence, there are limited conclusions that could be drawn regarding the officer’s intent and/or state of mind. They would be as follows:

-The officer mistakenly raised the Glock pistol, believing it to be the SIRT training pistol, and pulled the trigger, resulting in the discharge of the firearm. As the SIRT pistol is designed with very significant and obvious differences to make it much less likely for an officer to make this mistake, this is unlikely, but given the context and the speed of the response, it cannot be completely eliminated as a possibility. As such, this remains an available inference as to the officer’s intent at the time of the discharge of the live round.
- The officer knowingly raised and fired his Glock pistol, mistakenly believing it to be unloaded, or loaded with simunition (simulated non-lethal ammunition used for training purposes) and pulled the trigger, resulting in the discharge of the live round.
- The officer knowingly pulled the Glock pistol and intentionally fired the gun in the direction of the other officer(s) in the Tactics Training Section. With this possibility, one would need to assess whether the gun was fired at the other officer with malice, or whether it was fired not at the officer but in that direction, either as a joke or with the intent of “scaring” the officer. All of these scenarios would give rise to serious criminal offences.

The last line would indicate all 3 of those scenarios would indicate a criminal offense occurred.

All I said was why wasn't he charged. IF ARIST said he should be charged then there should be enough evidence to lay charges. If anyone else around here pointed a firearm (even an imitation firearm) at another person we could be charged but yet a police officer who was a member of the Firearms Training Section, who should be held to higher standards does it and no charges laid.

[brendan's dad]

Originally Posted by ghostguy6

From the article


The last line would indicate all 3 of those scenarios would indicate a criminal offense occurred.


All I said was why wasn't he charged. IF ARIST said he should be charged then there should be enough evidence to lay charges. If anyone else around here pointed a firearm (even an imitation firearm) at another person we could be charged but yet a police officer who was a member of the Firearms Training Section, who should be held to higher standards does it and no charges laid.

I will agree to disagree, but I believe they are referring to "serious criminal offences" as described in scenario 3 only.

Really, that is all you said?

I've said it many times before" To Serve Summons and Protect Themselves"

Seems like you are saying a lot more than "Why." Seems like you are blaming the police for no charges being laid even though the decision was made by the Crown. Also sounds like you believe that it happens all the time.

[ssyd]

If he's that jumpy in possibly the safest place he could possibly be while on duty I'd hate to see his reactions during a traffic stop.

[Albertacoyotecaller]

You want to point firearms at other employees and pull the trigger. That's fine by me but then please do not investigate and increase costs to the taxpayers by ignoring recommendations.

This incident reveals a lot of messed up stuff happening that we are paying for.

[Snowdog2112]

It's extremely disappointing, but not surprising. The Edmonton Police Service, and indeed most police organizations have made a priority to keep themselves unaccountable.

Shame on the Crown for not having the courage to prosecute. I'd love to know what happened behind closed doors.

More and more, we're seeing that police, especially in Alberta, are generally bad.

Incidents like this should absolutely not be handled 'in-house'. If the police have a bad reputation, its because they've gone out of their way to earn it.

[roper1]

Originally Posted by Snowdog2112

It's extremely disappointing, but not surprising. The Edmonton Police Service, and indeed most police organizations have made a priority to keep themselves unaccountable.

Shame on the Crown for not having the courage to prosecute. I'd love to know what happened behind closed doors.

More and more, we're seeing that police, especially in Alberta, are generally bad.

Incidents like this should absolutely not be handled 'in-house'. If the police have a bad reputation, its because they've gone out of their way to earn it.

No guff eh ? The hilarious(sad, tragic) part of the equation is the blue wall. They don't get it, but more & more of Joe Q Citizen does. Most of us grew up with a healthy honest respect for LEO, we've learned as adults we were taught wrong.

[Snowdog2112]

Too true.

One only needs look at the Mike Wasylyshen affair to clearly grasp the moral bankruptcy of the EPS.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmon...cord-1.2859907

[trooper]

People saying to give the officer a break need to realize that due to his position, he has to be held to a higher standard and the incident not be swept under the rug. An example should be set for all concerned, or further trust is lost.

[Snowdog2112]

Originally Posted by trooper

People saying to give the officer a break need to realize that due to his position, he has to be held to a higher standard and the incident not be swept under the rug. An example should be set for all concerned, or further trust is lost.

You're right, but the thing is, police don't care.

This is why I roll my eyes at the tributes to the fallen 'heroes'.

[cody j]

Originally Posted by trooper

People saying to give the officer a break need to realize that due to his position, he has to be held to a higher standard and the incident not be swept under the rug. An example should be set for all concerned, or further trust is lost.

There is that but also if one of us did that we would be enthusiastically charged and punished.

[elkhunter11]

Originally Posted by cody j

There is that but also if one of us did that we would be enthusiastically charged and punished.

And that double standard is a huge problem.

[NCC]

Is it normal practice for law enforcement to carry their side arms with a live round in the chamber? Should have at least had to click off the safety before it would fire.

[Husty]

Originally Posted by NCC

Is it normal practice for law enforcement to carry their side arms with a live round in the chamber? Should have at least had to click off the safety before it would fire.

Generally safe for law enforcement to carry service pistols loaded. Although glocks are know for 'glock leg', which comes down to poor training and users still having his finger on the trigger while holstering a sidearm. Some stryker fire pistols have been know to fire if dropped or hit hard but pretty rare. I carry my Colt on an empty chamber, but single actions are a different beast.

[CptnBlues63]

Originally Posted by lannie

I think more damage is done by this being published for the general public than good that will be gained. Some things are better off being held "in house". The police force has to eat too much crap as it is.

I am sure the entire police force learned from the mistakes made.

Let me fix the above up for you............."Police Service"

Personally, I think the transparency is a good thing. It sure beats the "good old days" when everything was kept "in house" and police pretty much did what they wanted without recourse...