Gunsmith shot by police Ontario

[nick0danger]

Post from another site

Ok so let's break it down

Toronto Police Service said that day at noon — in broad daylight — its officers carried out a search warrant on the property. It's unclear what information they had and how many officers were at the scene, but the service said it was looking for guns. Family said no warrant was left behind.

Quentin Dixon, Rodger's longtime friend, said officers bearing assault rifles had Jessie at gunpoint while she was unloading groceries from the vehicle.

Some officers were wearing plain clothes while others wore tactical gear, according to family, friends, neighbours and Michael Smitiuch, the family's lawyer, all of whom CBC spoke with this week.

They say Toronto police brought their own ambulance and paramedics with them when they first arrived, a move Toronto defence lawyer Kim Schofield, who has worked on numerous cases involving the SIU, said was "very unusual."

So I don't know much about police search warrants but the fact they brought an ambulance and paramedics with does seem hinky.

Friends and family also say Rodger was with an apparent customer in his workshop when police arrived. They separately shared the same details of what they say occurred.

"The group of police officers moved over to the shop door entrance and nothing was said ... within seconds, four gunshots rang out," Dixon said.

Fraser Pringle, Rodger's next door neighbour, said he heard two of those shots.

"I came out here and they were rolling him out on a gurney, threw him in an ambulance and took him," he said.

You'd think you'd hear police yell out commands, including to potentially drop whatever firearm is in his hands before firing 4 rounds.

"We're seeking answers and accountability ... the problem we have is we don't have an actual witness we've been able to speak to who saw all the events."

The family and Smitiuch have no copy of the search warrant police used and don't have enough information to get a copy. He added he has not heard from Toronto police or SIU.

Smitiuch said they haven't been able to track down the apparent customer who was with Rodger and the SIU couldn't confirm to CBC News if a second person was in the workshop.

"Rodger's phone is with the police now and no one else in the family spoke to this individual, there's no certainty as to exactly who this person was."

So the police never shared the search warrant at the time of use nor are they providing a copy of it now, that seems very strange, seems almost illegal to me.

Stephen Metelsky, a criminology professor at Mohawk College in Hamilton and a retired police sergeant, said he wonders why the search warrant was done at noon instead of at 3 a.m. or 5 a.m.

"The reason they do that ... the element of surprise, most people are in bed and it's for the safety of everybody involved ... and the second part is the preservation of evidence."

That is a great question, normally you hear about these raids being done at night when people are asleep but if the police were doing their job they should they known he was in his workshop with a customer with numerous firearms.

Also I'm very curious, why in the hell was it Toronto Police rather than OPP? Norfolk County is almost 2 hours away from Toronto, hell Toronto Police didn't even communicate with OPP regarding this.

[C2C3PO]

I watched the entire "press conference" on Twitter - or at least the majority of it as it seemed to be plagued by loss of cell signal as parts dropped out from time to time.

Some of the things listed above were not mentioned/nor part of the conference so someone obviously has added some things in from other places. Here is a snippet of some of the main points made:

This was an injury lawyer from a Toronto firm that appears to specialize in injury claims from car accidents which explains his lack of familiarity with some of the things he stated. I don't know why the family didn't retain a criminal lawyer who has experience in wrongful death cases but that is their choice.

The comment about Toronto Police Service bringing their own ambulance with them was raised. The lawyer said it was highly unusual. This IS NOT unusual and in fact is standard practice in similar warrant executions I have been a part of. It is done because there is no telling exactly when the search warrant will take place as these things are fluid with respect to timing. Police agencies are not supposed to rob valuable first responder resources from the existing (and already taxed) emergency services pool so they usually pay overtime and have a paramedic team on stand by with them if needed. This is standard operating procedure and was mandated long ago from fatality enquiries of the past.

At one point the lawyer said he found it entirely unusual that TPS did not notify the local OPP about the warrant and then a few minutes later said that TPS did in fact notify local OPP but it was only a few minutes before the warrant was actually executed.

It was also inferred that it may have been a "Guns and Gangs" operation that involved numerous targets. One of the reporters asked the lawyer if he was aware that on that same day 50 other warrants were executed across Ontario - including another one in the Port Dover area on the same day. The lawyer said he did not know that.

The lawyer repeatedly questioned whether the person in the shop at the time was in fact a customer or an agent or undercover police officer. Reason given was that he was apparently a new customer and had only made the appointment the night before. They (lawyer) have also not been able to contact or identify who this person was after the shooting as he has not come forward.

The lawyer reiterated many times they are looking for answers and have received none, at which point it sounded like a reporter asked if he had reached out to law enforcement. The lawyers' answer was that he has not called the lead investigator on the file but did send him an email but has not yet receive a response.

This was not a polished press release. It seemed like some of the questions from the participating crowd were staged but that is just my opinion. Other questions were just plain bizarre like "If these were so-called highly trained individuals responding then why did it take 4 bullets to kill him? ".
I suggest you see if you can find a recording of the conference and watch for yourselves and come to your own conclusions.

[nick0danger]

Originally Posted by C2C3PO

I watched the entire "press conference" on Twitter - or at least the majority of it as it seemed to be plagued by loss of cell signal as parts dropped out from time to time.

Some of the things listed above were not mentioned/nor part of the conference so someone obviously has added some things in from other places. Here is a snippet of some of the main points made:

This was an injury lawyer from a Toronto firm that appears to specialize in injury claims from car accidents which explains his lack of familiarity with some of the things he stated. I don't know why the family didn't retain a criminal lawyer who has experience in wrongful death cases but that is their choice.

The comment about Toronto Police Service bringing their own ambulance with them was raised. The lawyer said it was highly unusual. This IS NOT unusual and in fact is standard practice in similar warrant executions I have been a part of. It is done because there is no telling exactly when the search warrant will take place as these things are fluid with respect to timing. Police agencies are not supposed to rob valuable first responder resources from the existing (and already taxed) emergency services pool so they usually pay overtime and have a paramedic team on stand by with them if needed. This is standard operating procedure and was mandated long ago from fatality enquiries of the past.

At one point the lawyer said he found it entirely unusual that TPS did not notify the local OPP about the warrant and then a few minutes later said that TPS did in fact notify local OPP but it was only a few minutes before the warrant was actually executed.

It was also inferred that it may have been a "Guns and Gangs" operation that involved numerous targets. One of the reporters asked the lawyer if he was aware that on that same day 50 other warrants were executed across Ontario - including another one in the Port Dover area on the same day. The lawyer said he did not know that.

The lawyer repeatedly questioned whether the person in the shop at the time was in fact a customer or an agent or undercover police officer. Reason given was that he was apparently a new customer and had only made the appointment the night before. They (lawyer) have also not been able to contact or identify who this person was after the shooting as he has not come forward.

The lawyer reiterated many times they are looking for answers and have received none, at which point it sounded like a reporter asked if he had reached out to law enforcement. The lawyers' answer was that he has not called the lead investigator on the file but did send him an email but has not yet receive a response.

This was not a polished press release. It seemed like some of the questions from the participating crowd were staged but that is just my opinion. Other questions were just plain bizarre like "If these were so-called highly trained individuals responding then why did it take 4 bullets to kill him? ".
I suggest you see if you can find a recording of the conference and watch for yourselves and come to your own conclusions.

I will say until the TPS comes out with something it looks more and more like they messed up! You know for a fact if they were clean, they would be yelling it from the roof tops! Where there is smoke there is fire!

[Scott N]

Why would TPS bring their own ambulance? Sounds like TPS was all reved up for a showdown.

[C2C3PO]

Maybe you missed it Scott but I explained the reasoning above.

[Scott N]

Originally Posted by C2C3PO

Maybe you missed it Scott but I explained the reasoning above.

Yes I did miss that.

[fishnguy]

Originally Posted by C2C3PO

I understand the debate that always seems to center around the "But if it just saves one life " argument.
But the reality is you go door to door and ask taxpayers that question right about now when municipalities are deciding how much to increase your property taxes.
I'm guessing you won't get any consensus.

Plus it isn’t really worth that much from the public spending perspective. It can be easily seen if one looks into the valuation of life’s worth when the decisions are made in regards to the highway safety, public safety, warning labels, etc. It is literally in the hundreds of thousands of dollars when it comes to public spending. Or is that a lot? I dunno.

I also find interesting the perspective of “saves one life” when people mention it in discussion of various topics. It seems that the value of life changes significantly depending on the posters’, interests, believes, and convictions as related to the topic discussed. On a certain topic, people bring the argument of saving on life; on others, they bring it as a counterargument, implying that the life is not worth saving. This is not directed at Puma, rather general thoughts out loud.

[Smoky buck]

So far sounds like they have a crap lawyer and should fire him

The media is still completely lost but spouting crap as usual

This missing “customer” seems odd and hearing him speak would be interesting

Sounds possible this was not a small investigation

And to sum it up basically we still have no clue what took place

[C2C3PO]

I would not disagree with you on the lawyer comment.
There are far better choices than a personal injury lawyer unless he had some sort of previous experience in this area of law but I saw no shred or hint of that from his presentation.
It appeared to me from listening to him speak that the lawyer knows damn well why they cant seem to identify the mystery customer or why he hasn't come forward.....
But understandably it's not his job to raise points that would possibly suggest this was only one warrant out of many that they may have executed simultaneously in parts of the province and therefore part of a bigger, more complex investigation than just Rodger Kotanko.

As for the previous comment that keeps coming up about why TPS has said nothing on this matter TPS spokesperson confirmed that under SIU protocol agencies are prohibited from making responses while under investigation - again something that is standard right across the country.

[Au revoir, Gopher]

Originally Posted by Smoky buck

And to sum it up basically we still have no clue what took place

And we likely won't for another 6 months. We will just have to keep a look out for updates on Ontario SIU Case Number: 21-TFD-373.

ARG

[Puma]

Originally Posted by C2C3PO

I understand the debate that always seems to center around the "But if it just saves one life " argument.
But the reality is you go door to door and ask taxpayers that question right about now when municipalities are deciding how much to increase your property taxes.
I'm guessing you won't get any consensus.

Body-worn cameras were deployed to all patrol and traffic section officers, as well as some frontline officers, in April 2019. ... The reports add a survey found 95 per cent of Calgarians support the use of body-worn cameras, and 94 per cent of officers with cameras use them regularly. Mar. 23, 2021

CALGARY -- The use of body-worn cameras has resulted in an 11 per cent reduction in the number of times members had to use force beyond handcuffs and basic control, while also cutting in half the amount of time it takes to investigate concerns about officer conduct.

I find it odd that a dynamic warrant/ high risk take down team would not be using body cams ?

[C2C3PO]

Eventually everyone everywhere in agencies across Canada will have them.
The police like the idea of using them because as you quoted it reduces the number of frivolous complaints brought against many officers.
Can't speak for TPS as I don't know where they are with respect to the program but when everyone asks why some agencies don't have them yet it is primarily due to the total costs of implementing the program.
A news reporter asked the lawyer at the conference today whether he could state whether there was body worn cameras worn by any of the officers and he could not answer.
It is possible they could have had cameras on this warrant but even if they did they would have been seized by the SIU unit.

*** I looked it up and according to an article from earlier in 2021 only 20% of TPS officers had been issued body cameras at that time and as the program continued they expected all of them to have them by late in the year.

[Puma]

The one thing I think we all can agree on is, something went terribly wrong.

I'm sure nobody wanted it to end the way it did with someone loosing their life.

The Police service could have done a much better job reacting after the event. Saying nothing has only led to speculation, distrust , and bad press.

Policing is a tough enough job without events like this.

Hopefully, with time the facts will come out.

[lmtada]

Short video, basically what all the comments we have witnessed so far.
National Firearms association.
https://youtu.be/PdM2laAerys

[58thecat]

Originally Posted by Puma

The one thing I think we all can agree on is, something went terribly wrong.

I'm sure nobody wanted it to end the way it did with someone loosing their life.

The Police service could have done a much better job reacting after the event. Saying nothing has only led to speculation, distrust , and bad press.

Policing is a tough enough job without events like this.

Hopefully, with time the facts will come out.

Nope, even if there was a press release there would still be the same people stirring the pot!
That will never change.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[58thecat]

Originally Posted by lmtada

Short video, basically what all the comments we have witnessed so far.
National Firearms association.
https://youtu.be/PdM2laAerys

Even these guys don’t know what took place or what went down so they too have little credibility commenting on this just like you or I don’t.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[elkhunter11]

Originally Posted by 58thecat

Even these guys don’t know what took place or what went down so they too have little credibility commenting on this just like you or I don’t.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The only possible unbiased witness, would be the customer, and only if he really was a customer.

[WolfmanAB]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=63d9I-pWVqM

[nelsonob1]

TPS needs to come out and talk about what they think happened. Now, not a year from now. If they don't know what happened, then they need to explain how four officers are in a room when someone is killed by them and they don't know what happened.

[Au revoir, Gopher]

Originally Posted by nelsonob1

TPS needs to come out and talk about what they think happened. Now, not a year from now. If they don't know what happened, then they need to explain how four officers are in a room when someone is killed by them and they don't know what happened.

TPS can't comment, it is out of their hands. See below.

Originally Posted by C2C3PO

[...]

As for the previous comment that keeps coming up about why TPS has said nothing on this matter TPS spokesperson confirmed that under SIU protocol agencies are prohibited from making responses while under investigation - again something that is standard right across the country.

I know we all want "instant gratification", but the investigation has to run its course.

ARG

[Twisted Canuck]

Instant gratification is maybe a bit much to expect. But SIU hasn't even interviewed the officer who pulled the trigger yet, 2 weeks later. It would seem to me that the interviews of officers involved would be more immediate, while the memory is fresh. Rather then way later, after the memory may not be as clear. Or becomes edited after the fact. That is not suggesting a deliberate edit either, I just know that recalling stressful situations weeks after the incident, our memories may not be as reliable as immediately after the fact.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/hamil...view-1.6255064

[Au revoir, Gopher]

Originally Posted by Twisted Canuck

Instant gratification is maybe a bit much to expect. But SIU hasn't even interviewed the officer who pulled the trigger yet, 2 weeks later. It would seem to me that the interviews of officers involved would be more immediate, while the memory is fresh. Rather then way later, after the memory may not be as clear. Or becomes edited after the fact. That is not suggesting a deliberate edit either, I just know that recalling stressful situations weeks after the incident, our memories may not be as reliable as immediately after the fact.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/hamil...view-1.6255064

Well, that is... dismaying. I'm pretty sure that if I had pulled the trigger I wouldn't get two weeks to confer with my lawyer, my union rep, my colleagues, my dog, etc.

That is another article the raises more questions then it answer. For instance, "The SIU also collected one police-issued gun[...]". What is the nature of this "gun"? Sidearm or one of those military-grade assault-style weapons (aka police carbines)?

ARG

[Twisted Canuck]

As pointed out in the article, even if the SIU had requested an interview immediately with the officer who shot Rodger, he is under no obligation to comply or give a statement. He cannot be forced to give testimony that might incriminate himself. So, maybe he gives a boilerplate statement (I saw a gun, he pointed it at me, that's my story), or he may say nothing.

I suspect it will be a very long time before we have any information. Probably after we find out what happened in the NS shooting with Wortman. If we do find out. About either.

[nelsonob1]

Seems like there are lots of rules and procedures that protect the police. How about a new rule. If your a cop and you shoot someone, you have to write why within two weeks and we all get to read it. And if your a cop and see another cop shoot someone, you have to write what you saw within two weeks and we all get to see it.

And if the notion of making a public statement in the death of another person in a timely manner offends you, don't wear a gun, don't be a cop, do something else.

[brendan's dad]

Originally Posted by Twisted Canuck

As pointed out in the article, even if the SIU had requested an interview immediately with the officer who shot Rodger, he is under no obligation to comply or give a statement. He cannot be forced to give testimony that might incriminate himself. So, maybe he gives a boilerplate statement (I saw a gun, he pointed it at me, that's my story), or he may say nothing.

I suspect it will be a very long time before we have any information. Probably after we find out what happened in the NS shooting with Wortman. If we do find out. About either.

You are completely right. Most "Police Act's" will have a duty to report type clause. But it is very limit to what needs to be reported. Basically you can not endanger the public and you can not provide false evidence or impeded the original investigation. And we are not even sure what the original investigation was in relation to at this point.

Because these Officers are under investigation and their jeopardy may include murder, they are afford the same right as any other Canadian in that they have the right to remain silent. That is the American wording, but it applies to Canada as well. Here the police say "You need not say anything...."

Also the TPs and OPP will be very careful not to say anything in relation to the case. The reason being it could impact any court proceedings. And if the Officer are charged, it could be used to show bias and on the extreme end of things, could result in a mis-trial where the charges might be dismissed when they should not be.

It would be no different then the media and Biden trying to effect the outcome of the Kyle Rittenhouse trial.

I think the next thing we will hear is whether or not the officer are charged or cleared, and then we will need to wait for the trial or public inquiry to hear about the details.

[vcmm]

I heard the TPS officer was getting in some practice hours before transferring to the RCMP. (flame suit on) We will never know the whole truth.

[Pioneer2]

They didn't even have a warrant.

[Scott N]

Originally Posted by Pioneer2

They didn't even have a warrant.

Or wrong address perhaps.

[C2C3PO]

Originally Posted by Pioneer2

They didn't even have a warrant.

You mean police have refused to share a copy of the warrant with the family. There is a huge difference.
They executed a search warrant and then applied and were granted an application for it to be sealed - that is the most likely scenario for this instance based upon what has been said and can be pieced together by all the reports.

Here is a short excerpt explaining similar instances:

Section 487.2 (1) of the Criminal Code, implemented in 1985 in response to the MacIntyre ruling, bars the media from identifying suspects or places searched unless charges have been laid.

Courts in Ontario, Manitoba and Quebec quickly struck down the ban as a violation of the Charter right of freedom of the press and, even though the section remains on the books, media law experts consider it a dead letter. If a search has been completed and evidence was seized, the file is open to public scrutiny.


But other restrictions may apply. Section 487.3 (1) of the Code enables a judge to seal the file to prevent the information from being misused, to ensure the ends of justice are not subverted, or “for any other sufficient reason.” Police usually want the file sealed to protect ongoing investigations and undercover operations, or to shield the identity of a confidential informant.

[Ishpah]

Give it a break guys. The TPS needs time getting their story together. Remember the Robert Dziekański case at the Vancouver Airport back in 2007.