Police watchdog clears Edmonton officer who hit man multiple times during 2023 arrest

Yahoo

3 days ago

Alberta's main police oversight agency has cleared an Edmonton police officer who punched a man multiple times during an arrest in 2023.
The man had tried to punch the officer after they spoke for a moment, so the seven punches the officer landed were reasonable to defend himself and make the arrest, according to a decision by Matthew Block, assistant executive director of the Alberta Serious Incident Response Team (ASIRT), that was released Tuesday.
As a result, Block found there are no reasonable grounds to believe an offence was committed, the decision says.
An Edmonton Police Service (EPS) spokesperson issued a statement Tuesday, thanking ASIRT for the review and its findings.
A video of the incident, which triggered the investigation, lacked context, the statement said. But EPS appreciates that ASIRT found evidence that "provided this context and subsequently confirmed there are no reasonable grounds to believe that an offence was committed."
ASIRT investigates incidents where police may have caused serious injury or death, as well as "serious and sensitive" allegations of police misconduct, such as sexual assault, fraud and obstruction of justice.
Its investigation into this incident, which occurred Feb. 22, 2023, started after EPS learned a video of the arrest was circulating online and then informed the Alberta director of law enforcement.
According to the ASIRT decision, police had caught the man speeding significantly and ignored speed bumps.
Video shows a white vehicle parking smoothly into a parking spot. A police cruiser parks behind it seconds later. A man gets out of his vehicle and walks toward the cruiser. The officer behind the wheel, who was the subject of the ASIRT investigation, gets out too. They appear to talk with each other.
WATCH | Video of Edmonton police officer's use of force during 2023 arrest:
The decision notes that, at this point, the man and police officers provided conflicting accounts. The man, during an interview with ASIRT just over a year after the incident, said he approached the vehicle calmly, asking what was going on and how he could help, before the officer ordered him to return to his vehicle.
The officers told ASIRT that the man was confrontational and told them to leave the property. The subject officer declined an interview, as is his right, but supplied ASIRT with multiple reports and his notes. The witness officer did an interview and provided her notes and reports.
The video shows the man return to his vehicle. The decision says he told ASIRT he was taking the keys out of the ignition. But the subject officer, who followed him, said the man seemed to be reaching under the seat or console, which led him to believe he may be getting a weapon or hiding something.
The officer put his hand on his gun and ordered the man to show his hands, the ASIRT decision says. He said the man complied but kept acting aggressively, so he told him that they had to discuss the driving pattern.
The man eventually steps away from the officer again until he is hidden in the frame by a pillar. Another officer steps out of the cruiser.
The man had told ASIRT that the first officer permitted him to leave, and he didn't hear the officer tell him to stop. But the officer said he had told the man he was not allowed to leave, the decision says.
When the man reappears in the video, he is walking away. The first officer jogs up to him. According to the decision, the officer then grabs the man's left arm and spins him around.The video shows a struggle, during which the man puts his hands up, either to punch the officer or to shield himself. The officer then lands at least four punches before the man drops to the ground. He hits him four more times before he and his partner make the arrest.
The man's injuries included a concussion and marks on his face, a left-shoulder injury, cuts from the handcuffs and post-traumatic stress disorder, the decision says.
Man swung first: ASIRT
Whether or not the man tried to punch the police officer was a major factor in this investigation, said Block, from ASIRT, in the decision.
Under the Criminal Code of Canada, police officers have the right to use as much force as is necessary to perform their duties, and that force must be reasonable and proportionate given the perceived threat. Officers, like anyone else, also have the right to defend themselves.
The man and officer accused each other of throwing the first punch, according to the decision, and the witness officer told ASIRT she may have missed that part of the conflict while reaching for her stun gun.
Block found, however, that the video showed the man took what "appears to be a fighting stance" and clearly tried to punch the officer at least once, the decision says. He also noted that the officer's punches happened within several seconds.
As a result, the reasons for using such force would likely succeed in this case, the decision says. So there is no reason to believe the officer committed an offence.
Lawyer disagrees
The man's lawyer Heather Steinke-Attia, however, disagrees with Block's assessment.
"It determines — and focuses on — my client reaching his arm out in front of him, and determining that that was an attempted punch at the officer," Steinke-Attia told CBC News.
"He instinctively put his arms up in anticipation that he was about to get punched — which anyone would do — and ASIRT refused to give any consideration to that possibility," she said.
The man was charged with obstruction and assaulting a police officer, and issued two traffic tickets — although the charges were withdrawn on Jan. 12, 2024, the decision says.
Steinke-Attia felt the decision unfairly weighed the length of time between the incident and when her client spoke with ASIRT. He likely would have been instructed by his then-lawyer to exercise his right to remain silent until the charges were withdrawn, she said.
The EPS professional standards branch will review the decision and determine next steps, per the provincial Police Service Regulation, its statement said.
Shortly after the incident, the officers' duty status was under review. An EPS spokesperson confirmed Tuesday that they are both on active duty.