The Independent Investigations Office of B.C. (IIO) is taking the Vancouver police chief and a number of officers to court over an investigation into a stabbing and shooting at a Canadian Tire last year.
Thirty-eight-year-old Daniel Peter Rintoul was shot and killed by police outside a Canadian Tire in East Vancouver on Nov. 10, 2016 after he allegedly stabbed an officer and a store employee, and took an elderly man hostage.
The IIO launched an investigation into the incident, but now claims that Vancouver police officers failed to cooperate with the inquiry.
Seven officers present during the incident “failed or refused to comply with their statutory duty under s. 38.101 of the Police Act to co-operate fully with the Petitioner” and Chief Const. Adam Palmer had a legal duty to compel these officers to cooperate, said a petition filed in B.C. Supreme Court on March 22.
It adds that the officers refused or failed to attend interviews with the IIO and/or did not respond “in good faith” to questions directed to them in those interviews.
It also claims the officers “demanded” disclosure of certain investigation materials prior to their interviews that the IIO would not disclose.
The IIO is now seeking a mandamus, or order, for Palmer to direct the witness officers to cooperate with the investigation, and for the officers in question to attend interviews.
- Gas station clerk stabbed several times during violent attack at Ultramar in Montreal
- Canada’s most wanted list: Toronto suspect in fatal shooting at No. 1
- Man acquitted in Tina Fontaine murder found dead, says her aunt
- Canadians should expect politicians to support right to bail, Virani’s office says
This is the first time the IIO has filed a petition against the VPD.
Months of investigation delays
In a timeline of events, the petition states interviews with three witness officers were supposed to begin on Nov. 11, 2016 but the officers did not show up. The Vancouver Police Union (VPU) later requested the interviews be delayed until Nov. 14, so the officers could “collect their thoughts.”
But on Nov. 12, Kevin Woodall, the counsel for the police union, asked if the IIO could provide officers with investigation materials like dispatch audio and incident video that were related to the investigation.
“Mr. Woodall stated that his advice to the VPU would be that witness members were entitled to this requested pre-interview disclosure and were justified in law in deferring IIO interviews until they had received the requested disclosure,” the petition said.
The next day, IIO counsel Martin Allen advised that the IIO would provide investigation materials but only if those materials did not have the potential to “augment or influence the officer’s recollections,” the court documents said.
Allen added that it was unlikely that video of the incident would be released to the officers prior to their interviews.
The IIO also refused to accept Woodall’s claim that officers had the right to delay or refuse interviews or have counsel attend the interviews with them.
On Nov. 14, six witness officers failed to show up to their rescheduled interviews with the IIO.
During the subsequent months, both parties refused to budge: the IIO would not disclose investigation materials to the officers and the officers refused to attend numerous interviews without materials related to the investigation.
Amongst all seven witness officers, IIO tried to set up more than 40 interviews. None of the officers showed up for any of these interviews, citing reasons including unresolved disclosure issues, weekly leave, training courses and night shifts.
In early March, the IIO asked Palmer to order his officers to comply with the investigation.
A week later, Palmer declared he was seeking legal advice, the petition said.
In a statement to Global News, the IIO declined to comment as the matter is before the courts, only saying, “The filing speaks for itself and all of the facts are outlined in our petition and the accompanying affidavits.”
Vancouver Police Union president Tom Stamatakis said it is unfortunate that the issue is going to court.
“It seems like an awful waste of time and resources to me, rather than trying to come up with a reasonable solution,” Stamatakis said.
He added that the IIO’s claims “misrepresent what happened.”
He also claims that officers would not have accurate memory of their experiences during the incident without being able to review records like dispatch audio or video footage prior to their witness interviews.
The VPD told Global News, “we respect the civilian oversight process. This is a complex legal issue that has been filed in court. Due to the legal process, we cannot elaborate further at this time.”
Comments