Interesting recommendations from the jury, which as in most places are just ordinary folks asked to make them after hearing all the facts.

“The jury made four recommendations, including that domestic disputes be assessed by police to determine whether an intervention is necessary, and that police should call on a mental health adviser in some domestic disputes.”

Availability of such a resource? Next to zero.

“The jury also said officers should have Taser stun guns, or what police call conducted energy weapons, on hand.”

Probability of equipping every officer that may deal with domestics a taser? Zero. Prohibitive budget considerations.

“And it said all RCMP detachments should have a canine unit available to members and that a police dog should be used for all domestic disturbance calls.”

Probability of having a dog unit at every one of 750 offices available for every domestic? Desirable, but totally cost prohibitive. Letting the animal be cut and or stabbed is a question.

““From our experience, [coroner's] inquests are solely about trying to show that the RCMP had no responsibility for their deadly actions.””

Very sad that an independent agency such as the Coroners office, who utilize ordinary folks in its mandate, is so derided by a special interest group.

As you noted, there could be a creation of an independent agency for such investigations now undertaken by the police upon themselves. However, I would venture that if not satisfied with whatever findings or investigations that are done, you will have the same attitude as you have now. Accusations of bias, favoritism, etc.. I think the point is some persons / groups, will never be satisfied and we have to come to terms with that.

Do you Like or Dislike the above comment: 0  2

“Suicide by Cop” is defined on the internet and is recognized that people use the police to kill themselves. The trouble is that the person usually gets the results that is wanted and are killed. Therefore, we never know for certain what their intent was. The mistrust and animosity has to be acknowledged and put aside and the facts of the of the case, and the outcome of the investigation, presented no matter who it helps or who it hurts.

Deadly force may be used by the police when fearing death or grievous bodily harm to yourself or others and all other means to subdue the person has been exhausted. The violator must also have the ability, means, and intent to cause death or grievous bodily harm before deadly force can be used. (See RCMP Incident Management Intervention Model I.M.I.M.)

Judging by the recommendations and comments, I realize and understand that their perception of violence is limited and, in some cases, misguided. They have to examine, Officer Imposed Jeopardy, Hormonal Induced Stress etc. There are people out there who have no idea what a person with an edged weapon (knife) can do.

There are processes that can be used to educate key community people and elected officials etc. as to the stress of dealing with deadly encounters from a policing perspective.

While stationed in the Diversity Management Section of the RCMP in Ottawa I exposed the Commissioner’s Advisory Committee on Visible Minorities to the Fire Arms Training System (F.A.T.S. Machine). This was not to teach them how to use a firearm, but to expose them to hormonal induced stress and “shoot don’t shoot” situations that police officers are faced with. It was very successful in changing several “made up minds” about the police use of their weapons.

Managers have to start thinking outside the box to to educate people on the issue of deadly force, especially if there are calls for the creation of an outside agency to investigate the RCMP.

Calvin Lawrence
C.G.L. Consulting

Do you Like or Dislike the above comment: 1  1