B.C.'s police watchdog says the actions of a Courtenay man during an eight-hour standoff left police with "little choice" in how to proceed, and the head of the agency won't be recommending any charges against the officers.
The Independent Investigations Office of B.C.'s chief civilian officer Jessica Berglund released her six-page report Thursday (Feb. 6) into the April 7, 2024 standoff between Comox Valley RCMP and a Courtenay man that led to his arrest and left him with several injuries. In her report, Berglund said the emergency response team members were found to be using justified force and what was necessary in the circumstances.
She doesn't believe there are any reasonable grounds to believe any of the officers may have committed an offence, adding she wouldn't be referring charges to Crown counsel.
The Independent Investigations Office investigated the Comox Valley RCMP's Emergency Response Team's use of a conducted energy weapon and various methods of subduing the subject in order to remove him from his home and arrest him.
On the day of the incident, the suspect was thought to be in breach of his bail conditions and was seen to be causing a disturbance in front of his residence by yelling obscenities and threats, according to multiple 911 calls from neighbours.
His bail conditions included being under house arrest daily, except Sundays and Wednesdays between 1 and 3 p.m. April 7, 2024 was a Sunday.
When RCMP officers phoned dispatch in regards to the subject鈥檚 bail conditions, they received incorrect information and thought the subject was in breach of the house-arrest order.
Officers attempted to make contact with the individual at his front door, but he locked the door, brandished a knife and yelled threats through the door at the RCMP. The officers applied for an arrest warrant based on his behaviour.
The decision was made to call in the Emergency Response Team (ERT) and use crisis negotiation to have the the man leave his home and for officers to arrest him.
For two hours, officers attempted to negotiate with the man. The report states all attempts were ignored or met with threats. He asked police to speak with his lawyer, which they did, and the lawyer relayed the message that he was unable to persuade the subject to surrender to police.
RCMP received the warrant to enter the man's home at approximately 7:12 p.m. and prepared chemical gas weapons to get him to leave the home.
The man asked for the RCMP negotiator鈥檚 phone number for contact, but instead a friend contacted RCMP to tell police that the subject was currently wearing a gas mask and threatening to kill police if they entered his home. The friend said they were unaware of the subject possessing any firearms.
Police used the chemical gas weapons at approximately 7:20 p.m. and officers could hear the man coughing. He was thought to be in the home's crawl space and officers used an infrared camera to find him through heat signature. Officers fired pepper balls at him, but there seemed to be no reaction from the subject.
At 8:55 p.m., ERT members entered the home and cleared the main floor, inserting a camera into the crawl space to find where the subject was. He was seen to be in a corner, wrapped in a blanket or sleeping bag, and holding a knife in his right hand.
After repeated commands to drop the weapon and come out of the crawl space were met with no compliance, officers attempted to use a conducted energy weapon, but the subject was protected from the probes by the sleeping bag. ERT determined it was unsafe to send officers into the crawl space as the subject was still wearing a gas mask and holding a large knife in his hand.
At approximately 9:36 p.m., the subject slashed at an officer through one of the vents in the crawl space but missed him. The ERT responded by firing several 40mm blunt impact rounds and deploying the conducted energy weapon again. The 鈥渓ess lethal鈥� efforts appeared to have no effect on the subject, who continued to move around the crawl space.
An officer aimed a fire hose at the subject through an exterior vent at approximately 10:13 p.m. The subject was able to block this using a section of wall insulation, so a second fire hose was used from a different direction. Officers again shot 40mm rounds at the subject but were unable to dislodge the knife.
Eventually, the fire hose did dislodge the gas mask the subject was wearing so gas was inserted into the crawl space. Officers continued to ask the subject to surrender.
The subject was able to get his gas mask back on but one of the impact rounds struck his right hand, causing him to drop the knife. Instead, the subject picked the knife up with his left hand and told the officers that his right hand was broken. The subject said the knife would only be taken from him if he was unconscious.
At 10:47 p.m., the subject told ERT members that he was ready to come out.
He dropped the knife in the crawl space and came out through a hatch. The subject was wet and shivering and had a badly swollen hand. He was helped to an ambulance by two officers while his feet dragged on the ground.
He was then heard telling officers, 鈥淲ell, that was fun, guys, we should do it again," and asked, 鈥淎ren鈥檛 you guys proud of me? I stayed in there for a long time.鈥�
Paramedics determined the man had a broken right forearm, a puncture wound to his thigh and injuries to both hands, including fractured finger bones.
The subject was interviewed by the IIO. He said he knew he hadn't breached his conditions and didn't want the police to enter his home. He recalled being 鈥淭asered鈥� 16 times over the course of the incident and being shot repeatedly with 40mm rounds.
He said police had 鈥渢ried to drown me鈥� in the crawl space, adding that he had no intention of harming police. Instead, he told himself to remember his military training and that the police were civilians he had a duty to defend and protect.
The IIO is mandated to investigate any police incident where a person has died or suffered serious physical harm and there appears to be a connection to the actions or inactions of police.
In this investigation, the IIO had statements from the man, four witnesses and five witness police officers. The investigation also included police audio recordings, video recordings from security cameras and fire department dash cameras, conducted energy weapon data, medical evidence and crisis negotiation team documents.
Officers being investigated are not mandated to provide evidence. The IIO said none of the subject officers gave an account for the report.
While Berglund found that there are no reasonable grounds to believe that an officer may have committed an offence, she added it's unfortunate that the RCMP officers who initially responded to the 911 calls were given the wrong information regarding his bail conditions and the subject was not in breach of his conditions.
But she said the 911 callers complained about the subject causing a disturbance in public and these complaints gave police the grounds to arrest him.
However, Berglund said the failure of officers to not get the proper information regarding the man's bail conditions does not amount to a criminal offence on the part of any officer, but it did contribute to the sequence of events that could have easily become tragic and the events that did traumatize the subject.
In a subsequent interview with the IIO, it was clear that the incident caused the man continuing physical and psychological distress.
But Berglund said the police had no choice in how to proceed given the subject's actions toward them, including brandishing a weapon, yelling at them and threatening lethal force if they entered his home to arrest him.
Berglund found that in this incident the police tried over an extended period of time to communicate with the subject in the aim of de-escalation and a non-violent conclusion.
The combination of the subject鈥檚 refusal to comply with requests and his ability to withstand the non-lethal force used against him caused the incident to become as drawn out and violent as it was.
