Critic upset that city police still ‘make their own rules’
Watchdog rips ‘unfair advantage’
Concerns from Alberta’s police watchdog that Calgary police officers investigating their colleagues may be granting them an “unfair advantage” comes as no surprise to the brother of a man killed by a police service weapon.
A day after the Alberta Serious Incident Response Team released a two-page statement ripping the Calgary force’s ongoing use of socalled “proffered” or “conditional” statements by officers under investigation, Grant Heffernan said it appears to be business as usual when it comes to officers protecting their own at the expense of people like his brother Anthony Heffernan, who was shot and killed in a northeast hotel room nearly two years ago.
Although ASIRT had recommended charges against the Calgary officer who shot a drug-addled Heffernan, who had holed up in a hotel room before charging at a group of officers with a syringe without a needle, Crown prosecutors determined there was little likelihood of a conviction.
On Tuesday, the independent police watchdog took aim at the Calgary force’s practice of obtaining statements from officers under investigation, essentially a summary of what they might say in court. The contents are protected and can’t be used against the accused officer.
Grant Heffernan said the fact that Calgary police are continuing a practice that has earned a rebuke from the agency tasked with investigating their conduct shows there’s no will to change.
“It’s actually quite frustrating, but not surprising, that there’s basically been no changes since my brother’s death,” he said. “They basically make their own rules.”
The public broadside by ASIRT comes on the heels of a year in which the Calgary Police Service came under investigation 30 times, twice as many as the year prior. Calgary also experienced 10 police shootings, five fatal, easily the most in Alberta in 2016.
Brian Thiessen, chair of the Calgary police commission, the public body that governs the police service, said ASIRT’s concerns over how police take statements from officers under investigation came to the board’s attention earlier this year, and police brass pledged to review the practice.
“I think ASIRT provided valuable feedback and certainly the concerns have been raised and the commission asked questions,” said Thiessen.
“(Calgary police) take the concerns seriously and they’ll be looking at whether that’s an appropriate practice going forward.”
Mount Royal University criminologist Kelly Sundberg said that, under Alberta’s Police Act, officers involved in an incident are required to provide a statement within 14 days, unlike the average citizen, who has the right to remain silent.
“In Canada, you have the right to keep your mouth shut and lawyer up, but under the Police Act police officers have to give an account,” he said. “Police officers aren’t afforded that protection.”