Critics say public deserves to hear more on shooting
SIU steps in after officer allegedly shoots another cop in Niagara
Officially, what transpired just after noon Thursday between two Niagara Regional Police officers can be summarized succinctly: one officer allegedly shot the other multiple times, sending him to hospital where he remains in stable condition. The officer who allegedly fired his gun has not been charged, or taken into custody by the police watchdog now investigating him.
But the circumstances under which the shooting took place — was this a possible case of self-defence? An accident? — have not been revealed by the authorities, including the Special Investigations Unit (SIU), now probing what it has called an “altercation” between two officers.
Citing sources not authorized to speak on the record, local media have identified the officer who allegedly fired his weapon as Det.-Sgt. Shane Donovan and the wounded cop as 52year-old Const. Nathan Parker.
But the vacuum of official information about the incident — including the lack of information about the whereabouts of the officer who allegedly fired his gun, and whether he still had his weapon — has prompted concern from critics who say the public deserves more information.
“All the public’s aware of is one officer shot the other — even though they didn’t say that, which is really dumbfounding,” Howard Morton, a lawyer and former director of the SIU, said in an interview Friday in reference to the SIU’s first statement, which said “a firearm was discharged and one of the officers was struck.
“The public’s entitled to know, in light of that, are these officers still armed?”
SIU spokesperson Monica Hudon told the Star Friday the SIU “collected firearms from the officer who discharged his firearm and from the officer who was injured.”
Local media have identified both the officer who allegedly fired his weapon and the wounded cop
Asked for more information about the circumstances of the shooting, which took place at a rural crossroads in Pelham, Ont., including whether it was possible the injured officer had drawn his weapon, Hudon said: “Determining what transpired will be part of the SIU’s investigation.”
Addressing criticism that the SIU was not providing sufficient information, Hudon said that through the initial and updated news release, and a press conference on scene, the watchdog “provided whatever information it was able.”
“The SIU’s investigation is in the preliminary stages. In order to understand the nature of the altercation between the two police officers, investigators are speaking with witnesses and having the evidence that was collected analyzed. It will take time to get a complete picture of exactly what transpired.”
She added it was important the SIU not release information prematurely that could, for example, taint the memories of any witnesses.
Morton agrees, saying it would not be prudent for the SIU to release too much information at this stage that might compromise the probe, “but at the same time, there are always things that do not jeopardize that I think the public are entitled to know now, particularly when it involves somebody maybe out there with a gun who’s just shot somebody,”
Niagara Regional Police did not respond to questions sent by the Star via email or telephone Friday, including about the employment status of the officer who allegedly fired his gun. In a video released by Chief Bryan MacCulloch on Friday, he states the service can’t provide any information because the SIU has invoked its mandate.
Typically, police officers under investigation by the SIU are suspended with pay, under the requirements of Ontario’s Police Service Act.
On Thursday, Mike Zettel, a reporter with the Welland Tribune’s sister paper Niagara This Week, told a journalist that he had spoken with Donovan that morning, near the investigation scene.
“He was very friendly and very helpful,” said Zettel. “Often when a reporter gets to a scene like that, the officer you talk to is just there at the roadblock and might not know anything about the incident. But I got lucky. (Donovan) was able to explain what was going on.”
In a wide-ranging and recent review of police oversight in Ontario, Court of Appeal Justice Michael Tulloch recommended that the SIU be “more open, candid, and communicative than it is now.”
He called upon the watchdog to better communicate its decisions following investigations, a practice the watchdog has largely taken up.
Tulloch was sympathetic to the need to avoid tainting witnesses’ evidence, calling it a “legitimate concern.”
But he also said the SIU “should be allowed to provide information to the public to maintain public confidence, especially when to do so does not threaten the integrity of the in- vestigation.
“The SIU should not be under-reporting in such a way that it unnecessarily shakes public confidence,” he said.
Lisa Taylor, a Ryerson University journalism professor and former lawyer, said there are other examples of criminal probes where investigators release early information in the name of providing reassurance to the public.
“Think about how quickly we get first blush narratives about what happened in the Toronto van attack, or the Danforth shooting. We immediately have the police theory of the case presented,” she said.
Particularly given that this is a case of a police officer shooting his firearm, public interest depends on the provision of information in a transparent manner, Taylor said.
She suggests the SIU quickly convey as complete a narrative as possible, and in clear language.
“I’m weary of police speak, I’m weary of hearing that ‘someone was struck.’ I’m ready to hear, ‘at this stage it appears that one of the officers took out their gun and shot another officer.’ Let’s just say it.”