Judge right to deny officer anonymity at Baker inquest

“Better the gleam of sunlight than that of whitewash.”

So wrote Superior Court Justice Patrick J. Flynn when he wisely ruled that the police officer who killed Beau Baker in Kitchener in 2015 will not be granted anonymity at the upcoming inquest into Baker’s death.

The public’s right to know everything it possibly can about how an agent of the state took a citizen’s life in this community and, as well, the Charter of Rights guarantee of a free media trumped every argument against naming this Waterloo Regional Police officer, Justice Flynn concluded last week.

While this could not have been an easy or simple decision, it was the right one and the one that most clearly defends the public’s interest.

We do not employ secret police in Canada. We employ public servants who are accountable to a public which, above all else, values the life and freedom of every individual. Every life lost must be accounted for.

That, of course, includes Baker’s. His death was a terrible, tragic moment in this region’s history. A troubled 20-year-old who reportedly had substance-abuse issues and was suicidal. Baker told a 911 operator on the night of his death that he wanted to kill himself and hurt others.

According to a subsequent Special Investigations Unit report, Baker failed to obey an order to drop the knife he was carrying and instead advanced on a police officer, who shot him.

Both the SIU and another report by the Office of the Independent Police Review Director cleared the officer of any wrongdoing — without identifying that individual.

And so, after crude, hateful threats were later directed at the officer on social media, it is understandable that the officer, Waterloo Regional Police and Chief Bryan Larkin all called for Justice Flynn to guarantee the officer’s anonymity at the inquest.

But in this case, understandable did not equal incontrovertible.

The public is keenly interested in learning more about Baker’s death. The coroner’s inquest is the only vehicle remaining that can provide the public — and in particular Baker’s family — with such a full and comprehensive disclosure of the events that occurred the night he died.

It should bring out more facts than the two investigations that preceded it. And because, unlike those investigations, the coroner’s inquest is held in public, it should reassure the community that it will finally and truly know precisely what happened, what — if anything — went wrong and how similar crises might be handled better in future.

Such public trust is an essential byproduct of any inquest. It is part of the glue that binds together our society and preserves its faith in the rule of law. And for the sake of that trust, the officer should be named.

The officer in question deserves no criticism for wanting to remain nameless.

But while weighing the request for anonymity, Justice Flynn concluded the police department had not demonstrated any tangible threat against the officer outside of some unpleasant online postings. With that in mind, the judge rejected a ban on publicizing the officer’s identity.

It is good that transparency won out, and Beau Baker’s mother, Jackie Baker, along with the broadcasters CBC and CTV, should be thanked for going to court to fight for this openness.

The inquest is set for next February. When it begins, let the officer who shot Baker step out of the shadows of anonymity and into the full view of this community. Let that person’s name go down in the public record where it belongs.