OPP to probe officers’ testimony
Toronto police call for review as chief faces backlash for saying he hoped ‘for a different outcome’
Toronto police have tapped the Ontario Provincial Police to conduct an independent probe into their officers’ testimony during the highprofile murder trial of Umar Zameer, after the trial judge raised pointed concerns about their evidence then issued a rare apology to the accused.
The announcement by police just after 5 p.m. on Monday came one day after jurors found Zameer — a 34-year-old father and accountant — not guilty on all counts in the 2021 death of Const. Jeffrey Northrup. The verdict had followed a contentious trial that spurred accusations witness officers gave “false” evidence in a case some legal observers say should not have gone to trial.
It also came amid backlash to comments by Toronto police Chief Myron Demkiw on Sunday that he had been “hoping for a different outcome.”
“Whenever the Toronto Police Service becomes aware of concerns raised by the judiciary, its governance requires that a review be conducted with respect to officer testimony, conduct, procedures, practices, and training,” police said in a statement Monday.
Police also announced a “full internal review” of all aspects of plainclothes policing. A Toronto police spokesperson did not immediately respond Monday night when asked if the review results would be made public.
News of the OPP probe answers the critical question of whether anyone would examine if officers colluded in their testimony about Zameer’s actions on the night of the death, as alleged by defence lawyer Nader Hasan. Though police did not specify which “adverse comments” by Molloy prompted their review, the judge had invited jurors to consider whether all three officers could have been mistaken about the same key evidence that incriminated Zameer and at one point, in the absence of the jury, quipped that police had engaged in a “note-writing party.”
“Somebody should be looking at this — somebody independent should be looking at it,” Boris Bytensky, president of the Criminal Lawyers’ Association, said of the allegations of collusion in an interview Monday, before Toronto police announced the OPP review.
If there was collusion, he said, that could range from the “understandable” human behaviour of discussing the death of a colleague in the immediate aftermath to something more nefarious.
“If the answer is that it was something serious, it should be dealt with appropriately,” he said.
But there remain important questions about police handling of the case, experts said Monday, including about initial comments from then-Chief James Ramer stating Northrup’s death was an “intentional” and “deliberate” act.
“Although we can understand that when a police officer is killed on duty it’s highly emotional — a friend, a colleague, a father, all those things — nevertheless the police must very carefully release statements,” said Michael Kempa, a criminology and policing expert at the University of Ottawa — otherwise the public doesn’t get the full story.
In this case, by the time crucial context about the case came out, “public opinion had already formed,” Kempa said.
Following the acquittal, Superior Court Justice Anne Molloy gave a rare apology to Zameer, saying: “You have my … deepest apologies for what you have been through.” In her instructions to the jury, Molloy specifically commented about the discrepancies between the evidence and the officers’ account.
“It is possible for one officer to have a memory of Officer Northrup standing in front of the vehicle in the middle of that laneway with his arms raised to his chest level and his palms outstretched, even if that memory is not accurate. It is for you to decide if it is possible for three officers to have that same mistaken memory.”
The case has also sparked questions about whether changes should be made to policies governing plainclothes officers, including if they should be responding to radio calls when they aren’t visually identified as cops. In their statement Monday, Toronto police said they had ordered a full internal review “of all aspects of plainclothes policing, including equipment and procedures for officer and public safety.”
Alok Mukherjee, former chair of the Toronto police board, said in an interview Monday that he believes the civilian Toronto police board should be pushing for changes, including a review of plainclothes procedures.
“Are they identifying themselves clearly? Are they acting safety when they are confronted with a moving vehicle?” he said. “The board ought to be reviewing these procedures.”
Toronto police board chair Ann Morgan declined an interview with the Star Monday. A spokesperson said it would be premature to respond to questions from the Star, saying “the board has not yet had the opportunity to consider and discuss the matters arising from” the Zameer case.
Demkiw’s “different outcome” comments Sunday drew heated criticism Monday from members of the legal community who said the chief’s remarks could imply to the public that the justice system was broken.
“I think that’s a very dangerous message to send to the community,” said Bytensky. “A police chief who doesn’t like a verdict shouldn’t be saying things that will cause members of the public to think the justice system doesn’t work.”
In the statement from police Monday, Demkiw reiterated he respects “the judicial process and I accept the decision of the jury.”
“Perhaps closure in a tragic event of this magnitude will come with time. As chief, I was acknowledging the emotions many of us were feeling, while struggling with the death of a fellow officer, but of course, closure can never come at the expense of justice.”