Ontario police dog says two Vancouver police officers who hit protesters with “less lethal” projectiles at the end of this winter’s occupation of downtown Ottawa streets did not break any law .
Officers from various police departments across the country were in Ottawa to help local officers control the Freedom Convoy protests.
The Special Investigation Unit (SIU) was investigating what happened on the night of February 19 when police flooded the city center to evict people who had settled around Parliament Hill for the Convoy of Freedom.
This unit examines incidents in which police shoot someone with a firearm, along with police involvement in a death, serious injury or allegations of sexual assault.
In that case, the SIU said in a report released Monday that police officers were trying to move a crowd of people south on Bank Street from Sparks Street so they could install a fence.
He said he used a video from sources such as police, the city and the nearby Bank of Canada building, interviewing two of the people hit by projectiles and three eyewitnesses.
The two investigated officers declined an interview and the opportunity to present their notes. The second officer (as described below) made a written statement.
Person with flashlight hit in the face
According to the report, people in the crowd did not hear the police telling them to move backwards and both sides were pushing against each other.
At one point, a stranger climbed a concrete barrier near Bank Street’s McDonald’s and flashed a gleaming flashlight in the officers’ faces.
One of the two officers fired at the person with his 40mm Penn Arms L140-4 launcher. A projectile hit them in the face and knocked them off the barrier, SIU said. They then disappeared into the crowd and their identity remains unknown to the unit.
This is the L140-4 launcher from manufacturer Penn Arms used by one of the officers. (Special Investigation Unit)
The two men who spoke to the SIU were next to the person with the light when they were hit by a projectile fired by the same agent. Then they got off the barrier and left, the SIU said.
Without saying which projectiles could have hit people, the SIU said they fired four batons made of unspecified material and a round of oleoresin pepper or pepper spray.
The second SIU investigated officer fired two ARWEN (Anti Riot Weapon ENfield) projectiles at people’s legs, according to the report.
One was standing in front of someone who was advancing towards the fallen officers, the other was facing someone who had been described as fighting with the police who were approaching the police line again.
It is seen as a reasonable force
The SIU concluded that the two agents used reasonable force: first, that they were doing a legal mass check.
“The plan was not to close the rally, but simply to direct the protesters a short distance to the south so that security fences could be erected on the road,” he said.
“Those in the crowd had been repeatedly ordered to move south before officers began their forward push.”
Second, he said the use of his firearms was justified.
“[The first officer’s rounds] they were aimed at a man who was intentionally pointing a flashlight at the officers’ faces, presumably to interfere with their vision. Given the distance of the man from the front lines of the police, it would have been impractical and perhaps even dangerous to enter the crowd to deal directly with the man, “according to the report.
“In terms of shots fired [the second officer]these were also proportional to the demands of the moment … In both cases, the force managed to deter the protesters, presumably without causing serious injuries. “
He said that while it was “unfortunate” the two men next to the person with the flashlight were shot, their distance from the officer with the launcher, their position close to the light and the less lethal projectiles meant that it is not criminal negligence.
SIU closed the previous investigation
Proponents of her case have been working to make the actual transcript of this statement available online. police forced them out and they say the operation was not legal.
Police and government officials had said the right to protest did not allow people to camp on the streets indefinitely interrupting people, business and travel.
Earlier, the SIU canceled another investigation the same weekend, saying that the tense shoulder of a woman knocked down by a police horse did not meet her definition of serious injury.