Printable View
The length of time is frustrating but the SIU investigations are thorough and detailed. Some of the timing such as ballistic tests and laboratory analysis would be beyond their control. Here is a link to a report released last week from an incident in September that gives an idea on the detail that goes into their investigations. I would expect the Kotanko matter to be more complex than this one.Quote:
Originally Posted by MikePal
https://siu.on.ca/en/directors_repor....php?drid=1772
While I agree, if the incident was complex and forensics, ballistics, etc were required, but even then, 6 months would be dragging it out....lawyers must be involved :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Badenoch
But come on...a case like this, basically a traffic stop and the officer shot the driver...in front of another officer. I wonder if they had dash/body cams.
The more I read these SIU reports,the more I think the police services would be better off spending more of the SIU budget on putting more officers on the streets.
It sounds like they spend most of the time trying to get to the truth based on the two officers' statements...if you catch my drift.
edit add: ..Holy Crap:Quote:
With respect to full-blown SIU investigations, namely, those resulting in Director’s Reports or charges (see below), the average length of case was 187.59 days, down from 201.79 days the year before.
Just so I understand....... The OPP respond to a gasoline theft - shoplifting - Locate the SUSPECTED vehicle and said vehicle - ENDS UP - in the center median where the officers approach and a gun is discharged killing the driver. It takes the SIU almost 7 months to think there may be some wrongdoing here ? Meanwhile we pay the officer full salary, we pay the SIU members and we will pay the lawyer, and judicial system.Quote:
Originally Posted by MikePal
Seems all above board to me
There's a difference between thinking there may be "some wrongdoing here" and proving it in a court of law. Police unions hire excellent lawyers to defend their members and it is better that the SIU take the time required to build a case that won't get overturned than let a bad cop go free because of a rushed or slipshod investigation.Quote:
Originally Posted by Goosechsr
No charges recommended. Full details here:
https://siu.on.ca/en/directors_repor....php?drid=1856
Not surprised in the least.... Sounds like its a rap. :(
Better get some popcorn on…..
As I said earlier...they knew the day this happened what occurred, officers and witnesses saw it happen. No complex ballistics or crime scene investigation was required, someone should be asking why it took the SIU 3 months to release this report.Quote:
Originally Posted by rick_iles
the short of it..They shot a guy, 4 times while he was seated holding a gun he was working on, with no magazine in it and nowhere in the report was it found to be loaded.Quote:
In the workshop with the Complainant at the time was a client - CW #2. CW #2 had recently purchased a Norinco 1911-A1 compact .45 calibre pistol, and had brought it in to the Complainant for a repair. His intention had been to drop it off and return for it later, but the Complainant convinced him to wait as the repair would only take about 15 minutes. CW #2 provided the Complainant the gun in a gun case, and observed as the Complainant performed the repair. The Complainant was putting the pistol together again – the magazine had not been reinserted in the firearm but it looked like a complete gun – when he heard sound from behind him.
The sound was coming from the approach of FEU officers – the SO, followed closely by WO #4. The officers called out, “Police, search warrant,” and, “Put your hands up,” as they neared and entered the workshop’s pedestrian door. CW #2 surmised that it was the police and raised his hands.
With their guns drawn, the SO and WO #4 quickly turned their attention to the Complainant, seated by a workbench to the left of the pedestrian door. The Complainant did not raise his hands at the officers’ repeated direction. Within seconds of their entry, he reached with his right hand towards the workbench, retrieved CW #2’s firearm, and turned with it in the officers’ directionas they yelled at him to “drop the gun”. The SO fired his gun – a Glock .40 calibre semi-automatic – four times in rapid succession, striking the Complainant and knocking him off his chair onto his back. The time was about 12:15 p.m.
Sounds more like he was startled by the noise, turned towards the sound, while holding the gun he was working on and the officer shot him.
Have to see wait now to see what the family's civil suit draws out, where we will hear what the witness CW#2 saw and maybe a judge will be able dig thru the subterfuge.
JUST AMAZING! I NOW SUPPORT ALL POLICE ACTIONS UNCONDITIONALLY WITHOUT QUESTION!
Yes, this is sarcasm. It is getting real in Canada.
John
Better read it again . Police announce their presence, enter the building, witness sees them, realized who they are, complies with order to raise hands, Kotanko doesn’t raise hands, but reaches for the gun and turns towards the police. Police can’t wait to see, or make sure a gun is loaded when they are confronted with one, as you seem to suggest. Question is, what was Kotanko thinking ??Quote:
Originally Posted by MikePal
And yes, there will be civil ramifications…regardless , there always are !