Ontario gunsmith shot and killed by police

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rick_iles

Better read it again . Police announce their presence, enter the building, witness sees them, realized who they are, complies with order to raise hands, Kantanko 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 Kantanko thinking ??

---

Funny I interrupt it to mean he was working on a gun, they startled him (not seeing them come in), he turned in his seat still holding the gun and was shot by an office 4 times.

And..."seated by a workbench to the left of the pedestrian door." Means he was twisting to the left , with the gun in the right hand, there would be no intent to point the gun, it just traveled with him in his twisting motion.

He may have misjudged the danger to that motion, but no need to put 4 slugs put into him for it.

A good lawyer will have a field day with this report.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rick_iles

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 ??
And yes, there will be civil ramifications…regardless , there always are !

---

There's no question many things could have been done in advance that would have prevented this tragedy but based on the testimony of two witnesses the incident itself does not appear to be an unjustified use of force. People who point guns at the police, even unloaded ones, risk getting shot.

The family will probably proceed with its civil action but it will be an uphill climb when the SIU has exonerated the officer.

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

Pretty clear to me. He reached for the gun after the police ordered him to raise his hands….

In the end, it looks like police have the right to yell, confuse and disorient the elderly victim in his own home and then execute him because he does not understand what is happening in a split second. You might see this different but the only 1 who knows for sure how he was feeling or what he might have heard is dead. No answers from him, problem solved.
Yup, I feel the SIU nailed another one. Nothing to see here, onward to N.S. now to clear up some more problems.
John

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rick_iles

. Within seconds of their entry, he reached with his right hand towards the workbench, retrieved CW #2’s firearm....

Pretty clear to me. He reached for the gun after the police ordered him to raise his hands….

---

The officer is behind him over his left shoulder...how was he able to see him, while sitting at the bench, move his right hand to pick up a gun right in front of him. ?

The judge and jury will ask those questions...you should be open to the fact the officer was at fault here Rick...because it sure looks like he was trigger happy by the picture the SIU report pictures.

I

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by johnjyb

In the end, it looks like police have the right to yell, confuse and disorient the elderly victim in his own home and then execute him because he does not understand what is happening in a split second. You might see this different but the only 1 who knows for sure how he was feeling or what he might have heard is dead. No answers from him, problem solved.
Yup, I feel the SIU nailed another one. Nothing to see here, onward to N.S. now to clear up some more problems.
John

---

That's the rub isn't it...a life long gunsmith and shooter would be hard of hearing, he may have only heard 'noise' and twisted in his chair to see what was going on...

At least the SIU report means nothing more than they're covering the officers back and not are pressing charges. It means nothing to a judge and jury..

The SIU says there's no reasonable grounds to lay charges. Surprise!! Next,at the very least,should be a Coroner's Inquest which should examine events leading up to the shooting. The entire thing seems to be a colossal screw up from the get-go. There's no way this should just "go away".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MikePal

The officer is behind him over his left shoulder...how was he able to see him, while sitting at the bench, move his right hand to pick up a gun right in front of him. ?

The judge and jury will ask those questions...you should be open to the fact the officer was at fault here Rick...because it sure looks like he was trigger happy by the picture the SIU report pictures.

I

---

I know from experience, if there’s a charge to be laid, SIU would have laid it. There was a civilian witness(customer) sitting there with him. I’m sure he shed some first hand light on the event…

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by trimmer21

The SIU says there's no reasonable grounds to lay charges. Surprise!! Next,at the very least,should be a Coroner's Inquest which should examine events leading up to the shooting. The entire thing seems to be a colossal screw up from the get-go. There's no way this should just "go away".

---

It’s not over…and it’s not just going away! There will be an inquest and civil action. Whether there is a civil trial or not, remains to be seen. Most are settled without…

Very interesting turn of events-i am wondering, how they will explain-a Licensed and long term gunsmith, who worked close with the Police for many years, knew gun laws and repercussions, would turn "on " a police officer ,pointing a gun at him -while the officer, guns drawn ,was yelling commands at him?