Alberta
ASIRT investigations concluded on fatal officer-involved shooting involving the RCMP.
Incident investigation report from the Alberta Serious Incident Response Team (ASIRT)
Introduction
On December 22, 2022, the Alberta Serious Incident Response Team (ASIRT) was directed pursuant to s. 46.1 of the Police Act to investigate a then non-fatal Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) officer-involved shooting. The shooting of the affected person (AP) was reported to have happened during an interaction with him, as a result of him being a suspect in a complaint of a man with a gun.
While AP initially survived, he died of complications from the shooting the following day.
ASIRT’s Investigation
ASIRT’s investigation was comprehensive and thorough, conducted using current investigative protocols and principles relating to Major Case Management. Information from civilian witnesses, the subject and a witness officers, and importantly video recordings provided sufficient information to determine whether the force used by the subject officer during this incident was reasonable.
Circumstances Surrounding the Officer-Involved Shooting
On December 01, 2022, Maskwacis RCMP received a call reporting that a male [AP] had been drinking and left the caller’s house with a gun. AP was shooting the gun in the country (believed to be the area around the residence). Two RCMP officers responded.
Witness officer (WO) located AP walking on the road with a rifle. AP walked toward WO’s marked police vehicle with the rifle pointed at the vehicle/WO, while WO was seated in the driver’s seat. WO then exited his vehicle with his carbine rifle and moved to the rear of his vehicle while AP kept the rifle pointed at the police vehicle. The subject officer (SO) arrived on scene, but came from the opposite direction. AP turned around and walked toward SO with the barrel of the rifle pointed upwards. SO exited his police vehicle with his service pistol drawn and walked toward AP while he
repeatedly provided verbal direction to AP to drop the firearm. AP and SO were walking toward each other; at that time AP still had the barrel of the rifle pointed upward. As SO and AP got within approximately five meters of each other, AP lowered the barrel of the rifle and pointed it directly at SO. SO fired multiple rounds and struck AP with four rounds causing AP to stumble, drop the rifle and fall to the ground. AP initially survived the shooting and was transported to an Edmonton hospital, where he underwent emergency surgery. The following day, AP succumbed to his injuries.
Analysis
The subject officer was lawfully placed and acting in the execution of his duties in dealing with AP as a person who was the subject of a complaint about him being in possession of a firearm and shooting it off.
The Use of Force
Under s. 25 of the Criminal Code, police officers are permitted to use as much force as is necessary for the execution of their duties. Where this force is intended or is likely to cause death or grievous bodily harm, the officer must believe on reasonable grounds that the force is necessary for the self-preservation of the officer or preservation of anyone under that officer’s protection.
A police officer’s use of force is not to be assessed on a standard of perfection nor using the benefit of hindsight.
With the benefit of hindsight, time for detached reflection and knowledge of the ultimate outcome, it is easy to speculate about how things could have been done differently. That is not the standard, however, against which an officer’s conduct is measured. The question is, applying principles of proportionality, necessity, and reasonableness, whether the force used falls into a range of possible reasonable responses.
Proportionate Response
Proportionality requires balancing a use of force with the action to which it responds. Here, the subject officers were faced with an individual that was armed with a gun and pointing it in their direction. As such, the response by the subject officers in using their respective firearms to shoot AP was proportionate to the threat of death or grievous bodily harm that he reasonably posed to both of them.
Reasonably Necessary
As set out previously in this report, AP presented as a lethal threat to both SO and WO given his actions in pointing his rifle at them. While WO did not shoot during this incident that does not impact the analysis of SO’s actions. Under the circumstances as then faced by SO, no other use of force options were reasonably available for attempted use. The use by SO of his firearm to incapacitate this lethal threat was reasonably necessary. Given the above, the defence available to SO under s. 25 of the Criminal Code would apply.
Conclusion
Under s. 25 of the Criminal Code a police officer is justified in doing what he or she is authorized to do and to use as much force as is reasonably necessary where he or she has reasonable grounds to do so. Force intended to cause death or grievous bodily harm is justified if the officer believes, on reasonable grounds, that the force was necessary to prevent the death or grievous bodily harm of the officer and/or any other person. The analysis under s.34 of the Criminal Code leads to a similar finding that subject officer’s actions were lawfully permitted.
After a thorough, independent and objective investigation into the conduct of the subject officers, it is my opinion that they were lawfully placed and acting properly in the execution of their duties. There is no evidence to support any belief that any officer engaged in any unlawful or unreasonable conduct that would give rise to an offence. The force used was proportionate, necessary and reasonable in all the circumstances.
Alberta’s government is encouraging Albertans to explore their electricity options and take charge of their power bill.
Albertans need to be able to make smart financial choices, including choosing an affordable electricity plan that best meets their needs. While most ratepayers choose to sign competitive contracts with one of more than 50 electricity providers in the province’s uniquely competitive market, those who don’t are automatically enrolled on the Rate of Last Resort – the default electricity rate – and likely to pay more for their power.
As part of ongoing efforts to help Albertans save more on their electricity bill, Alberta’s government is launching an advertising campaign to encourage Albertans to explore their electricity options and ensure they know they don’t have to settle for the Rate of Last Resort.
“Albertans shouldn’t pay more on their power bill than they have to. Our government is taking action to ensure they have the tools they need to make informed decisions about their electricity so more of their hard-earned dollars can be used where they’re needed most for them and their families.”
Last year, tens of thousands of households made the switch from the Rate of Last Resort to a competitive contract. The campaign aims to ensure new Albertans and first-time ratepayers still on the Rate of Last Resort know they have choices when it comes to their power bill, and a better electricity option that could save them hundreds of dollars may be available to them.
“Alberta’s competitive electricity market gives consumers choice, and for most Albertans, competitive retail rates are a better choice than the Rate of Last Resort. I encourage everyone to learn about their electricity options and contact the Utilities Consumer Advocate if you need help understanding your utilities.”
The campaign builds on existing consumer awareness initiatives and efforts to lower utility bills and protect ratepayers from volatile price spikes. New regulations came into effect Jan. 1 that require providers to clearly indicate on customers’ utility bills if they are on the Rate of Last Resort and inform them of their competitive retail market options. Every 90 days, the Utilities Consumer Advocate will contact all ratepayers on the Rate of Last Resort, confirm whether they would like to remain on the default rate and encourage them to explore their options.
“Moving to a new place can be overwhelming and expensive, especially those moving from outside the province or country. Alberta’s government is helping ease stress and financial strain by making sure newcomers are informed about their electricity options.”
To protect any Albertans who may not be able to sign a competitive contract from sudden, volatile price spikes, the Rate of Last Resort is set at approximately 12 cents/kWh. The rate is set every two years and can only be changed by a maximum of 10 per cent between two-year terms. Through these changes, Alberta’s government is making the Rate of Last Resort more stable and predictable for Albertans unable to sign a competitive contract. Albertans who are looking for help with their utility bills or are experiencing a dispute with their provider should contact the Utilities Consumer Advocate (UCA).
Quick facts
- Albertans have three options when purchasing their electricity: the Rate of Last Resort, a competitive contract for a variable rate, or a competitive contract for a fixed rate.
- Competitive retail contracts continue to provide the best, lowest cost options for Albertans.
- The Rate of Last Resort is approved by the Alberta Utilities Commission (AUC) and is not determined by the government.
- Approximately 26 per cent of residential customers purchase electricity through the Rate of Last Resort.
- Approximately 29 per cent of eligible commercial customers and 40 per cent of farm customers purchase electricity through the Rate of Last Resort.
Related information
Conspiracy Facts With Jeffrey Rath
Alberta Health hides data against the wishes of Premier Danielle Smith
Prior to the vaccine roll-out for children, PFIZER’s OWN DATA in Table 14 of its Emergency Use Authorization, admitted that COVID would only notionally kill 1 child per million from original virulent strain COVID but PUT 34 CHILDREN PER MILLION INTO ICU WITH MYOCARDITIS. Pfizer in that same table made the remarkable, but highly questionable statement that they posited 0 DEATHS in children from the vaccine. The table claiming no children would die from the vaccine also only focused on myocarditis and ignored potential deaths from transverse myelitis, anaphylaxis, and RSV which are all well-known potential side effects of the Pfizer COVID shot. Trudeau, Tam, Kenney and Hinshaw were all personally warned by the author of this Substack of those risks. Did they pause the childhood COVID injection roll-out to even investigate if the concerns about the shots killing more children than COVID were accurate? Of course not. It has become apparent that Trudeau’s obvious Narcissistic Personality Disorder leaves no room for self-reflection or ever admitting that he is wrong.
Don’t forget that from a “vaccine” approval perspective if Pfizer put any digit other than “0” on the “DEATHS FROM VACCINE” column the Pfizer shot could not be approved for use in children. Even admitting to 1 death per million from the vaccine would mean that the vaccine was as deadly or more deadly than COVID and could not be approved or justified for an age cohort at statistically zero risk of COVID Mortality. Also, the recent high powered JAMA Cardiology Study referred to below shows that the Moderna shot has an almost 300% greater risk of increased myocarditis risk in children than the Pfizer shot that already increases myocarditis risk in children by 500%. The mixing of the shots which “Doctor Trudeau” recommended exponentially increased the risk of IN-PATIENT myocarditis in children by a shocking 3600%.
Appendix 6 of The “ALBERTA COVID 19 PANDEMIC RESPONSE Alberta COVID-19 Pandemic Data Review Task Force FINAL REPORT” reads in part as follows :
“Nordic countries have restricted use of vaccines in children, referencing a large Nordic population-based study which showed that the 28-day risk of IN-PATIENT MYOCARDITIS wash higher in the vaccinated component compared with the unvaccinated. For males aged 16-24 years the risk of myocarditis was 5x higher following 2 doses of Pfizer, 14x higher following 2 doses of Moderna and 36x higher WITH A PFIZER FOLLOWED BY A MODERNA VACCINE.”
This study was massive. It reviewed health outcomes post COVID vaccine roll out for 23.1 million people. It can hardly be dismissed as “misinformation.”
The same Appendix of the Alberta Government Task Force report notes:
“A US Lancet-published study assessing the long-term health quality of life effects of adolescents and young adults diagnosed with myocarditis following vaccination found that they were unable to complete their usual activities (21%), had pain (20%), and had anxiety or depression (46%) in the 90 days following their diagnosis.” …
The ALBERTA GOVERNMENT TASK FORCE FINAL REPORT In APPENDIX 3 of Chapter 8 on vaccines cites that other well-known source of “anti-science”, “misinformation” and “anti-evidence, the JOURNAL OF MEDICAL ETHICS in a 2023 Bullen, Heriot and Jamrozik article on “Herd Immunity, vaccination and moral obligation” showing data at Table A3.2 that demonstrate that in children, COVID related “severe adverse events” were orders of magnitude higher in vaccinated children as opposed to children who just got COVID and recovered.
The TASK FORCE FINAL REPORT is now being attacked by self-appointed “expert” Gary Mason in the Globe and Mail on February 4th, 2025 as being “misinformation” that “is an insult to health care workers and officials”.
Notably Mr. Mason’s scientific credentials are unknown. It is also notable that Mason attacks a reference to a Substack in the Task Force report without acknowledging that the Substack author was likely better educated and accomplished than Mr. Mason or that the Substack in question was simply citing government published data and reports. None of the critics of the TASK FORCE FINAL REPORT including the AMA, CMA, or Trudeau pal “Little Timmy” Caulfield EVER identify specifically what they allege is “anti-scientific”, “anti-evidence”, “misinformation” that takes us back to the “dark age”.
This is reminiscent of the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Alberta persecution of Dr. Eric Payne. Last year, the CPSA quietly dismissed “misinformation” complaints brought against Dr. Payne. This followed 4 years of the CPSA steadfastly refusing or being unable to identify a single statement made by Dr. Payne that CPSA or its “investigators” and “experts” could identify as “misinformation”.
Gary Mason in the Globe and Mail takes the same “drive by smear” approach and goes so far as to suggest that:
“Dr. James Talbot an adjunct professor at the University of Alberta School of Public Health, told the Edmonton Journal that Ms. Smith’s Government was sitting on data that showed who got immunized, how many of them developed COVID and whether any developed any rare medical conditions after being inoculated. Yet that information remains a state secret.”
What Mr. Mason ignorantly refuses to acknowledge is the number of times that Dr. Gary Davidson an “Assistant Clinical Professor of Medicine at the University of Alberta” in good standing, repeatedly stated in the Report that a PUBLIC INQUIRY with subpoena powers is required. The reason for this is that a Government Task Force ORDERED BY THE PREMIER OF ALBERTA was repeatedly refused access to data by Alberta Health and Alberta Health Services bureaucrats who appear intent on continuing to play hide the ball on vaccine safety and efficacy. Mr. Mason also refuses to acknowledge data and tables scrubbed from the internet by these same ALBERTA BUREAUCRATS—opaque, nameless, faceless bureaucrats—which confirm the high-powered Cleveland Clinic study that demonstrates that the greater a person’s vaccine and booster uptake, the worse their health outcomes, including COVID related hospitalization and death.
The Mason hit piece and Talbot quote above demonstrates the degree of dirty propaganda being promulgated in the legacy press. The statement that “The Government was sitting on data that showed who got immunized, how many of them developed COVID and whether any developed any rare medical condition” is largely true. The problem for the pro-pharma propagandists is that the information is being withheld AGAINST THE STRICT INSTRUCTIONS OF PREMIER SMITH in the TASK FORCE MANDATE.
While it may be slimy and underhanded for these Vaccine Propagandists to try to smear Premier Smith’s reputation for integrity with these underhanded insinuations, its simple defamation to suggest that Premier Smith has anything to do with evidence being withheld from her own TASK FORCE.
There is absolutely no way that if AHS or Alberta Health bureaucrats had evidence to refute AHS tables showing increased hospitalization and death among the vaccinated as opposed to the unvaccinated—confirmed by the 56,000-person Cleveland Clinic Study, JAMA Cardiology, Lancet and Pfizer Studies referred to in this column—those same self-serving, insubordinate, bureaucrats would have either gleefully provided the data to Dr. Davidson’s Task Force team or have leaked it to the media long before now.
Premier Smith and Dr. Davidson need to name by name the bureaucrats that are actively smearing both of their reputations by making scurrilous statements to the media that suggest that THEY are the ones hiding the truth as opposed to all the pro-vaccine cultists in AHS and Alberta health.
I know Premier Smith is really busy trying to save Alberta and Canada from the trade war provoked by Justin Trudeau’s despicable degradation of Canadian sovereignty. Howver, she needs to hold a press conference accompanied by Dr. Davidson to defend her own reputation against the faceless, disloyal minions in her own government who continue to hide the truth from Albertans by fraudulently parroting the words “safe and effective”.
Jeffrey R.W. Rath B.A. (Hons.), LL.B. (Hons.)
Foothills, Alberta
February 5th, 2025
Subscribe to Conspiracy Facts With Jeffrey Rath.
For the full experience, upgrade your subscription.
List of items Canadians will pay 25% tariffs on includes US made orange juice, wine, beer, and clothing
Trump declares national emergency at northern border
‘Coming Down Like A Missile’: Former FAA Safety Rep Says Plane in Philadelphia Crash Appeared ‘100% Out of Control’
Trudeau Promises ‘Fentanyl Czar’ and US-Canada Organized Crime Strike Force To Avert U.S. Tariffs
-
Business1 day ago
Trudeau Promises ‘Fentanyl Czar’ and US-Canada Organized Crime Strike Force To Avert U.S. Tariffs
-
Banks1 day agoThe Great Exodus from the Net Zero Banking Alliance has arrived
-
Business2 days agoPoilievre Says Both Sides Lose Trade Wars, Promotes Inter-Provincial Trade
-
armed forces2 days agoCanada could cut deal with U.S.—increase defence spending, remove tariffs
-
Business10 hours agoLiberals, globalists flip out after Trump orders USAID freeze
-
Business2 days agoA Lone Federal Political Voice Opposing Retaliatory Tariffs
-
Bruce Dowbiggin1 day agoThe Limping Loonie: Are Canada’s Pro Sports Team In Trouble Again?
-
Business2 days agoTrump, Mexican president reach deal to delay tariffs