Alberta
Investigation reveals terrifying life and death situation faced by police officer forced to shoot attacking suspect
Figure 1 – HAWCS video showing the AP (circled in white) driving on the wrong side of the highway and forcing a vehicle off the road.
News release from the Alberta Serious Incident Response Team (ASIRT)
ASIRT’s Investigation
ASIRT’s investigation was comprehensive and thorough, conducted using current investigative protocols, and in accordance with the principles of major case management. Investigators interviewed all relevant police and civilian witnesses, and secured and analyzed all relevant radio communications.
This incident was captured on video by a Calgary Police Service (CPS) helicopter air watch community safety (HAWCS) helicopter. Some of the incident was also captured on cameras in the RCMP vehicles. These videos provide objective evidence and are therefore extremely valuable to ASIRT investigations.
Circumstances Surrounding the Incident
At approximately 1:50 p.m. on February 12, 2023, CPS received a 9-1-1 call about the affected person (AP). The caller was concerned that she was suicidal. RCMP officers responded to an area east of Calgary, and a CPS helicopter went to assist.
At 3:35 p.m., the witness officer (WO) located the AP in her vehicle on the side of Highway 564. The AP sped off and the WO followed. The CPS helicopter located the AP and the WO shortly after and began to record the incident.
The AP was driving extremely fast, including at speeds of over 175 km/h, and often on the wrong side of the highway. There were other vehicles on the road at that time. The AP drove through a stop sign at the intersection of Highways 564 and 9 and was briefly launched into the air due to her speed and the elevated intersection. The AP continued to drive on the wrong side of the highway (Figure 1).
At Highway 21, the AP turned around and travelled back west. She then briefly went off the road and into the ditch. At 3:51 p.m., the SO used a tire deflation device that punctured some of the AP’s tires. The AP then came to a stop and, at 3:52 p.m., the SO stopped his marked police vehicle behind the AP.
As the SO stopped, the AP exited her vehicle. She had a knife in her left hand and a beer in her right (Figure 2).
Figure 2 – The SO’s vehicle video showing the AP with a knife in her left hand.
The SO can be heard to yell, “drop the knife!” on the police vehicle video. The AP took a few steps toward the SO and then began to run toward him (Figure 3).
As she was running, the AP said, “I’m going to fucking kill you!” The SO said “drop the knife” repeatedly. The SO moved backwards and drew a handgun and then a conductive energy weapon (CEW).
Figure 3 – HAWCS video showing the AP running at the SO.
The AP continued to run at the SO until she reached the rear of his police vehicle, when she turned and attempted to go into the police vehicle (Figure 4).
Figure 4 – HAWCS video showing the AP entering the SO’s police vehicle.
The SO ran back to his vehicle and used his CEW on the AP. The AP then turned and ran at the SO again (Figure 5).
Figure 5 – HAWCS video showing the AP running at the SO again.
The AP again said, “I’m going to fucking kill you!” The SO then fired seven shots at 3:53 p.m., hitting the AP and causing her to fall to the road and drop her knife (Figure 6).
The SO approached the AP and kicked away the knife. The SO began to assess the AP, and other officers arrived within one minute to provide first aid to the AP. At 4:06 p.m., emergency medical services arrived and assumed care of the AP. An air ambulance was then used to transport the AP to hospital.
The AP had seven gunshot wounds to her chest, midsection, arms, and legs. She required surgeries and stayed in the hospital for some time.
Figure 6 – HAWCS video showing the AP falling to the road after being shot by the SO.
A knife was found in the ditch near the AP (Figure 7).
Figure 7 – Knife found in ditch near the AP.
Civilian Witnesses
ASIRT investigators interviewed or reviewed interviews with eight individuals who saw the incident or the AP driving that day. Their evidence was generally consistent with the above.
Affected Person’s (AP) Statement
ASIRT investigators interviewed the AP on February 28, 2023. She told them that she was suicidal on February 12. Initially she planned to find a semi-truck to run her over.
After the WO had stopped chasing her, she turned around to reengage with the police. She drove over the tire deflation device and then pulled over. Before she left her vehicle, she grabbed a knife because she thought that the police would not shoot her unless she had something. She left her vehicle and walked fast toward the SO, saying something like “just hit me” or “shoot me.”
The SO used his CEW on her but she pushed through the pain and continued to move toward the SO. She said something like “fucking hit me you little bitch” and the SO shot her. She continued to approach the SO and he then jumped on her, taking her to the ground and injuring her leg.
The police officers provided her with medical attention immediately. She asked them to let her die.
The AP said it was her goal to die and she did not want to hurt any police officers.
Subject Officer’s (SO) Statement
On May 1, 2023, ASIRT investigators interviewed the SO. He provided a written statement and then answered questions after reading it. Subject officers, like anyone being investigated for a criminal offence, can rely on their right to silence, and do not have to speak to ASIRT.
The SO’s evidence was consistent with the video evidence and provided some insight into his view of the incident. The SO did not hear what the AP said when she was running at him. After he shot her, he heard her say things like “let me die” and “you never help me.”
When the AP was running at the SO for the second time, he recognized that he could only run backwards for so long before tripping or falling and being at risk. He feared that the AP would cause him grievous bodily harm or death and fired at the AP until she stopped advancing.
Analysis
Section 25 Generally
Under s. 25 of the Criminal Code, police officers are permitted to use as much force as is necessary for 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. The force used here, discharging a firearm repeatedly at a person, was clearly intended or likely to cause death or grievous bodily harm. The subject officer therefore must have believed on reasonable grounds that the force he used was necessary for his self-preservation or the preservation of another person under his protection. Another person can include other police officers. For the defence provided by s. 25 to apply to the actions of an officer, the officer must be required or authorized by law to perform the action in the administration or enforcement of the law, must have acted on reasonable grounds in performing the action, and must not have used unnecessary force.
All uses of force by police must also be proportionate, necessary, and reasonable.
Proportionality requires balancing a use of force with the action or threat to which it responds. This is codified in the requirement under s. 25(3), which states that where a 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. An action that represents a risk to preservation of life is a serious one, and only in such circumstances can uses of force that are likely to cause death or grievous bodily harm be employed.
Necessity requires that there are not reasonable alternatives to the use of force that also accomplish the same goal, which in this situation is the preservation of the life of the officer or of another person under his protection. These alternatives can include no action at all. An analysis of police actions must recognize the dynamic situations in which officers often find themselves, and such analysis should not expect police officers to weigh alternatives in real time in the same way they can later be scrutinized in a stress- free environment.
Reasonableness looks at the use of force and the situation as a whole from an objective viewpoint. Police actions are not to be judged on a standard of perfection, but on a standard of reasonableness.
Section 25 Applied
The SO was assisting on a call that evolved as time went on. It started as a welfare check, became a serious dangerous driving investigation, and ended with dealing with an assaultive person. The SO’s actions throughout were required or authorized by law and he acted on reasonable grounds.
The first stage in assessing whether the force he used was excessive is proportionality. The AP was running at the SO with a knife, which could affect the SO’s self-preservation. He responded with his firearm, which was intended or likely to cause death or grievous bodily harm. These two forces are proportionate.
The necessity element of the assessment recognizes the dynamic nature of incidents such as this. Here, the AP ran at the SO suddenly, which created a serious situation. The SO recognized at this point that he could attempt to deescalate the situation by moving away from the AP. However, the AP then attempted to get into his police vehicle, which would have created a profoundly serious danger to him and other users of the highway. He then used his CEW, which was not effective. The AP began running at him again. With the threat still present and having exhausted reasonable alternatives, it was necessary for the SO to fire at the AP at that time.
The final element, reasonableness, looks at the incident overall. The SO conducted himself carefully and showed restraint at the beginning of the incident. His actions were reasonable.
As a result, the defence under s. 25 is likely to apply to the SO.
Section 34 Generally
A police officer also has the same protections for the defence of person under s. 34 of the Criminal Code as any other person. This section provides that a person does not commit an offence if they believe on reasonable grounds that force is being used or threatened against them or another person, if they act to defend themselves or another person from this force or threat, and if the act is reasonable in the circumstances. In order for the act to be reasonable in the circumstances, the relevant circumstances of the individuals involved and the act must be considered. Section 34(2) provides a non-exhaustive list of factors to be considered to determine if the act was reasonable in the circumstances:
(a) the nature of the force or threat;
(b) the extent to which the use of force was imminent and whether there were other means available to respond to the potential use of force;
(c) the person’s role in the incident;
(d) whether any party to the incident used or threatened to use a weapon;
(e) the size, age, gender and physical capabilities of the parties to the incident;
(f) the nature, duration and history of any relationship between the parties to the incident, including any prior use or threat of force and the nature of that force or threat;
(f.1) any history of interaction or communication between the parties to the incident;
(g) the nature and proportionality of the person’s response to the use or threat of force; and
(h) whether the act committed was in response to a use or threat of force that the person knew was lawful.
The analysis under s. 34 for the actions of a police officer often overlaps considerably with the analysis of the same actions under s. 25.
Section 34 Applied
For the same reasons as under s. 25, this defence is likely to apply to the SO. The AP was running at him with a knife and, like anyone would be, he was entitled to use force to repel her.
Conclusion
The AP was suicidal on February 12, 2023. She initially intended to drive into a semi- truck, but then decided to force police to shoot her. She did this by running at the SO with a knife in her hand. The SO was justified in responding with his firearm.
The defences available to the SO under s. 25 and s. 34 are likely to apply. As a result, there are no reasonable grounds to believe that an offence was committed.
Alberta has cut its methane emissions from the oil and gas sector in half, showing how to reduce emissions and keep powering the world.
As global demand for energy continues to rise, Alberta remains one of the most responsible producers in the world. The province was the first in Canada to set a methane emissions reduction target for the upstream oil and gas sector, and its approach has won international awards and recognition.
This is the message Alberta’s government will take to COP 29. The Alberta approach is working. It is possible to reduce methane emissions and grow the economy, all while delivering the safe, affordable, reliable energy the world will need for generations to come.
According to the latest data from the Alberta Energy Regulator, Alberta has now officially reduced methane emissions from the oil and gas sector by 52 per cent since 2014, even as production has continued rising. The province’s common-sense approach is reducing emissions, creating jobs and growing the economy without punitive federal regulations or caps.
“We do not need Ottawa to tell us how to reduce emissions. In fact, the federal government should learn from Alberta’s success. By working closely with industry and focusing on technology, not costly taxes or unrealistic targets, we can achieve rapid emission reductions while delivering the safe, affordable, reliable energy the world needs.”
Under Alberta’s equivalency agreement with the Government of Canada, the province is in charge of regulating methane emissions. Alberta’s approach is working closely with industry and focusing on achievable results, including early action programs like carbon offsets, implementation of strong provincial regulatory requirements in place for all facilities, and improved leak detection and repair. This is estimated to have saved industry about $600 million compared with the alternative federal regulations that would otherwise have been required.
Since 2020, Alberta has invested $78 million from the industry-funded Technology Innovation and Emissions Reduction program to improve methane monitoring and management. Almost 15,000 well sites and facilities have been reviewed across the province, preventing nearly 17 million tonnes of emissions from being released.
Continuing this momentum, the province recently announced $15 million in funding for the NGIF Emissions Testing Centre to help companies test technologies free of charge in both laboratory and live settings, attract investors and get methane emissions reduction technologies to market faster. Alberta is also engaging with industry to develop a flexible, forward-looking path that will keep reducing emissions while supporting responsible energy production.
“Tourmaline, like other producers in Western Canada, has been diligently reducing methane emission intensity across our field operations, and we are targeting a 55 per cent reduction from 2020 levels by 2027. We operate a world-leading methane emissions testing centre (ETC) at our West Wolf Lake gas plant near Edson, Alberta. At the ETC site, the latest technologies to better measure and mitigate future methane emissions are being developed.”
Minister of Environment and Protected Areas Rebecca Schulz will travel to the 29th Conference of the Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (COP 29) from Nov. 10 to 16 to share Alberta’s success with the world. Alberta’s environment minister will use the largest global climate summit to promote the province’s effective approach to reducing emissions while keeping energy reliable, secure and affordable.
Alberta’s government is committed to working with national and international partners to advance shared interests that can lead to new opportunities for people and businesses around the world.
Minister Schulz will attend COP29 with one staff member and three department officials. Mission expenses will be posted on the travel and expense disclosure page.
Itinerary for Minister Schulz*
| Nov. 10-11 |
|
| Nov. 12 |
|
| Nov. 13 |
|
| Nov. 14 |
|
| Nov. 15 |
|
| Nov. 16 |
|
*Subject to change.
Quick facts
- The Alberta Energy Regulator monitors, compiles and reports methane emissions data by facility type, production type and area. It releases the ST60B report annually to ensure the public and stakeholders have the latest information about methane emissions from Alberta’s upstream oil and gas sector.
- Alberta carbon offset protocols resulted in more than 58,000 low- or no-bleed devices being installed, and more than 7 million offset credits have been serialized.
- Alberta uses a combination of bottom-up and top-down measurement, monitoring and verification techniques as part of methane measurement compliance data.
Related information
Alberta
39 percent increase in funding for RCMP instigates discussion about future policing for rural Alberta
Alberta’s government will pay the 39% increase for one year and will begin engagement with smaller communities on their policing needs for the future.
Alberta’s government is temporarily freezing the amount rural municipalities are responsible for paying for front-line policing services in Alberta.
The province is responsible for providing policing services to municipal districts, counties and urban municipalities with populations less than 5,000. In response to rising rural crime, Alberta’s government announced increased funding for RCMP services in 2019 which helped create hundreds of additional RCMP positions across the province.
When these changes came into effect in 2020, the province also worked with Alberta Municipalities and Rural Municipalities of Alberta to create a shared funding model through the Police Funding Regulation. Now, due to higher costs from recent RCMP collective agreements, the cost for policing in these smaller communities will increase by 39 per cent, with no corresponding increase in the services provided. To assist municipalities with these new costs, Alberta’s government will pay the increase for one year and will begin engagement with them on their policing needs for the future.
“The expiring regulation would have municipalities seeing a 39 per cent increase in their costs – with no improvement in policing services delivered. We know this is not acceptable for many municipalities. This cost freeze will give rural municipalities the stability and predictability they need, and it will allow for meaningful engagement between the province and municipalities on equitable support.”
“Alberta’s government understands that such an increase in costs for service will be a challenge to our rural municipalities. With the costs frozen for a year, we look forward to a comprehensive review of the police funding model with our municipal partners. During our review, we will carefully consider all factors to ensure we provide an updated funding model that is sustainable.”
Municipalities are preparing their budgets for 2025, and those served by the RCMP under the Provincial Police Service Agreement can continue to expect the same level of service without the additional costs for one year. While these costs are shared between municipalities and the province, the province will pay a higher proportion of the costs next fiscal year, a total of $27 million, so that municipalities’ costs remain stable while they determine how to cover the increases on a forward basis and what the best model of policing is for their community.
The Police Funding Regulation introduced in 2020 was phased in over several years, with rural municipalities paying an increasing share of their policing costs each year for four years. Municipalities have been paying 30 per cent of front-line policing costs since fiscal year 2023-24. By sharing costs, the province has been able to afford the addition of many new RCMP police officers, programs and services over the past several years.
The Police Funding Regulation has been in place for almost five years, and with the significant cost increases coming from the federal government, the province will undertake a review to determine what improvements may be needed. While the regulation was originally supposed to expire March 31, 2025, Alberta’s government has extended it by one year to March 31, 2026, which will enable the province and municipalities to have fulsome conversations about future policing needs and models. More details about the comprehensive review and engagement opportunities for rural municipalities will be released shortly.
Quick Facts:
- The Police Funding Regulation brought in a new funding model, which was phased in over several years, with rural municipalities paying an increasing share of their policing costs each year, reaching the intended 30 per cent in 2023.
- They were charged 10 per cent starting April 1, 2020. This increased to 15 per cent one year later, 20 per cent the following year and finally 30 per cent starting April 1, 2023.
- The initial funding model was based on 2018 costs to provide certainty and stability to municipalities.
- After 2024-25, the municipal share will be required to be based on current policing costs, resulting in a proposed 39 per cent increase in costs for municipalities.
- The Police Funding Model enabled a $235.4-million investment in policing over five years, adding 285 regular members and 244 civilian positions to enhance rural policing.
Prominent COVID jab critic examines the amazing evidence for the Shroud of Turin
CSIS warned Health Canada of “insider threat” from Wuhan Institute-tied scientist Dr. Qiu Seven Months Before Lethal Ebola Shipped to China
Dad says 5-year-old develops autism after being forced to get 18 vaccines in 1 day
Trudeau’s pro-transgender regime is a get-out-of-jail-free card for Canada’s most violent criminals
-
Frontier Centre for Public Policy2 days agoHow Canadians lost the rule of law
-
Censorship Industrial Complex1 day agoNew Australian law, if passed, will make the gov’t the sole arbiter of truth’
-
Business1 day agoUp to $41 billion in World Bank climate finance unaccounted for, Oxfam finds
-
C2C Journal2 days agoNet Gain: A Common-Sense Climate Change Policy for Canada
-
armed forces1 day agoCanadian veterans battle invisible wounds of moral injury and addiction
-
Daily Caller2 days ago‘It’s Gonna End On Day One’: GOP Lawmakers, Fishermen Urge Trump To Keep Promise To Axe Offshore Wind
-
Bruce Dowbiggin1 day agoTrump Effect: No One Gretz Off Easy Backing The Donald
-
armed forces1 day agoHunter Brothers “In Flanders Fields”