In this issue:
1. The Zameer case and Toronto police credibility
2. TTC to get body cameras
3. Senior staff appointments and a missed opportunity
4. Horrific police chase
Toronto Police Accountability Bulletin No. 152, May 5, 2024.
This Bulletin is published by the Toronto Police Accountability Coalition (TPAC), a group of individuals and organizations in Toronto interested in police policies and procedures, and in making police more accountable to the community they are committed to serving. Our website is http://www.tpac.ca .
***
In this issue:
1. The Zameer case and Toronto police credibility
2. TTC to get body cameras
3. Senior staff appointments and a missed opportunity
4. Horrific police chase
5. Subscribe to the Bulletin
**
1. The Zameer case and Toronto police credibility
Several years ago Umar Zameer, his wife and young child, got into their car in the underground parking garage at City Hall close to midnight after celebrating Canada day. The car was immediately surrounded by people Zameer thought were carjackers, and he tried to drive off. He tried to escape. He was boxed in, pulled out of his vehicle and was told the people he had just seen were plain clothes Toronto police officers and that he had run over officer Jeffery Northrup. Police were looking for a suspect with `dark skin’ who had stabbed someone, and Zameer had dark skin so they assumed he was their suspect, which is why they surrounded the car.
He was arrested, handcuffed, and then punched in the face. He was charged with murdering a police officer. At the bail hearing the judge said the evidence was very questionable in supporting a murder charge, and Zameer was released on bail. Interim Toronto police chief James Ramer then asserted that this was another example of a broken bail system, a claim reinforced by even more egregious comments by Premier Doug Ford, Toronto mayor John Tory, and Brampton Mayor Patrick Brown.
At the recent trial, three officers gave evidence under oath that Northrop was in front of the car and that Zameer intentionally ran over and killed him. Video evidence and the two experts who had reconstructed the scene (one of whom was retained by the prosecution) both said Northrop was behind the car in its blind spot.
The jury acquitted Zameer of all charges. Then judge apologized to Mr. Zameer for all he had been through. The judge wondered whether the police had colluded in their evidence.
Shortly after the verdict Police Chief Myron Demkiw addressed Torontonians through the media, saying he was `hoping for a different outcome’, making it quite clear that he didn’t like the conclusion the jury had come to. He later said that issues in the case would be referred to the Ontario Provincial Police and the Toronto police Professional Standards branch for review.
TPAC wrote the Toronto Police Service Board, copying the media, with a plan of action. It reads:
“The investigation and prosecution of Umar Zameer involving the death of Const. Northrup raises very serious policy and administration of justice issues for the TPSB and the Toronto Police Service.
“We believe the Board needs to take the following actions:
“1. Adopt a policy that an outside police service must be assigned to conduct any criminal investigation into the death of an officer. Further, an independent lawyer must be retained to provide ongoing advice to the investigating officers including the issue with respect to the swearing of criminal charges. In the event criminal charges are laid an independent prosecutor must be retained at the outset. The independent prosecutor will assume carriage of all post-charge decisions including the decision as to the threshold test of whether such prosecution has a reasonable prospect of conviction and is in the public interest.
“This will mirror the process involved in cases of high-ranking justice system participants— like former Attorney General Michael Bryant— and ensure than those who normally prosecute cases with the Toronto police service are not responsible for whether and how the case will proceed. In the Zameer case, the opposite occurred; one of the prosecutors’ parents was a TPS officer, creating the obvious potential for bias— whether conscious or not— in the process.
“2. Immediately adopt a policy that in any case where an officer dies on duty, an independent investigator will be retained after the legal proceedings are completed to report publicly on what occurred and what changes, if any, should be made to police policies and practices. It is unrealistic to think that investigators from the same police service as the deceased – as the chief has suggested should investigate in the Zameer case - will produce independent reports that will be credible to the public, or that the full reports will be made public.
“3. A policy be enacted that the Chief and other members of the Toronto police service and the TPSB may not publicly comment on suspect’s and arrestee’s motives or other characterizations, or knowingly undermine public confidence in bail decisions or criminal verdicts, and if they do, they will be subject to disciplinary actions.
“4. The chief should be disciplined for his comments undermining public confidence in the verdict in the Zameer case, in the order of a penalty of between four and six months pay. The Board must take clear and meaningful action to censure Chief Demkiw for his irresponsible remarks after the jury released its verdict. A meaningful consequence such as this is necessary to restore public trust.
“5. The three officers who presented evidence under oath at the Zameer trial must be suspended without pay— pursuant to Section 210 of the new Community Safety and Policing Act which permits such action to be taken in the case of a `serious offence’, an action which is appropriate for those are alleged to have colluded on the evidence— until the conclusion of the investigation into (or prosecution with respect to) their conduct.
“6. An independent investigator should be retained to determine whether there are grounds to lay perjury charges against the three officers who testified.
“We believe these decisions should be taken without delay. The credibility of the Toronto police service is at stake.”
At the police board meeting April 30, Chief Demkiw finally apologized for his irresponsible remarks about the results of the trial. “I apologize for my choice of words in those early moments outside the courthouse. I want to be very clear and repeat that I respect and accept the decision of the jury.” He made no mention of Mr. Zameer.
The chair of the Board, Ann Morgan, herself a former crown prosecutor, stated, “As a Board, we very much support the two reviews recently announced by Chief Demkiw - an independent review to be conducted by the OPP as a result of comments made by Justice Anne Molloy, along with a full internal review as it relates to all aspects of plainclothes policing, including equipment and procedures for officer and public safety.
“There are many highly charged, divergent and understandably emotional views on this matter. I am asking our community to let cooler heads prevail. Both our Toronto and Canadian communities are founded on principles of fairness, tolerance and respect. Please let the process of review take place.”
But the reviews are being done by police themselves when what is needed is independence to look at the significant issues of credibility to the Toronto police service and to the prosecution.
2. TTC security to get body cameras
The TTC Board approved a policy on April 11, 2024 to implement a body-worn camera pilot program for fare inspectors and special constables. These changes integrate recommendations from the Ombudsman Toronto Report: An Investigation into the Toronto Transit Commission’s Oversight of its Transit Enforcement Unit which was sparked by Ombudsman investigations into an incident on January 29, 2015, involving two TTC employees and two members of the public.
The pilot will run for 9 months beginning in early 2024; 20 TTC constables and 20 fare inspectors will wear cameras rotated between all officers for 6-week periods. At the conclusion of the pilot, an evaluation of pilot success will be completed with a report outlining the final results provided to the TTC Board in Q4 2024.
They will not be recording 24/7. Fare Inspectors will be activating their cameras when conducting fare inspections; officers when interacting with Individuals to investigate and ensure compliance with TTC Bylaws; special constables when interacting with Individuals with respect to a violation or breach of TTC By-laws, Trespass to Property Act, Liquor License and Control Act, Mental Health Act, and Criminal Code of Canada; or when an individual involved in an interaction with an officer requests the officer to record the interaction.
Officers have the option to activate Body Worn Cameras in circumstances where an officer reasonably believes the Body Worn Camera recording may support the officer in the execution of their duties or an individual’s safety.
The total cost for the body camera pilot has been $709,000 between 2022 - 2024, plus $99,000 in operating costs in 2024. For full deployment of body worn cameras the TTC’s estimate was a capital cost of $374,000 (not including the yearly operating cost).
The TTC entered into a contract for the procurement of body-worn cameras including hardware, software, data storage provisions, as well as technical support and training services for the use of the body-worn cameras with Axon, a US manufacturer of tasers and technology products for military and law enforcement, including body-worn cameras, dashcams, computer-aided dispatch software, and Evidence.com, a cloud-based digital evidence platform.
Here are TPAC’s thoughts on this program:
Body cameras have mixed results and will continue to increase enforcement budgets. With cameras being worn only for 6 weeks on each officer for the pilot, we do not believe this gives an accurate picture of what the impact will be when worn all year round, particularly after the novelty impact wears off.
Body cameras are costly: law enforcement agencies across Canada and the US have dropped their programs due to the high operational cost.
An April 18, 2024 Toronto Star article pointed out that “Canadians are generally not privy to BWC footage due to privacy protections which also allow police to withhold footage. Requests to view one’s own BWC footage usually requires a freedom of information (FOI) request, including the knowledge, ability, and wherewithal to do so. The FOI process is also subject to lengthy delays and disclosure exemptions.”
The policy is available on the TTC’s website.
3. Senior staff appointments and a missed opportunity
The appointment by the Police Service Board on April 30 of five members of the service as staff superintendents was a missed opportunity.
All individuals are long-time members of the Toronto police service: 37, 23, 32, 30 and 25 years, respectively. All might have fine qualities, but after serving within the Toronto service for such long periods, they cannot be expected to bring transformative changes that are so sorely needed to the service. In particular, they cannot be expected to change the police culture and practices that they have been carrying out for decades, culture and practices which stubbornly resist change.
TPAC believes the Board should be looking for senior staff from outside of the police service, people who can bring new progressive ideas about policy, operations and management; and strategies to reduce the budget and redistribute resources to other community and social sectors who are addressing the roots of so many of the issues that face our city. The Toronto police service has promoted from within for many decades, which leads to the same results year after year, and it needs to change. There must also be a strong commitment by the board and the Chief to hearing and implementing these ideas and strategies.
The Board needs a strong policy which ensures that many of the senior staff hired come from the outside the policing community. Not creating such a policy is a missed opportunity.
4. Horrific police chase
TPAC has been a long-time opponent of police car chases. Too many chases end in car crashes, personal injury and death. (See Bulletin No. 76, June 27, 2013.)
According to the information we have at the moment, on the early evening of April 29, an off-duty officer in Bowmanville saw someone stealing from a liquor store, and allegedly pulling a knife. He called Durham police and a car chase began. It wove through local streets for 25 kilometers before the suspect pulled on to Highway 401 using an off-ramp, and proceeded to drive eastbound in the westbound lanes. Ignoring a supervisor’s order to stop the chase, at least six Durham police cars engaged in the chase, driving the wrong way on Highway 401 until there was a crash of six vehicles, killing four people: the suspect driver as well as two grandparents and their grandchild – all because of a few bottles of stolen alcohol.
Regulation 266/10 under the Community Safety and Policing Act governs police pursuits. It provides that the decision to pursue requires that officers engaging or initiating a police pursuit must engage in a balancing of the risk to the public, and the risk must be continuously evaluated throughout the pursuit.
The initiator must immediately notify the Command Supervisor of a chase, and Supervisor can order the chase to be discontinued which apparently happened here before the cars entered Highway 401.
Premier Ford’s reaction was to say police need helicopters – but Durham police already have one. A properly enforced prohibition preventing police chases except in the most dire of circumstances is what’s needed.
5. Subscribe to the Bulletin
To subscribe or unsubscribe to this Bulletin, please send a note to info@tpac.ca with the instructions in the subject line or in the text of the message. Our e-mail list is confidential and will not be made available to others. There is no charge for the Bulletin. Our website is http://www.tpac.ca .
end