October 2020 – The "True" North

On Tuesday, Oct. 20, Justice Robert Kelly cleared Ottawa Police Service Constable Daniel Montsion of all charges in the 2016 death of Abdirahman Abdi.

Canada’s justice system is supposedly built on the principle of people being innocent until proven guilty. The burden of proof is on the prosecution to demonstrate that the accused did their crimes, “beyond a reasonable doubt”. Justice Kelly said that, regarding the charges of manslaughter, aggravated assault and assaulted with a weapon against Montsion, the Crown had failed to prove that.

If Abdi had been arrested and gone to trial he would have had the same right to the presumption of innocence. Anthony Aust, who fell to his death when Ottawa Police raided his home Oct. 7, would have too, if he had been arrested. But they didn’t get the chance.

They didn’t get the chance because such force was used to apprehend them that they ended up dead. Montsion was cleared of any wrongdoing by Justice Kelly and we fully expect the Special Investigations Unit will do the same for the many officers who raided Aust’s place.

White people, especially white cops, get the benefit of the doubt that Black people often don’t. Our kids don’t get it when they get suspended or expelled from school, sometimes for simply questioning unjust behaviour. Black drivers don’t get it when they get disproportionately pulled over, sometime for offences they haven’t even committed, like the Ottawa man recently stopped by an Ottawa police officer for expired plates – that weren’t expired. And Black people with mental health issues, like Abdirahman Abdi, don’t get it when they are treated like violent threats instead of what they are: people in need of compassionate help.

All these actions are based on the assumption by white people that Black people aren’t innocent until proven guilty, but guilty until proven innocent – or killed.

But back to Montsion…

He’s now free and, no doubt, would certainly have us think he believes deeply in the concept that led to his freedom: the presumption of innocence. If that’s the case, we must assume two things: he presumed Abdi was innocent and he felt he had to punch him several times in the head with metal gloves for Abdi’s safety and that of his fellow officers. Given the verdict, we can assume he’ll do the same thing next time – and that his fellow officers will feel enabled to do the same. And they expect us to simply wait for the next Black person to be beaten to death…

On the day of the verdict, Ottawa Mayor Jim Watson issued a statement in which he said, “I also want to take this opportunity to re-iterate my full confidence in our justice system. We are privileged in Canada to have a justice system that strives to render verdicts based on the facts and evidence before the courts – a system that upholds the rule of law.”

What the system strives to do is irrelevant. What it actually does is disproportionately penalize, imprison and kill Black people. It does uphold rule of law. The only problem is that the rules were designed to oppress Black people – and still do so with fatal efficiency.

On Wednesday, Oct. 10, 23-year-old Anthony Aust fell to his death after several heavily armed officers with the Ottawa Police tactical unit burst through the front door of his 12th-floor Ottawa apartment.

An Oct. 10 CBC story said Aust’s family was worried about his mental health and that he was falling into a depression and quoted his mother, Nhora Aust, 50, saying, “He was terrified of his peers, terrified of the police and terrified of jail.” His mom said police told her they were looking for a gun and cocaine. She wasn’t told if they found anything.

She’s not confident that Ontario’s police watchdog will lay charges in her son’s death. Media reports say the Special Investigations Unit (SIU) has assigned four investigators to the probe, which will take months to complete. Only five per cent of SIU cases result in charges, the agency said in 2019.

Ottawa is currently awaiting the verdict in the trial of Ottawa police constable Daniel Montsion in the 2016 death of Abdirahman Abdi. The SIU led the investigation.

In 2013, the Supreme Court of Canada ruled that such “no-knock” warrants could be used in urgent cases. But in February of this year, an Ottawa judge ruled that the police had violated one woman’s charter rights after raiding her home using “dynamic entry”, as the method is known. Superior Court Justice Sally Gomery said that “police cannot operate from an assumption that they should break in the door of any residence that they have a warrant to search.”

In an Oct. 9 story, the Ottawa Citizen said, “Despite the ruling, the police service has defended the practice and said it will continue using the entry when the service thinks it’s necessary to ensure public and officer safety or if there is a risk that a target might destroy evidence.”

Before he retired in 2018, Jeff Kilcollins was a duty inspector on the Ottawa police force and was on the SWAT team for two decades. Quoted in a CBC story, Kilcollins said dynamic entries are the “bread and butter” of tactical officers because of how common they are. He said most dynamic entry warrants are issued when there is a concern that suspects will try to destroy evidence if police don’t act quickly and with surprise.

“There are demands from the court system, the judicial system. They like it much better when the accused is in possession of the evidence. Narcotics are generally considered disposable evidence, much like child pornography,” Kilcollins said.

However, CBC also quoted veteran defence lawyer Mark Ertel, who won the February Superior Court case before Gomery. Ertel said search warrants are often granted based on intelligence from unsavoury characters who may not be telling the truth.

“It’s usually informant evidence — information from people who are paid to provide information to police or will have charges withdrawn if they provide information to police. These are people with criminal records and a lot to be gained by providing information.” Ertel also said the ruling doesn’t appear to have curbed the use of surprise raids by the Ottawa police – but Aust’s death could be a turning point.

Given all this, Aust’s death raises a number of questions:

If one of the aims of dynamic entry is ensuring public safety, why did the police seemingly disregard the safety of Aust’s family by raiding his apartment when his family, including his 12-yr-old brother and his grandmother were home?
As Aust was also a member of the public, did the police not have an obligation to keep him safe, even as they attempted to take him into custody?
Given the May 2020 falling death of Regis Korchinski-Paquette, and the fact that, like Korchinski-Paquette, Aust was known to be experiencing mental health issues, why didn’t the police anticipate Aust might jump and be prepared for that with something outside to break his possible fall? Did they speak with his family before the raid to assess his mental state?
Do police keep stats, by race, on how often they use dynamic entry?
Since Aust was wearing a GPS ankle monitor as part of his bail conditions, why couldn’t the police have chosen to work with his parole officer to find a time to apprehend him that would put as few others at risk as possible?
Do the police believe that avoiding lost evidence is worth endangering people’s lives?
How often are the police basing their raids on information from “unsavoury” characters?

The facts would suggest that Aust’s 12-yr-old brother saw him jump to his death.

We will ask Ottawa police chief, Peter Sloly, all the questions above, and one more: how were the police protecting Aust’s 12-yr-old brother by causing his older brother to jump to his death in front of him?