Decision coming over officer's use of anti-riot gun in B.C. woman's death
Former B.C. Supreme Court judge Wally Oppal ruled last month that Victoria police Sgt. Ron Kirkwood's use of a so-called ARWEN gun on Lisa Rauch was 'reckless and unnecessary.'
Oppal was appointed by the Office of the Police Complaint Commissioner to review the evidence against the officer and determined Kirkwood committed misconduct when he used the weapon on the woman, who was in a drug-induced psychosis.
The commission says Oppal, a former B.C. attorney general, is also expected to issue his decision on possible corrective measures and recommendations for change in relation to his findings.
Oppal's ruling said the 43-year-old woman was at a friend's Victoria apartment using drugs and alcohol when she went into the psychosis on Christmas Day 2019.
It says when police entered the apartment, their view was obscured by smoke from a fire and they believed Rauch was standing, but she was actually sitting and was hit in the head by two plastic projectiles.
This report by The Canadian Press was first published June 12, 2025.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Winnipeg Free Press
7 hours ago
- Winnipeg Free Press
9/11 victims' fund architect slams changes to New Hampshire abuse settlement program
CONCORD, N.H. (AP) — An attorney who helped design and implement the 9/11 victims' compensation fund says New Hampshire lawmakers have eroded the fairness of a settlement program for those who were abused at the state's youth detention center. Deborah Greenspan, who served as deputy special master of the fund created after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, recently submitted an affidavit in a class-action lawsuit seeking to block changes to New Hampshire's out-of-court settlement fund for abuse victims. She's among those expected to testify Wednesday at a hearing on the state's request to dismiss the case and other matters. More than 1,300 people have sued the state since 2020 alleging that they were physically or sexually abused as children while in state custody, mostly at the Sununu Youth Services Center in Manchester. Most of them put their lawsuits on hold after lawmakers created a settlement fund in 2022 that was pitched as a 'victim-centered' and 'trauma-informed' alternative to litigation run by a neutral administrator appointed by the state Supreme Court. But the Republican-led Legislature changed that process through last-minute additions to the state budget Gov. Kelly Ayotte signed in June. The amended law gives the governor authority to hire and fire the fund's administrator and gives the attorney general — also a political appointee — veto power over settlement awards. That stands in stark contrast to other victim compensation funds, said Greenspan, who currently serves as a court-appointed special master for lawsuits related to lead-tainted water in Flint, Michigan. She said it 'strains credulity' to believe that anyone would file a claim knowing that 'the persons ultimately deciding the claim were those responsible for the claimant's injuries.' 'Such a construct would go beyond the appearance of impropriety and create a clear conflict of interest, undermining the fairness and legitimacy of the settlement process,' she wrote. Ayotte and Attorney General John Formella responded by asking a judge to bar Greenspan's testimony, saying she offered 'policy preferences masquerading as expert opinions' without explaining the principles beyond her conclusions. 'Her affidavit is instead a series of non sequiturs that move from her experience to her conclusions without any of the necessary connective tissue,' they wrote. The defendants argue that the law still requires the administrator to be 'an independent, neutral attorney' and point out that the same appointment process is used for the state's judges. They said giving the attorney general the authority to accept or reject settlements is necessary to give the public a voice and ensure that the responsibility for spending millions of dollars in public funds rests with the executive branch. As of June 30, nearly 2,000 people had filed claims with the settlement fund, which caps payouts at $2.5 million. A total of 386 had been settled, with an average award of $545,000. One of the claimants says he was awarded $1.5 million award in late July, but the state hasn't finalized it yet, leaving him worried that Formella will veto it. 'I feel like the state has tricked us,' he said in an interview this week. 'We've had the rug pulled right out from underneath us.' The Associated Press does not name those who say they were sexually assaulted unless they come forward publicly. The claimant, now 39, said the two years he spent at the facility as a teenager were the hardest times of his life. 'I lost my childhood. I lost things that I can't get back,' he said. 'I was broken.' Though the settlement process was overwhelming and scary at times, the assistant administrator who heard his case was kind and understanding, he said. That meeting alone was enough to lift a huge burden, he said. 'I was treated with a lot of love,' he said. 'I felt really appreciated as a victim and like I was speaking to somebody who would listen and believe my story.' Separate from the fund, the state has settled two lawsuits by agreeing to pay victims $10 million and $4.5 million. Only one lawsuit has gone to trial, resulting in a $38 million verdict, though the state is trying to slash it to $475,000. The state has also brought criminal charges against former workers, with two convictions and two mistrials so far. The 39-year-old claimant who fears his award offer will be retracted said he doesn't know if he could face testifying at a public trial. 'It's basically allowing the same people who hurt us to hurt us all over again,' he said.
Vancouver Sun
8 hours ago
- Vancouver Sun
News organizations fight to publicize evidence presented at fitness hearing of suspect in Lapu Lapu attack
A media consortium has challenged a publication ban on evidence at a hearing to determine if the man accused of killing 11 people at Vancouver's Lapu Lapu Day festival is fit to stand trial. The ban, which is supported by both prosecutors and the defence, says evidence in the British Columbia provincial court hearing is not publishable until the ban is lifted or after the end of a criminal trial. Adam Kai-Ji Lo, who attended court by video on Tuesday wearing a blue sweatshirt, faces 11 second-degree murder charges over the ramming attack in April, when an SUV drove through a crowd at a Filipino community festival. Start your day with a roundup of B.C.-focused news and opinion. By signing up you consent to receive the above newsletter from Postmedia Network Inc. A welcome email is on its way. If you don't see it, please check your junk folder. The next issue of Sunrise will soon be in your inbox. Please try again Interested in more newsletters? Browse here. Lawyer Daniel Coles, representing the consortium that includes The Canadian Press, argued that lifting the ban would be in the public interest while Crown lawyer Michaela Donnelly and Lo's defence lawyer Mark Swartz opposed lifting or altering the ban. Coles told the court that Vancouver now 'wears the crown of the deadliest vehicle attack in Canadian history' and the attack has garnered significant public attention. He said it was essential to the public interest and the open-court principle to allow the media to report on the matter, as it was not often possible for members of the public to attend court and coverage 'fills that void.' He argued that the court must find a balance between Lo's right to a fair trial with court openness and freedom of expression. 'A proper publication ban — one that can withstand Charter scrutiny — is done with a scalpel and not a hatchet,' he told the court Tuesday. 'It's minimally invasive.' Coles argued that because a trial date has not yet been set, much of what is covered by the fitness hearing 'will be in the rear-view mirror of the public consciousness' by that time. He also said several details are already known by the public, including that Lo had 'significant interactions with police in connection with mental health issues.' 'Any potential juror would know that,' he told the judge, adding that public is also aware of his family history, including the murder of his brother and his mother's attempted suicide. Swartz rebuffed that argument, saying publicly known information is 'very bare bones' and 'quite ambiguous.' He said the publication ban safeguards Lo's right to a fair trial, and there is risk that publishing details of the fitness hearing could taint a jury. He also argued that there is 'real risk' that details heard in the fitness hearing may include evidence ruled inadmissible in a criminal trial. Donnelly agreed. 'There is a real live question about what will be admissible at trial as opposed to what evidence is admissible at a fitness hearing,' she said. She told the court she agreed with the importance of the open-court principle, but argued the ban 'doesn't bar publication forever. It simply delays it.' 'The need to protect the accused's right to a fair trial outweighs any negative effects on the open-court principle and the benefits of an interim publication ban outweigh the negative effects,' she concluded. Last month, Lo appeared in court as forensic psychiatrists Dr. Robert Lacroix and Dr. Rakesh Lamba testified as expert witnesses in the fitness hearing. Their evidence cannot be described due to the ban, but their names and roles are allowed to be reported. Lo is expected back in court when the fitness hearing continues on Friday. This report by The Canadian Press was first published Aug. 19, 2025. Our website is the place for the latest breaking news, exclusive scoops, longreads and provocative commentary. Please bookmark and sign up for our daily newsletter, Posted, here .
Edmonton Journal
8 hours ago
- Edmonton Journal
News organizations fight to publicize evidence presented at fitness hearing of suspect in Lapu Lapu attack
Article content A media consortium has challenged a publication ban on evidence at a hearing to determine if the man accused of killing 11 people at Vancouver's Lapu Lapu Day festival is fit to stand trial. Article content The ban, which is supported by both prosecutors and the defence, says evidence in the British Columbia provincial court hearing is not publishable until the ban is lifted or after the end of a criminal trial. Article content Article content Adam Kai-Ji Lo, who attended court by video on Tuesday wearing a blue sweatshirt, faces 11 second-degree murder charges over the ramming attack in April, when an SUV drove through a crowd at a Filipino community festival. Article content Article content Lawyer Daniel Coles, representing the consortium that includes The Canadian Press, argued that lifting the ban would be in the public interest while Crown lawyer Michaela Donnelly and Lo's defence lawyer Mark Swartz opposed lifting or altering the ban. Article content Coles told the court that Vancouver now 'wears the crown of the deadliest vehicle attack in Canadian history' and the attack has garnered significant public attention. He said it was essential to the public interest and the open-court principle to allow the media to report on the matter, as it was not often possible for members of the public to attend court and coverage 'fills that void.' Article content Article content He argued that the court must find a balance between Lo's right to a fair trial with court openness and freedom of expression. Article content 'A proper publication ban — one that can withstand Charter scrutiny — is done with a scalpel and not a hatchet,' he told the court Tuesday. 'It's minimally invasive.' Article content Coles argued that because a trial date has not yet been set, much of what is covered by the fitness hearing 'will be in the rear-view mirror of the public consciousness' by that time. Article content He also said several details are already known by the public, including that Lo had 'significant interactions with police in connection with mental health issues.' Article content 'Any potential juror would know that,' he told the judge, adding that public is also aware of his family history, including the murder of his brother and his mother's attempted suicide. Article content Swartz rebuffed that argument, saying publicly known information is 'very bare bones' and 'quite ambiguous.'
