Decision coming over an officer's use of anti-riot gun in BC woman's death
Former BC 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 BC 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.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Global News
an hour ago
- Global News
‘On behalf of the Islamic State': Security video shows terror attack on Surrey bus
WARNING: This story contains disturbing details. Discretion is advised. Global News has obtained video surveillance entered as evidence at a recent B.C. Supreme Court trial that ended with federal prosecutors securing a terrorism conviction in a horrifying attack on a Surrey transit bus two years ago. Abdul Aziz Kawam, 30, assaulted a man with a knife at a bus stop near Fraser Highway and 156th Street before boarding a bus and slashing another passenger in the throat on April 1, 2023. Both men survived. Security video shows Kawam walking onto the bus, followed a few seconds later by his victim, whose identity is protected by a publication ban. Both stood near the rear exit doors of the bus and rode together in silence for approximately three minutes, not speaking or interacting. Kawam then suddenly pulled out a large knife and slashed at the victim's neck three times, intending to kill him, according to the Admissions submitted at trial. As bus passengers are heard screaming in the video, the victim used his body to push Kawam out of the bus. 'He was bleeding out of his neck and he still managed to throw his attacker off the bus,' said Oren Bick, general counsel with the Public Prosecution Service of Canada. Blood on the floor of the bus after the attack. Provided by BC Supreme Court The knife nicked the victim's vocal chords and missed his main artery by a millimetre, his brother-in-law, whom we are not identifying as per the publication ban, told Global News days after the attack. Advertisement 'It scared him to his core, he thought he was going to die,' he said in April 2023. Some fifteen minutes earlier on April 1, Kawam had used the same knife to attack his first victim across the street. 'Mr. Kawam initially approached him and asked are you Muslim?,' Bick told Global News in an interview. When the man replied 'No', Kawam went back to the bus stop, prayed for approximately two minutes, and then returned, taking the large knife out of his jacket and attacking the victim, aiming a slashing motion at his neck without making contact. The victim, who pushed Kawam away and ran, described the blade as being approximately 10 inches, according to the Admissions. 'Kawam chased him for some distance, knife still in hand, but (the victim) was ultimately able to escape,' stated the Admissions, and was able to call 911 from a gas station nearby. 'This wasn't a who done it, this was a why did he do it,' said Bick. 'There was really no disputing what happened.' The knife used in the attack. BC Supreme Court Justice J. Miriam Gropper was tasked with determining whether the facts amounted to a terrorist purpose and Bick said the B.C. Supreme Court justice found the Crown proved its case on all three routes. On June 30, Kawam was convicted of attempted murder and assault with a weapon for the benefit of, at the direction of, and in association with a terrorist group: the Islamic State. 'From day one of this case, within a minute of committing the attack, he took credit for it and he said it's on behalf of the Islamic State,' Bick told Global News.
National Post
2 days ago
- National Post
B.C. Supreme Court orders city of Prince George to dismantle long-standing homeless encampment
The City of Prince George says it will begin dismantling a long-standing homeless encampment after a B.C. Supreme Court judge approved the move and ruled the city had taken steps to shelter unhoused people. Article content Prince George had gone to court twice before to close the encampment on lands the city owns, but was previously told that residents must be allowed to stay due to unsuitable housing and daytime facilities for unhoused people in the city. Article content Article content Article content The court ruling, issued last week, says that after a new supportive housing facility adjacent to the encampment opened in January, the city returned to court to enforce its bylaws and close the camp. Article content Article content The ruling says the most recent data from November 2024 show there are more than 200 people in Prince George who were 'absolutely homeless,' many of whom struggling with poverty, mental health issues, racism and addiction. Article content 'Housing for this vulnerable population is inherently precarious,' Justice Bruce Elwood wrote. 'Many people without a home in Prince George end up camping on city lands; yet the city does not have the funds, expertise or jurisdiction to create housing for them without support from senior levels of government.' The judge found the lack of affordable housing, coupled with 'strict rules' about subsidized housing mean 'people who want a safe and warm place to stay either cannot find a space, are ineligible for the available spaces or cannot comply with the rules and find themselves evicted with nowhere else to go.' Article content Article content The encampment known as the Lower Patricia Boulevard Encampment was established in 2021, and peaked that summer with around 70 'tent structures,' the court ruling says. Article content Legal efforts to shut it down began in the fall of 2021, with the city naming encampment residents as defendants, including one who allegedly ran a bicycle 'chop shop' at the camp. Article content The B.C. Supreme Court, however, ordered that encampment residents be allowed to stay due to the absence of 'other suitable housing and daytime facilities.' Article content The city then moved some residents to a supportive housing property known as the Knights Inn and dismantled much of the encampment, mistakenly believing it had been 'abandoned.' Article content It went to court again in 2022, but was told that it had breached a court order and inflicted 'serious harm on vulnerable people' by dismantling the camp. Article content The latest ruling says the city changed course after the 2022 court loss, and the province, the B.C. Housing Management Commission and the city have 'since made significant investments to create new housing and shelter for unhoused people in Prince George.'
CTV News
2 days ago
- CTV News
City of Prince George, B.C., can close homeless encampment, judge rules
The City of Prince George is entitled to an order to close the Moccasin Flats homeless camp to full-time sheltering, according to a written Aug. 14 decision by B.C. Supreme Court Justice Bruce Elwood. After failing in court in 2021 and 2022, the city sought an injunction to regain control of the land, also known as the Lower Patricia Boulevard Encampment, and refuse anyone the right to camp on the city-owned property if they refuse to apply to or receive an offer from BC Housing for suitable housing with daytime activities. After a three-day hearing in early July, Elwood found the continuous occupation of city lands by an encampment is a 'clear breach of the relevant provisions of the Parks and Open Space Bylaw and the Zoning Bylaw which prohibit camping and sheltering activity.' But Elwood ruled that a provision must be added for a person subject to the injunction to apply to the court for a constitutional exemption. He found that the city's proposed order satisfied the availability and accessibility conditions set by Chief Justice Christopher Hinkson, but did not give the city everything it sought. Elwood said the injunction against daytime sheltering 'must be subject to limited judicial review for exceptional circumstances.' Lawyers for the named defendants — Belvery Edward Johnny (also known as Bel Johnny), Jessica Alec, Tom Beaudette, Jesse Boake, Quinton Campbell, Constant Lavoie and Johnnie Macburnie — argued that the there was inadequate accessible housing available to meet the needs of the encampment dwellers and they must be permitted to stay. Elwood's decision hinged upon the population of the enampment and quantity of available alternatives. The city recognized the population varies 'and may not be accurately represented by the most recent count by BC Housing of 11 people on June 25 (or as of the date of the defendants' affidavit evidence that there are 18 occupants of the encampment).' Last January, BC Housing opened the Third Avenue Site next to the encampment. It is built from ATCO trailers and includes 42 private rooms with single beds, laundry facilities, two meals a day, mental health support and naloxone anti-overdose kits. 'As discussed, the city initially relied on dozens of units at multiple sites without regard to current availability, then revised that number to 16 units at two sites, and then further revised the number to eight units at the Third Avenue Site, of which only three were available for immediate occupancy on June 25th, and five may become available, but at an unknown date,' Elwood wrote. So, he decided the terms of the injunction cannot be absolute and there must be a process to exempt those who truly cannot find shelter at the Third Avenue site. 'The parameters of the judicial review will need to be defined, if and when the issue arises,' Elwood wrote. 'My view (which is not binding on the judge who hears any such application) is that the grounds for review should be limited to serious mental illness that effectively prevents a remaining occupant from living indoors in a communal setting.'
