Lawrence Gridin

The Crown applied for certiorari seeking to quash a preliminary inquiry judge’s decision discharging a police officer from charges of second-degree murder and manslaughter arising from the fatal shooting of a suspect during the execution of a search warrant.

The Crown conceded the murder charge but argued the officer should have been committed to trial for manslaughter based on careless use of a firearm, advancing two theories: that the officer released the firearm onto a sling while grappling with the deceased, or that he had his finger on the trigger and unintentionally fired.

The Superior Court held the preliminary inquiry judge applied the correct committal test and did not commit jurisdictional error.

The evidence showed the officer’s conduct complied with training and police policy, and the proposed inferences of careless firearm use were unsupported and speculative.

Certiorari was therefore unavailable.

A preliminary inquiry into charges of second degree murder and careless use of a firearm arising from the death of Eric Osawe during a dynamic police entry.

The Crown alleged that the accused officer deliberately fired his MP5 submachine gun during a struggle with the deceased.

The court found no evidence from which a reasonable jury could infer intentional discharge, and further found that the officer's conduct was consistent with professional standards.

The accused was discharged on all counts.

A police constable was charged with assault causing bodily harm after forcibly taking an intoxicated man to the ground during an arrest for public intoxication.

The Crown alleged excessive use of force.

The court found the arrest was lawful under the Liquor Licence Act and that the force used was necessary and not excessive.

The officer believed the arrestee was about to strike his partner and pulled him away, resulting in an unintended fall.

The defendant was acquitted.

The accused, a police constable charged with assault causing bodily harm, brought a motion for an order requiring the Crown to disclose occurrence reports relating to police investigations of the complainant.

The accused sought evidence of the complainant's history of intoxication, violence, and resistance to arrest to support a defence of justified use of force during arrest.

The court found that the occurrence reports constituted first-party disclosure obligations under the Crown's duty to disclose, applying the principles from R. v. McNeil.

The court ordered the Crown to examine sealed packages from the police services and review all occurrence reports for potentially relevant information relating to the complainant's past conduct.

Eight police officers sought judicial review of decisions by the Toronto Police Services Board allowing the Chief of Police to delay serving Notices of Hearing for public complaints arising from the G20 summit.

The respondents moved to dismiss the application for prematurity.

The Divisional Court dismissed the application, finding no exceptional circumstances to justify judicial review of an interlocutory administrative decision.

The court noted the officers had an adequate alternative remedy to raise the issue of prejudice caused by delay through an abuse of process motion before the hearing officer.