Sault Police may recommend review of officers conduct in Mitchell case

The actions of Sault Ste. Marie Police Service officers in the Timothy Mitchell case may yet be reviewed by an independent third party, if senior Sault Police officers determine a review is needed after another look at the evidence next week.

“I’ve never seen this before…this was a really, really complex matter,” said Robert Keetch, Sault Ste. Marie Police Service chief, speaking to reporters after a Sault Ste. Marie Police Services Board meeting Thursday.

“They’re so diametrically opposed (a Special Investigations Unit ruling regarding the Mitchell case in March 2016, and a court decision handed down Feb. 20) that we’re having difficulty reconciling the two,” said Deputy Chief Sean Sparling.

Mitchell suffered several injuries stemming from a blow to the abdomen by a Sault Police officer when he was arrested March 26, 2016, charged with resisting arrest and failing to comply with a recognizance condition that he not consume alcohol.

In Nov. 2016, the province's Special Investigations Unit (SIU) determined there were no reasonable grounds to lay criminal charges against Constable Matthew Keating in connection with Mitchell's injuries.

However, on Feb. 20, it was ruled by Ontario Court Justice John Condon the actions of Sault Police officers violated Mitchell's rights under two sections of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, his right to security of person and right to retain and instruct counsel violated.

In Mitchell’s trial it was revealed Keating moved Mitchell, after his arrest, abruptly down a corridor at the Sault Police building to the cell area, where he was pushed from behind once he was in the cell.

It was determined excessive force was used by police and the charges against Mitchell were dropped.

“I think it presents a unique situation to us,” Keetch said.

“We have an outside agency, the SIU, that’s called in that does an extensive, thorough, complex investigation relative to the actions of the officers and comes back with a finding, and then you have a court…where we’re assessing the conduct of the accused, and there’s an assessment done and a different conclusion.”

“That’s something I haven’t faced and haven’t heard of in the past,” Keetch said. 

“I respect both decisions…(plus an internal Section 11 investigation completed by the Sault Police Service).”

Still, Keetch told reporters Thursday “I wasn’t aware of the descriptions of the interactions between Mr. Mitchell and the officers in the cell area, I certainly was not aware he had not been afforded his right to counsel under the Charter. I was disappointed and concerned when I read that.”

“If the actions of the officers potentially amount to misconduct we’re going to call an outside agency in (likely another, yet-to-be-determined police service) to do an investigation into that.”

“In the next week or so, I’ll sit down with the judge’s decision, with the SIU information from that review and the cell video, and I’ll look at it (the video), and if I believe that there may be misconduct on the part of one of our officers, I’ll make a recommendation to the chief that the matter be investigated by an outside party, independent of the service,” said Deputy Chief Sean Sparling.

Sparling said he and the Sault Police Professional Standards Bureau (PSB, dealing with internal affairs), will look over that information together.

“That initial review itself will take me a week or two to have a look at at all the materials, maybe less,” Sparling said, expecting to have a report ready for Keetch before the next Police Services Board meeting, emphasizing it is yet to be determined if there will be a recommendation for a review. 

If a review of police conduct in the case is considered warranted by Sparling and recommended to Keetch, then the third party will report to Keetch on how to proceed with the misconduct after its own review.

On other matters regarding use of force, a report prepared for Thursday’s Board meeting showed tasers were displayed 43 times by Sault Police in 2017, up from 31 times in 2016 (tasers displayed only 13 times in 2015).

Tasers were actually deployed nine times in 2017, up from seven times in 2016.

Sparling emphasized displaying a taser (an officer drawing his/her taser as a warning) and deployment (actual firing of a taser to subdue an individual) are two different matters.

Both Keetch and Sparling told SooToday the rise in taser display is not a link to an increase in crime, but is due to more officers being equipped with the devices and their effectiveness in dealing with certain situations.

The report also showed pointing of firearms by Sault Police (28 in 2017, up from 25 in 2016) “are equally spread throughout the year,” some of these incidents arising from Emergency Services Unit (ESU) high risk arrests.

Firearms were actually deployed twice by Sault Police in 2017, in both cases to dispatch injured animals.

Pepper spray was not used by Sault Police at all in 2017 (not having been used since 2012, and used only three times in that year).