Toronto Police have recently been placed under public scrutiny for employing the use of lethal force in altercations which involve emotionally disturbed individuals suffering from mental illness. On October 14th, CTV News reported that a coroner’s inquest, currently underway, is expected to raise concern about police use-of- force guidelines and communication strategies between officers and the mentally ill.
Over the course of the past three years, Reyal Jardine Douglas, Sylvia Klibingaitis, Michael Eligon, and Sammy Yatim have been among the individuals who were gunned down by police while they were suffering from a psychological crisis. The Toronto Police openly communicate their strategies to defuse these situations on their website in an “Overview of Toronto Police Reponse to Emotionally Disturbed Persons,” which reports that “In 2011, officers were dispatched to over 19 000 calls involving the emotionally disturbed.” The document proceeds to state that “law enforcement personnel are routinely the first line of response for situations involving mentally ill people in crisis and as a result, officers may have assumed the role of “street-corner psychiatrists” by default.” If responding officers are “temporary psychiatrists,” then why are there so many incidents that end in tragedy instead of resolution?
Canada’s Justice System does not have strict laws that define when officers are permitted to use lethal force. Instead, it is left up to the responding officer’s judgment to determine when it is necessary. While police play a crucial role in keeping communities safe, each officer’s view of the use of weapons and firearms will vary, and the tendency to rely on their use in order to eliminate a threat should not be a primary solution. This view was supported by the public following the death of 18-year-old Sammy Yatim who was shot on board a TTC streetcar by police this past summer. Following the incident, instead of placing emphasis on psychological negotiation tactics, Chief Bill Blair encouraged more officers to carry Tasers as an alternate option to “resolving” these incidents.
Citizens suffering from mental illness also face stigma from law enforcement officials within Canadian courts. In “Sentencing Neurocognitively Impaired Offenders in Canada” found in the most recent issue of the Canadian Journal of Criminology and Criminal Justice, Simon N. Verdun-Jones and Amanda Butler demonstrate how those involved in court proceedings and sentencing decisions often do not consider mental disorders as part of their consideration. The Toronto Police use-of-force procedures are currently under review, but there are no ongoing initiatives to re-evaluate the consideration of mental health in court.
What is your opinion? Should officers receive additional training to avoid the use of firearms? Share your thoughts with us on Twitter @utpjournals or #journalsinthenews
Comments on this entry are closed.