‘Police don’t release information:’ Why the RCMP withheld details after N.S. massacre | Canada News Media
Connect with us

News

‘Police don’t release information:’ Why the RCMP withheld details after N.S. massacre

Published

 on

HALIFAX — At the centre of the political firestorm erupting over the RCMP’s response to the worst mass shooting in Canadian history is a phrase used by police to justify withholding case information.

In the weeks after a gunman killed 22 people during a 13-hour rampage on April 18-19, 2020, Nova Scotia RCMP officers insisted that disclosure of key facts — including details about the weapons used — could “jeopardize the integrity” of their investigation.

But what does that phrase really mean? And were the Mounties’ reasons for keeping those details from the public valid?

Internal RCMP documents released Tuesday show that on April 28, 2020, the head of the RCMP, Commissioner Brenda Lucki, told a meeting of senior officers she was disappointed that details about the firearms had not been released at previous news conferences in Halifax.

According to notes taken by Supt. Darren Campbell, Lucki said she had promised the Prime Minister’s Office that the Mounties would release the descriptions, adding that the information would be “tied to pending gun control legislation that would make officers and public safer.”

In response, Campbell wrote that he told Lucki that disclosure of those details could “jeopardize ongoing efforts” to determine how the killer illegally obtained two rifles and two pistols.

When Campbell’s notes were made public Tuesday in a report prepared for the public inquiry investigating the tragedy, the opposition federal Conservatives and New Democrats accused the governing Liberals of interfering in a police investigation for political gain.

Lucki issued a statement Tuesday saying, “I would never take actions or decisions that could jeopardize an investigation.” As well, the Liberals have denied the allegation, saying Lucki wasn’t told to do anything.

Lost in the partisan bickering was any discussion over the public’s right to know about the firearms in question.

There can be little doubt that most Mounties, like Campbell, were opposed to saying anything about the weapons. They believed the information, if released to the public, could tip off those involved in illegally supplying guns to the killer.

“It is reasonable to believe the (RCMP) had an ongoing investigation into the source of the weapons,” said a retired Mountie who asked not to be named to protect his relationship with the RCMP. “It may have involved U.S. partners, which would have made them less inclined to provide any information that could threaten the investigation.”

In November 2020, seven months after the shootings, the National Post obtained a list of the killer’s guns, which was included in a briefing note prepared for Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and obtained through the Access to Information Act.

Three firearms were illegally obtained from the United States: a .40-calibre Glock 23 semi-automatic pistol, a 9-mm Ruger P89 semi-automatic pistol and a 5.56-mm Colt Law Enforcement semi-automatic carbine. A Ruger Mini-14 semi-automatic rifle came from a gun shop in Winnipeg, but investigators determined it, too, was acquired illegally.

A.J. Somerset, author of the 2015 book, “Arms: The Culture and Credo of the Gun,” said the release of those details was unlikely to hobble the RCMP’s investigation.

“When the shooter is identified, then anybody who had any information about how those guns were obtained would immediately want to avoid talking to police,” Somerset sad in an interview.

“I don’t see how the identification of the weapons actually leads to that person becoming aware of something they weren’t already aware of.”

Somerset said the real problem is that law enforcement agencies in Canada have grown accustomed to using the jeopardized-investigation argument as a crutch.

“In Canada, the police don’t release information,” he said. “We’re kind of used to that, compared with the United States, where within an hour of a mass shooting, we know everything about what weapons were used.”

Somerset said a former Toronto cop once told him that as a police officer he believed the public had no right to know what police investigations uncover until there is a trial.

“In Canada, there’s a cultural difference around the idea of who the police are working for,” the author said. “Police in Canada, in general, don’t view themselves as accountable to the public …. We saw this in (the Nova Scotia mass shooting case). Warnings weren’t sent out to the public and the police appeared to be acting in their own interest.”

The public inquiry investigating the murders, known as the Mass Casualty Commission, has heard that police knew about an active shooter on the night of April 18, 2020, but no public warnings stating that fact were distributed until the next day — 10 hours after the killing started.

On Aug. 12, 2020, RCMP Sgt. Angela Hawryluk told a court hearing that search warrants used by the Mounties had to remain heavily redacted to ensure the investigation into the mass murder was not compromised.

Search warrants are supposed to be made public after they have been executed, with some exceptions. But in this case, the Crown produced redacted versions that were challenged in court by several media outlets, including The Canadian Press.

Those documents also contained information about the firearms and much of what the RCMP had learned during their investigation.

At one point, Hawryluk told the court, “I had no intention of any of the (search warrants) being revealed to the public.”

That kind of hardline approach stands in contrast to the way things used to be in Canada, said Blake Brown, a history professor at Saint Mary’s University in Halifax.

On Dec. 6, 1989, soon after a man fatally shot 14 women at Montreal’s École Polytechnique, the public was told about the gun he used: another Ruger Mini-14.

“But at some point, police stopped doing that,” said Brown, author of “Arming and Disarming: A History of Gun Control in Canada.”

“I don’t understand why that information can’t be released faster by police. One of the themes of the Mass Casualty Commission has been highlighting the tendency of the RCMP to hand out very little information and to treat the public like they don’t need to know much.”

Both Lucki and Campbell are expected to testify before the inquiry later this summer.

This report by The Canadian Press was first published June 23, 2022.

 

Michael MacDonald, The Canadian Press

News

Virginia Democrats advance efforts to protect abortion, voting rights, marriage equality

Published

 on

 

RICHMOND, Va. (AP) — Democrats who control both chambers of the Virginia legislature are hoping to make good on promises made on the campaign trail, including becoming the first Southern state to expand constitutional protections for abortion access.

The House Privileges and Elections Committee advanced three proposed constitutional amendments Wednesday, including a measure to protect reproductive rights. Its members also discussed measures to repeal a now-defunct state constitutional ban on same-sex marriage and ways to revise Virginia’s process to restore voting rights for people who served time for felony crimes.

“This meeting was an important next step considering the moment in history we find ourselves in,” Democratic Del. Cia Price, the committee chair, said during a news conference. “We have urgent threats to our freedoms that could impact constituents in all of the districts we serve.”

The at-times raucous meeting will pave the way for the House and Senate to take up the resolutions early next year after lawmakers tabled the measures last January. Democrats previously said the move was standard practice, given that amendments are typically introduced in odd-numbered years. But Republican Minority Leader Todd Gilbert said Wednesday the committee should not have delved into the amendments before next year’s legislative session. He said the resolutions, particularly the abortion amendment, need further vetting.

“No one who is still serving remembers it being done in this way ever,” Gilbert said after the meeting. “Certainly not for something this important. This is as big and weighty an issue as it gets.”

The Democrats’ legislative lineup comes after Republican Governor Glenn Youngkin, to the dismay of voting-rights advocates, rolled back a process to restore people’s civil rights after they completed sentences for felonies. Virginia is the only state that permanently bans anyone convicted of a felony from voting unless a governor restores their rights.

“This amendment creates a process that is bounded by transparent rules and criteria that will apply to everybody — it’s not left to the discretion of a single individual,” Del. Elizabeth Bennett-Parker, the patron of the voting rights resolution, which passed along party lines, said at the news conference.

Though Democrats have sparred with the governor over their legislative agenda, constitutional amendments put forth by lawmakers do not require his signature, allowing the Democrat-led House and Senate to bypass Youngkin’s blessing.

Instead, the General Assembly must pass proposed amendments twice in at least two years, with a legislative election sandwiched between each statehouse session. After that, the public can vote by referendum on the issues. The cumbersome process will likely hinge upon the success of all three amendments on Democrats’ ability to preserve their edge in the House and Senate, where they hold razor-thin majorities.

It’s not the first time lawmakers have attempted to champion the three amendments. Republicans in a House subcommittee killed a constitutional amendment to restore voting rights in 2022, a year after the measure passed in a Democrat-led House. The same subcommittee also struck down legislation supporting a constitutional amendment to repeal an amendment from 2006 banning marriage equality.

On Wednesday, a bipartisan group of lawmakers voted 16-5 in favor of legislation protecting same-sex marriage, with four Republicans supporting the resolution.

“To say the least, voters enacted this (amendment) in 2006, and we have had 100,000 voters a year become of voting age since then,” said Del. Mark Sickles, who sponsored the amendment as one of the first openly gay men serving in the General Assembly. “Many people have changed their opinions of this as the years have passed.”

A constitutional amendment protecting abortion previously passed the Senate in 2023 but died in a Republican-led House. On Wednesday, the amendment passed on party lines.

If successful, the resolution proposed by House Majority Leader Charniele Herring would be part of a growing trend of reproductive rights-related ballot questions given to voters. Since 2022, 18 questions have gone before voters across the U.S., and they have sided with abortion rights advocates 14 times.

The voters have approved constitutional amendments ensuring the right to abortion until fetal viability in nine states: Arizona, California, Colorado, Maryland, Michigan, Missouri, Montana, Ohio and Vermont. Voters also passed a right-to-abortion measure in Nevada in 2024, but it must be passed again in 2026 to be added to the state constitution.

As lawmakers debated the measure, roughly 18 members spoke. Mercedes Perkins, at 38 weeks pregnant, described the importance of women making decisions about their own bodies. Rhea Simon, another Virginia resident, anecdotally described how reproductive health care shaped her life.

Then all at once, more than 50 people lined up to speak against the abortion amendment.

“Let’s do the compassionate thing and care for mothers and all unborn children,” resident Sheila Furey said.

The audience gave a collective “Amen,” followed by a round of applause.

___

Associated Press writer Geoff Mulvihill in Cherry Hill, New Jersey, contributed to this report.

___

Olivia Diaz is a corps member for The Associated Press/Report for America Statehouse News Initiative.

Source link

Continue Reading

News

Vancouver Canucks winger Joshua set for season debut after cancer treatment

Published

 on

 

Vancouver Canucks winger Dakota Joshua is set to make his season debut Thursday after missing time for cancer treatment.

Head coach Rick Tocchet says Joshua will slot into the lineup Thursday when Vancouver (8-3-3) hosts the New York Islanders.

The 28-year-old from Dearborn, Mich., was diagnosed with testicular cancer this summer and underwent surgery in early September.

He spoke earlier this month about his recovery, saying it had been “very hard to go through” and that he was thankful for support from his friends, family, teammates and fans.

“That was a scary time but I am very thankful and just happy to be in this position still and be able to go out there and play,,” Joshua said following Thursday’s morning skate.

The cancer diagnosis followed a career season where Joshua contributed 18 goals and 14 assists across 63 regular-season games, then added four goals and four assists in the playoffs.

Now, he’s ready to focus on contributing again.

“I expect to be good, I don’t expect a grace period. I’ve been putting the work in so I expect to come out there and make an impact as soon as possible,” he said.

“I don’t know if it’s going to be perfect right from the get-go, but it’s about putting your best foot forward and working your way to a point of perfection.”

The six-foot-three, 206-pound Joshua signed a four-year, US$13-million contract extension at the end of June.

This report by The Canadian Press was first published Nov. 14, 2024.

The Canadian Press. All rights reserved.

Source link

Continue Reading

News

Trump chooses anti-vaccine activist Robert F. Kennedy Jr. as health secretary

Published

 on

 

NEW YORK (AP) — President-elect Donald Trump says he will nominate anti-vaccine activist Robert F. Kennedy Jr. to lead the Department of Health and Human Services, putting him in charge of a massive agency that oversees everything from drug, vaccine and food safety to medical research and the social safety net programs Medicare and Medicaid.

“For too long, Americans have been crushed by the industrial food complex and drug companies who have engaged in deception, misinformation, and disinformation when it comes to Public Health,” Trump said in a post on his Truth Social site announcing the appointment. Kennedy, he said, would “Make America Great and Healthy Again!”

Kennedy, a former Democrat who ran as an independent in this year’s presidential race, abandoned his bid after striking a deal to give Trump his endorsement with a promise to have a role in health policy in the administration.

He and Trump have since become good friends, with Kennedy frequently receiving loud applause at Trump’s rallies.

The expected appointment was first reported by Politico Thursday.

A longtime vaccine skeptic, Kennedy is an attorney who has built a loyal following over several decades of people who admire his lawsuits against major pesticide and pharmaceutical companies. He has pushed for tighter regulations around the ingredients in foods.

With the Trump campaign, he worked to shore up support among young mothers in particular, with his message of making food healthier in the U.S., promising to model regulations imposed in Europe. In a nod to Trump’s original campaign slogan, he named the effort “Make America Healthy Again.”

It remains unclear how that will square with Trump’s history of deregulation of big industries, including food. Trump pushed for fewer inspections of the meat industry, for example.

Kennedy’s stance on vaccines has also made him a controversial figure among Democrats and some Republicans, raising question about his ability to get confirmed, even in a GOP-controlled Senate. Kennedy has espoused misinformation around the safety of vaccines, including pushing a totally discredited theory that childhood vaccines cause autism.

He also has said he would recommend removing fluoride from drinking water. The addition of the material has been cited as leading to improved dental health.

HHS has more than 80,000 employees across the country. It houses the Food and Drug Administration, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the Medicare and Medicaid programs and the National Institutes of Health.

Kennedy’s anti-vaccine nonprofit group, Children’s Health Defense, currently has a lawsuit pending against a number of news organizations, among them The Associated Press, accusing them of violating antitrust laws by taking action to identify misinformation, including about COVID-19 and COVID-19 vaccines. Kennedy took leave from the group when he announced his run for president but is listed as one of its attorneys in the lawsuit.

__ Seitz reported from Washington.

The Canadian Press. All rights reserved.

Source link

Continue Reading

Trending

Exit mobile version