A number of newspapers in Ontario, both local and national, have spent the last week reporting on the coroner’s inquest into the shooting death of 17-year-old Jeffrey Reodica. The shooting, which took place two years ago, has sparked a national discussion on use of force by police, driven largely by Reodica’s young age.
The Toronto Star today reported on the tension within the courtroom yesterday, as Det. Const. Dan Belanger testified to his part in the incident. According to the Star, Belanger, the officer who fired three times into Reodica’s back, testified he truly believed both he and his partner were in immediate danger when Reodica began swinging a knife at them. If three shots hadn’t put the kid down, he would have fired more, he said.
“I believed Jeffrey was going to inflict serious or bodily harm on myself or my partner, To stop that, I discharged my firearm until that threat was stopped.” –Det. Const. Dan Belanger
When asked if any other alternative to shooting the youth, Belanger said there was none, the Star reported. His collapsible baton and pepper spray were both in a backpack in the back seat of his car. By the time he extended the baton, he said, Reodica could have stabbed his partner, Det. Const. Allen Love. If sprayed, nothing would stop the teen from wildly swinging his knife, he added.
Jeffrey’s family is obviously distraught with the entire situation, the pain still lingering two years after the fact. The article stated that many took to screaming at the two officers outside the courtroom and expressing their anger and resentment through the media.
“He had an extendible baton and he had pepper spray. … Shooting three times was excessive.” –Robyn Reodica
The Special Investigations Unit (SIU) conducted a 16-week investigation into the shooting, as they do with any violent incident involving a police officer, and concluded that Belanger’s actions, while regrettable, were legally justified. According to their report, 31 civilian witnesses and five police witnesses were interviewed. A number of items were also retained for evidence.
“I believe, based on the very thorough investigation conducted by this Unit, that the force used was reasonable however regrettable the outcome may be.” -James L. Cornish, SIU
I aim the following criticisms not so much at the Reodica family, but at many of their supporters. Hundreds of people have banded behind the family, crying “police brutality!” and “excessive force!”. Give me a break. I think it’s time we all gained some perspective on this situation.
Let me make one thing clear: I feel nothing but compassion for the Reodica family. I cannot begin to imagine the pain they must be feeling, and must have felt in the last two years. This must have been, without question, one of the hardest situations they will face together and I can only hope they will one day reach a point where the pain is not quite so overwhelming.
Jeffrey’s sister, Robyn, made a point of asking why the officers felt shooting her brother was their only option when they had a baton and pepper spray available to them. Okay, on the surface I can understand her concerns. However, it is worth nothing that the officer have testified (and the SIU probe confirmed) that those tools were not at the officer’s immediate disposal.
As mentioned in the Toronto Star article, as well as the SIU report, Belanger and Love were in plainclothes and in an unmarked police car. They were off on a food run and, quite frankly, were not in a position to be fully equipped for any situation which may have come their way. I mean, it’s not like these were uniformed officers on their normal patrols, these were just two guys who answered the call after no regular patrols were available to respond.
Belanger testified that, due to the baton and spray being in the car, he would have been unable to reach the items before his partner was potentially seriously injured. If, as both he and Love have testified, he truly believed Reodica was swinging a knife at his partner, he was absolutely justified in attempting to prevent that attack. He used the only tool at his disposal — his gun. If I were in a situation where I was being attacked by a knife-wielding assailant, I can only hope a police officer present at the scene would have the wits to do the same thing.
Reodica’s mother called the two officers “killer cops”, reportedly loud enough for Belanger and Love to hear inside the courthouse. While I can understand her pain, I simply cannot support her claims. We, as a society, give these men and women the power to defend us and, if necessary, kill someone who is a threat to the greater population. We give them the guns and we give them the training. Sometimes, a cop is called upon to defend another police officer, sometimes with lethal force. A gun was not used in this situation simply because the boy was attacking a fellow police officer, it was used because a fellow citizen and human being was in danger.
This is what we train, equip, and pay these officers to do.
One need only think of what they would want done if a member of their family were in a similar situation to understand where I’m coming from. Condemning these officers simply because they did their jobs accomplishes nothing. If this had been a 35-year-old man, would there have been the same public outcry? I doubt it. However, we live in an age where the young have increasingly become murders and violent offenders.
At what point do we allow our police forces to begin treating them like the threats they are, rather than coddling them?