(This
column was published in the North
Shore News on
June 6, 2001)
Cops in tough with gun play
By Leo Knight
ON
a relatively quiet Friday night at 8:30 p.m., Hobbema, Alberta,
Mounties began receiving calls of a man walking around the
Samson Cree First Nations reserve with a shotgun.
Patrols
found 19-year-old Denny Greene holding a shotgun in the
dwindling light. As they approached him with their pistols at
their sides, they ordered him to drop the weapon.
Greene,
who family members say was despondent over the suicide of his
sister buried the day before, responded by pointing the shotgun
at the police officers. The RCMP members pointed their weapons
at Greene and screamed at him to "Freeze" and
"Drop the gun."
He
didn't. One officer fired two shots, hitting him in the waist,
causing non-life threatening injuries.
Police
officers investigating the shooting took statements from
witnesses and for all intents and purposes, it appeared to be a
clean shot. But, as with most things these days when it involves
the police using violence, what should be clear-cut seldom
remains so for very long.
Within
days of the shooting, the victim's family began spouting
nonsense trying to blame police for shooting Greene. They said,
via their lawyer, that Greene had screamed at the officers
holding their weapons on him, that his gun wasn't loaded; a fact
confirmed by police after the shots were fired when they checked
the weapon.
Now,
it should be noted that none of the witnesses or the police
officers involved in the shooting heard Greene say anything as
he pointed the shotgun at the Mounties. But why let facts cloud
the matter when the issue can be obfuscated in political
correctness. "Bad white cops shoot poor, distraught
native" becomes the underlying message. Even if Greene had
shouted those words, when a shotgun is pointed at police what
reason in the world would they have to believe him? "Honest
officer, it's not loaded." Boom. "Hah, fooled
you."
Frankly,
when staring at the business end of a shotgun, it looks like
it's the size of a 17th-century blunderbuss. With guns drawn,
the RCMP gave Greene ample opportunity to drop the weapon before
they fired. When he pointed a shotgun at a police officer,
loaded or not, he authored his own misfortune.
And
that should be the end of that. It shouldn't matter that Greene
is a native or that his sister had just been buried. While this
may emote empathy, it cannot excuse his actions on that Friday
night.
Greene
has been charged with two criminal offences relating to the
incident. He will appear in court in Wetaskawin when he is
released from hospital. But it's even money whether those
charges get dropped after the family lawyers file their lawsuit
against the Mounties. And that, should it happen, will be
totally wrong.
A
police officer has a tough enough job to begin with, let alone
to try and have the ability to read a suspect's mind as to
whether his gun is loaded. Take that police officer and place
him or her in the politically charged atmosphere of a
reservation and nothing is cut and dried.
Denny
Greene is a tragic figure and I hope he can come to grips with
whatever demons he is wrestling with. But, to expect the police
to have acted in any way other than the way they did in this
case, is just plain wrong.
•
• •
On
May 29, federal Justice Minister Anne McLellan rammed her new
Youth Criminal Justice Act through third reading. It will become
the law of the land soon after the senate and the governor
general rubber stamp it.
The
act, guided through Parliament as Bill C-7, replaces the old
Young Offender's Act. While the YOA screamed for a rework, this
new law only serves to further muddy the waters.
The
bill is written in such a manner as to provide an exception to
almost every new innovation. The more cynical among us might
suggest this was done as nothing more than a sop to the Bloc
Quebecois who introduced more than 3,000 amendments the last
time the bill appeared on the order paper.
For
those of you who were looking for something substantial in the
new legislation, it's just not there. A young offender, no
matter the reason, still cannot be identified. While the act
deals with so-called "alternative measures" when an
offender accepts responsibility, it still does not limit this to
first time offenders. The door is still wide open to having
violent, repeat offenders scoot through the system without
facing any real consequences for their actions, no matter how
many times they have been in the dock before.
Canadian
Alliance MP Chuck Cadman, who lost his son Jesse to senseless
teen violence and knows of what he speaks, did everything he
could to put some teeth in the bill. He proposed 55 amendments
to C-7. Not one was accepted. In conversation with Cadman on
Monday, he explained his frustration. "The biggest concern
I have is the incredible complexity.
"For
every time they took a step forward, you read a couple of more
paragraphs and they take two steps back," said the MP.
Cadman believes the only people going to win in this are the lawyers trying to interpret the complex new law. What a surprise.
-30-