Cases

Background
The IIO is committed to transparency through public reporting and is aware of previous recommendations made to public bodies regarding transparency. For example, the Commission for Public Complaints Against the RCMP made a recommendation to the RCMP to provide regular, meaningful and timely updates to the media and public, specifically regarding police-involved shootings. Although the IIO is newly established and is still in the process of developing performance measures, the organization will endeavor to provide regular, meaningful and timely updates on the status of investigations wherever possible.

This investigative status chart is intended to provide general information related to the timelines of active investigations and does not represent specific investigative plans, activities or tasks. The chart will be updated on a bi-weekly basis.

(Click the chart below to zoom in)

Click here for Public Reports on closed investigations

Deployments

Police services in British Columbia are required to notify the IIO when an officer is involved in an incident that may result in death or serious harm. An IIO Team Director is on call 24/7 to receive the notifications and to assess if the incidents fall within the IIO’s jurisdiction. The Team Director must obtain all available information from the police service and then answer two questions – “is this incident officer related?” AND “may it result in death or serious harm” (as defined by the Police Act).

If the answer to both questions is immediately “yes”, the IIO will assert jurisdiction and investigate under section 38.09 of the Act. At the end of the investigation, the CCD will close the investigation with a decision and a Report (under section 38.11 of the Act). If the CCD considers an officer may have committed an offence, he will make a Report to Crown Counsel. If the CCD does not consider an offence may have been committed, he will issue a Public Report. Cases under investigation by the IIO and those closed over the previous quarter are seen in Chart 1.

There will be instances when the IIO asserts jurisdiction and during the initial stages of the investigation, determines that either there was no relationship/nexus between the injury and an officer’s actions OR the injury did not meet the definition of serious harm. These deployments are closed by internal memo as “jurisdiction was not sustained.” Deployments that are open and those that have been closed over the previous quarter are seen in Table 1.

DATE	AFFECTED PERSON	CITY	INCIDENT	REASON JURISDICTION NOT SUSTAINED
October 2013	Adult male	Surrey	Serious harm-Other	Serious harm not established
August 2013	Adult male	Tsay Keh Dene	Death	Nexus not established
	Adult female	Burnaby	Serious harm- Fall	Serious harm not established
	Adult male	Cranbrook	Serious harm- other	Serious harm not established
July 2013	Adult male	New West	Serious harm- Fall	Nexus not established
June 2013	N/A
May 2013	Adult male	Maple Ridge	Serious harm – Police Dog	Serious harm not established
	Adult male	Penticton	Fatal- MVI	Nexus not established
April 2013	Adult male	Nanaimo	Serious harm – Police Dog	Serious harm not established
	Adult male	Williams Lake	Serious harm – Other	Nexus not established
March 2013	Adult males	Vanderhoof	Serious harm – MVI	Nexus not established
Feb 2013	Adult male	Vancouver	Serious harm-Fall	Serious harm not established
Jan 2013	Adult male	Abbottsford	Serious harm – Other	Serious harm not established
	Adult female	Maple Ridge	Serious harm – MVI	Serious harm not established
	Adult female	Vancouver	Fatal –Self-inflicted	Nexus not established
Dec 2012	Adult male	Vancouver	Serious harm – Other	Serious harm not established
	Adult male	New West	Serious harm – Fall	Nexus not established
Nov 2012	None recorded
Oct 2012	Adult male	Surrey	Serious harm – MVI	Serious harm not established
Sept 2012	Adult male	Surrey	Serious harm – Police Dog	Serious harm not established
	Adult female	Penticton	Serious harm – Self-Inflicted	Nexus not established
	Adult female	Surrey	Serious harm –MVI	Serious harm not established
	Adult male	Surrey	Serious harm –MVI	Nexus not established
	Adult male	North Van	Serious harm – Other	Nexus not established
	Adult male	Mission	Serious harm – Other	Serious harm not established

Table 1 (above) – Deployments that are open and those that have been closed over the previous quarter

Table 2 below is intended to provide a summary of IIO investigations in which a Report to Crown Counsel has been made. It will be updated on an as-needed basis.

DATE OF REPORT TO CROWN	AFFECTED PERSON	CITY	INCIDENT	CRIMINAL JUSTICE BRANCH DECISION
Dec 2013	Adult male	Chilliwack	Serious harm	Pending
	Adult male	Prince George	Serious harm – MVI	Pending
Nov 15, 2013	Adult male	New Westminister	Serious harm – MVI	Pending
Nov 7, 2013	Adult female	Salmon Arm	MVI – fatal	Pending
July 11, 2013	Adult male	New Westminster	Shooting – fatal	Pending
June 26, 2013	Adult male	North Vancouver	Serious harm – Police Dog	No charge approved
June 4, 2013	Adult female	Port Alberni	Serious harm	No charge approved
April 8, 2013	Adult male	Campbell River	Serious harm – MVI	No charge approved
April 2, 2013	Adult male	Cranbrook	Shooting – non-fatal	Charge approved
March 25, 2013	Adult male	Creston	Serious harm	No charge approved

Table 2

Commonly Asked Questions

Are Preliminary Investigations included in this chart?

No. Preliminary Investigations are circumstances where the IIO initiated an investigation but subsequently determined that legal jurisdiction was not sustained. Circumstances could include investigators determining that the injuries did not meet the statutory definition of serious harm or that a relationship between the incident and an officer was not established.

What is an investigative task?

A task is a single investigative activity usually assigned to an individual investigator. The assignment of tasks ensures an organized method of investigating in accordance with Major Case Management principles. For example, an investigator may be assigned the task of conducting an interview of a witness to an incident.

The assignment and completion of tasks is an ongoing process in an investigation. At any time during an investigation, tasks may be newly assigned, in progress, or submitted and awaiting approval. An assigned task is submitted, reviewed and approved before it is considered complete. The chart will indicate the percentage of completed tasks (i.e., the percentage will indicate 0% complete until initial tasks have been reviewed and approved). The percentage of completed tasks may fluctuate as new tasks are generated during an investigation.

Why are there investigations that are open for a period of time but that have no tasks assigned?

It is important to note that the chart reflects the date that the IIO was notified, not necessarily when the IIO asserted jurisdiction or deployed resources. By asserting jurisdiction, we mean the IIO having the legal authority to initiate or take over an investigation into an incident.

Once jurisdiction has been sustained, tasks will not show on this chart until they have been completed and approved. By jurisdiction sustained, we mean that after preliminary investigation, the injuries are confirmed to meet the definition of serious harm AND the incident WAS officer related.

If an investigation shows that no tasks have been assigned, it is likely that their completion is underway and/or pending approval by a supervisor.

Why might an investigation be closed prior to all of the tasks being completed?

Some tasks are administrative in nature and cannot be completed until after the Chief Civilian Director (CCD) has rendered a decision. These would be tasks that do not affect the CCD’s decision. An example is when personal effects may be returned to an affected person or their family.

There are other circumstances when the CCD may close an investigation prior to a complex third party report being completed. An example of that could be lengthy medical and pathology reports that relate to an affected person’s cause of death. It may be that tasks remain outstanding due to other proceedings like a Coroner’s Inquest.

What types of tasks may be assigned after an investigation has been referred to Crown?

After reviewing a completed IIO investigation, Crown may request additional information that would result in new tasks being created. Tasks might include the need for additional or follow up interviews with witnesses or obtaining specialized analysis and/or reports.

What types of tasks may be assigned after Crown has decided not to proceed with charges, or after the CCD has issued a Public Report?

Follow up tasks associated to the return of evidence or other non-investigative activities may take place after a file is complete.

Why are some investigations concluded in less time than others?

IIO investigations vary in complexity. The more complex an investigation is, the longer it will take to complete. Some investigations require extensive forensic examinations. Incidents that occur in a public location with numerous witnesses may take longer to investigate versus incidents where there are fewer involved persons.

Others may be impacted by concurrent investigations. By concurrent investigations, we mean those conducted by the police service regarding the affected person at the same time as the IIO investigation into the actions of the officer(s).

What is the difference between an investigation that is closed and one that has been reported to Crown?

IIO investigations that have been referred to Crown remain open as they are subject to an assessment by Crown counsel and potentially, a subsequent court process. Once Crown has returned a “no charge” decision, the investigation would be considered closed. IIO investigations are closed once no further investigations or other processes will be conducted.