Should police be compelled to testify when it comes to officer-involved shootings?

The province’s police watchdog has revealed a Peel police officer involved in a fatal shooting has not yet given a statement, more than two months after the incident. The news has revived a debate about whether officers should be obligated to speak with investigators probing violent incidents involving police.

The Special Investigations Unit was called to a residence in Brampton on April 6, where D’Andre Campbell was pronounced dead after an interaction with Peel police. They confirmed officers tasered the Black man twice, before an officer fired multiple shots. Campbell’s family says the 26-year-old struggled with his mental health, and was the one who had called 9-1-1 for help.

Police officers designated as a subject officer by the SIU are not required to speak to investigators.

“The reason being these are criminal investigations and we all in our society have a right not to incriminate ourselves in criminal matters,” explains Ian Scott, a former SIU Director.

Like any civilian accused of a crime, officers who are being investigated have a right to remain silent. But police insist it doesn’t mean a thorough investigation can’t be conducted.

“They will still speak to all witness officers, any witnesses, and still complete their case whether an officer speaks or not,” says Cst. Danny Marttini, a Media Relations officer with Peel Regional Police.

But some critics have long opposed the idea that police should be treated the same as civilians.

“I think the main difference is we provide police with extra powers and guns, which civilians don’t have, so that should come with increased accountability,” says Andre Marin, a former SIU Director and former Ontario Ombudsman who has criticized the provincial watchdog in the past.

He believes there are ways to increase accountability while still protecting officer rights.

“You could have the subject officer compelled to give a statement, but it can’t be used against him in court,” Marin suggests. “Or if he refuses, then you don’t allow him to carry a gun again because you don’t know what happened.”

While subject officers aren’t required to give a statement, officers who witness the incident are. But that raises its own series of questions – what happens if the office in question is alone when shots are fired? And what are the implications of forcing officers to give testimony about their colleagues?

Scott points out that investigators rely on more than just police witness accounts.

“There’s often civilians, and in ideal circumstances – and this is why I’m a big fan of body worn cameras – there’s independent evidence,” he says.

Historically, the SIU clears officers in about 90 per cent of its cases.

Peel Police confirm officers typically remain on active duty while SIU investigations are ongoing because they haven’t yet been found guilty.