A recent controversy irrupted in Toronto, Ontario over the findings from a tragic collision whereby a Toronto police officer, Constable Jeffery Northrup, was killed when he was run over by a fleeing vehicle in the parking garage of Toronto’s City Hall on July 2, 2021. At trial the driver of the fleeing vehicle, Umar Zameer, was found not guilty. The trial judge, Superior Court Justice Anne Molloy, became concerned that some police officers may have colluded in reporting that Constable Northup was standing in front of Zameer’s BMW, and visible to Zameer, just before Northrup was struck. The reconstruction evidence of a Toronto police expert and that of the defense expert both agreed that the evidence did not support that Northrup was standing as claimed.
In response Toronto’s Chief of Police, Myron Demkiw, made a bad decision by claiming that he would involve the Ontario Provincial Police in an “independent” review of the court findings. The existence of Ontario’s Special Investigations Unit (SIU) would signal to anyone that police investigating the actions of other police is highly unlikely to create an “independent” assessment. The subsequent report of the OPP reversed the findings of the trial by concluding that Constable Northrup was indeed standing up just before he was struck.
Having reviewed the OPP report it is my view that it supported an impossible collision scenario. This scenario would have placed Constable Northrup on top of the BMW hood as the impact took place and it could not explain how Constable Northrup would have come to be underneath the BMW and thus run over.
Never-the-less the findings of the OPP report provided the excuse that Chief Demkiw needed to override the matter of police collusion. This was subsequently followed by comments made by Ontario’s Premier, Doug Ford, that the trial judge should apologize, a comment that was also supported by the president of Toronto’s police association.
In my view these developments are a black mark on the reputation of Chief Demkiw, the OPP, Premier Ford and Toronto’s Police Association. The findings of the trial should have been a catalyst toward reviewing the operations of police when they operate under cover, are on foot, and are in the vicinity of motor vehicles. The secrecy with which police conduct their operations makes it impossible to know how they conduct their training in this area. However there are previous incidents over the years that lead to safety concerns for both the police officers and also the public, like Umar Zameer, who may not be guilty of any wrongdoing but become caught up in questionable police procedures.
Confusing interactions have occurred where pedestrian police have used questionable judgment and these can be highly publicized. It can be recalled that in the early morning of May 17, 2024, the world’s top-ranked golfer, Scottie Scheffler, was on his way to the Valhalla Golf Club, in Louisville Kentucky when he encountered a pedestrian police officer who engaged Scheffler after Scheffler had steered into a wrong lane as a result of a police investigation that blocked Scheffler’s progress to the club. It was alleged that sometime during this altercation Scheffler drove his vehicle forward causing the police officer to be dragged and injured. Initially Scheffler was removed from his vehicle and handcuffed and police indicated he would be sent to jail because he did not comply with police instructions. Eventually Scheffler was released to continue with the golf tournament but what actually caused the dangerous encounter was never properly explained. Scottie Scheffler’s public demeanour demonstrated a calmness that did not align with an aggressive action to cause a police officer’s harm. The police officer being “dragged” by Scheffler’s vehicle is something that is commonly described in news media articles but it is not always a result of the officer being caught and attached by some portion of the vehicle. Rather it is often that an officer grabs a hold of a vehicle that begins to move. However what actually took place that led to the altercation was never properly disclosed. And this is a recurring problem when attempting to unravel the Gordian Knot of secrecy surrounding police interactions. Not all incidents are the same and the unique conditions of every incident requires that the details surrounding it need to be revealed. But such details are rarely or never revealed.
The next segment of this article will review incidents, some of them tragically fatal, where police officers, while pedestrians, were struck by fleeing vehicles.
Historic Incidents Of Police Officers Struck By Fleeing Vehicles
Unless one is a police officer who is continually exposed to making traffic stops and conducting other investigations near running vehicles it is difficult to get a clear understanding as to why police become embroiled in life-threatening incidents when they are pedestrians. It can be reasonably assumed that there are dangerous persons in our society and there is an essential need to control those persons for the society’s protection. How often police must deal with such dangerous persons, and how they are forced to perform their essential duties, is simply unknown. And this is not helpful to police and not helpful to the general public.
The table below is a summary of recent incidents where police in the Province of Ontario were struck by moving vehicles while they were pedestrians. It has not been possible to obtain a complete set of these instances and there is no other resource where such data can be found. Never-the-less the table provides some general indicator of the types of scenarios in which police, as pedestrians, were struck.
In reviewing the scant details of some of these instances it is quite obvious that drivers were aware that they were dealing with police. Regardless of the consequences such drivers have made the decision to flee. And at times those drivers were not intent on stopping just because a pedestrian police officer was in their path. And if such a driver is not stopped he or she may travel anywhere throughout a city or rural area, possibly endangering the lives of many innocent persons. So there is a strong urgency for police to try to stop such drivers as quickly as possible.
One problem is that not all persons who interact with police are criminals, nor are they dangerous. Sometimes, like in the instances of Scheffler and Zameer, misunderstandings develop. As in the case of Umar Zameer he appeared to be just an average citizen who was out with his family when he was approached by under-cover police whom he did not recognize and circumstances escalated. It may be that police believe they do not need obvious uniforms and badges to be recognized as police. It was reported in the Zameer trial that police tried to show their identification to Zameer and therefore he should have recognized that they were police. However it would not be difficult for a criminal to create identification that looks legitimate. How could a typical driver be able to distinguish genuine documentation versus forged documentation?
The image below shows the three under-cover officers who interacted with Umar Zameer on the night of the tragic Northrup collision. It is difficult for me to believe that these persons were readily identifiable as police officers. And this is an important safety problem.
In my review of the scant details of these instances it is apparent that, at a number of times, police made a decision that placed them in a dangerous position. The methods of police training in such instances are accountable to no one outside of the police community yet those methods have to be questioned when a number of officers have attempted to physically interact with a vehicle and driver when the vehicle is running and under the control of a driver.
I should not have to emphasize that a driver in a running vehicle is no different than a person holding a loaded gun. It may be possible for a physically fit police officer to subdue a person holding a gun or knife. But that same officer cannot subdue a 4000 pound vehicle even through the driver might be of minimal size and strength. The officer is highly unlikely to win that battle. There are instances where police officers have attempted to reach into a running vehicle to attempt to shut off the ignition or for some similar purpose. In my view police training should explicitly forbit an officer from such an action. Past experience has demonstrated that this is too dangerous. When police have reportedly been “dragged” by an escaping driver’s vehicle it is rarely because the officer has become physically snagged onto some portion of the vehicle exterior. Almost exclusively it is because the officer has attempted to grab a hold of some portion of the vehicle or has partially entered into the vehicle interior and this decision has placed the officer in greater danger.
In my long career I have had the displeasure of conducting a detailed investigation of a police pedestrian fatality in a traffic stop gone terribly wrong. It was something that I conclude could have been avoided if police had received proper warning about the dangers of engaging a driver in a running vehicle. Not being an expert in these procedures I would advise that the most important matter is to disengage a driver from a running vehicle by asking the driver to shut off the engine and step outside. If the driver does not comply then the officer should never attempt to open the vehicle’s door and attempt to remove the driver or attempt to reach in and shut off the ignition. Reaching into the vehicle is the worse thing a police officer can do. At this juncture the most important action a police officer can do is to disable the vehicle by whatever means possible. There may be some method to deflate or damage the vehicle’s tires. Or there may be some method to disable the performance of the engine. Creating holes in a vehicle’s radiator would be an example where a vehicle would progressively become undriveable. Police ought to have instruments available on their person to perform these actions.
A driver that attempts to escape after their vehicle has been damaged by police can be easier to apprehend. If a tire is damaged and becomes deflated the vehicle can no longer be driven at its highest speed. And the deflated tire becomes progressively damaged the more it is driven in a deflated condition. Incidents have occurred where the path of escaping vehicles can be followed by the roadway markings left by the damaged tire. In some instances the trail left behind can be followed without the necessity of involving a high speed pursuit. As a tire begins to disintegrate the escaping vehicle will begin to ride on the wheel rim and this produces distinctive markings on the roadway which are not difficult to detect. In one instance the path of a vehicle riding on its rim was followed through numerous urban roadways, over several kilometres up to the final location where the vehicle was boxed in by police vehicles.
Tragic results have occurred when police have discharged their firearms toward occupants of a `vehicle rather than at the vehicle itself. This was evident on November 26, 2020 when OPP officers attempted to stop an escaping pick-up truck that crashed through their road block on Pigeon Lake Road in Kawartha Lakes. This encounter resulted in the death of the Pick-up truck driver but also an 18-month old child in the pick-up truck who was struck and killed by police bullets. While charges against the three officers who shot at the occupants were dropped this was an example of bad police training and bad police performance of their duties.
It is understandable that many times police have no idea who they are approaching and it requires some exceptional thought to consider what may unfold. On a previous occasion an officer may have encountered a dangerous criminal with a loaded gun, so that could colour an officer’s actions in the next instance where the officer does not know the next encountered individual. The difficulty is that not all drivers are dangerous criminals and how they are approached must be an essential part of police training. The tragic death of Constable Jeffery Northrup must be a catalyst for police officials to review their procedures when police are on foot and undercover.
You must be logged in to post a comment.