Chair-Initiated Complaint into the Shooting Death of Kevin St. Arnaud in Vanderhoof, British Columbia and into the Adequacy of the Subsequent RCMP Investigation
Overview
On December 19, 2004 at approximately 12:50 a.m., Mr. Kevin St. Arnaud broke into a pharmacy in a mall in Vanderhoof, British Columbia.2 Constable Ryan Sheremetta, a member of the Vanderhoof RCMP, responded to the break-in alarm. Constable Colleen Erickson, also with the Vanderhoof RCMP, responded to the alarm in a separate police vehicle. Constable Sheremetta observed Mr. St. Arnaud running from the mall and pursued him in his police vehicle. Constable Sheremetta exited his police vehicle near the Vanderhoof curling rink and continued to pursue Mr. St. Arnaud on foot.
Constable Sheremetta followed Mr. St. Arnaud onto a soccer field while all the time yelling commands for Mr. St. Arnaud to stop. Mr. St. Arnaud eventually stopped, turned around and came back towards Constable Sheremetta. Mr. St. Arnaud continued to advance upon Constable Sheremetta, who later recounted that he stepped backwards but slipped and fell on his back. It was from this position that he shot Mr. St. Arnaud three times in the chest. Constable Erickson,3 who was in a police vehicle, had come around from the curling rink and was driving beside the tennis court and soccer field when she heard yelling, observed
Mr. St. Arnaud "kind of charging back at Constable Sheremetta" and observed Constable Sheremetta, while standing in a police shooting stance,4 shoot Mr. St. Arnaud twice from a distance of approximately ten feet. The subsequent autopsy confirmed that Mr. St. Arnaud was shot, in fact, three times.
The shooting was investigated by the RCMP's "E" Division North District Major Crime Unit (MCU) based in Prince George. The MCU submitted a Report to Crown Counsel to the Regional Crown Counsel on September 12, 2005. On February 15, 2006 Crown Counsel determined that there was no substantial likelihood of conviction and that Constable Sheremetta would not be charged with any offence arising from the shooting of Mr. St. Arnaud.
On March 15, 2006, following the Crown's decision not to proceed with criminal charges, as the Chair of the Commission, I initiated a complaint pursuant to subsection 45.37(1) of the RCMP Act, in which I raised two issues: Firstly, whether members of the RCMP improperly entered into a situation with Mr. St. Arnaud that resulted in his death and, secondly, whether a member of the RCMP improperly discharged his firearm in the incident. On April 26, 2007, I amended the complaint after the conclusion of the inquest into Mr. St. Arnaud's death. The amended complaint (Appendix C), also questioned whether members of the RCMP failed to conduct an adequate investigation into the death of Mr. St. Arnaud.
On August 4, 2006, the RCMP forwarded the RCMP Commissioner's Notice of Direction (Appendix D) terminating the investigation into my complaint pursuant to paragraph 45.36(5)(c) of the RCMP Act.The Notice of Direction stated that it was not reasonably practicable to investigate the complaint and linked this decision to the fact that a coroner's inquest into Mr. St. Arnaud's death was in the investigative stage.
The Commission responded with a report (Appendix E) dated September 28, 2006, which did not address the rationale advanced by the RCMP but, rather, held that the RCMP Commissioner had exceeded his jurisdiction since paragraph 45.36(5)(c) of the RCMP Act does not apply to complaints initiated by the Commission Chair pursuant to subsection 45.37(1) of the Act. I then directed that the RCMP immediately commence an investigation.
Accordingly, as required by the RCMP Act, the complaint was investigated by the RCMP. On completion of the investigation the RCMP Commissioner (or his delegate) shall send his Final Report to the complainant summarizing the results of the investigation and any action taken to resolve the complaint. In this case, the Commissioner's Final Report dated June 26, 2008 (Appendix F) informed me of his findings: that RCMP members properly responded to the break-in at the pharmacy; "[...] that Cst. Sheremetta's actions were justified given his reasonable belief that he would suffer grievous bodily harm or death [...]"; and "[...] other than the concerns identified with the Blood Stand [sic Stain] analysis, I find that members of the RCMP conducted an adequate investigation into the death of Mr. St. Arnaud and as such I do not support this allegation."
Pursuant to subsection 45.42(1) of the RCMP Act, the Commission is required to review any complaint initiated pursuant to subsection 45.37(1) of the Act. This report constitutes my review of the RCMP's investigation into the issues raised in my complaint, and the associated findings and recommendations. A summary of my findings and recommendations can be found in Appendix G.
2 See Appendix A for a condensed timeline of the events related to this incident and Appendix B for a list of RCMP members and others involved in the incident and investigation.
3 For the purposes of this report, all ranks are as held at the time of the events being described. Subsequently many of the members involved have either retired or been promoted.
4 The contradictory descriptions of the position from which Constable Sheremetta shot Mr. St. Arnaud are assessed in detail later in this report.