Metro officer is charged in fatal shooting

Manslaughter charge laid in death during Easter Sunday drug takedown

By Philip Mascoll and Rosie DiManno
Toronto Star Staff Reporters

Hugh Dawson was unarmed and likely blinded by blood flowing from his
pummelled face when he died Easter Sunday in a hail of 11 Metro police
bullets 10 of them fired by Detective Constable Rick Shank, sources
say.

Shank was charged yesterday with manslaughter in the death of the
31yearold father of two who was killed during what police have said
was a drug takedown.

``This is not a good day for the Metropolitan Toronto police
department,'' said Deputy Chief Bob Kerr, acting police chief
yesterday in the absence of David Boothby.

Shank's lawyer, Harry Black, preempted the press conference at which
special investigations unit director Andre Marin announced the charge.

Black released a written statement earlier in the day which said: ``As
counsel for Detective Constable Shank, I must state that those who are
responsible for this decision will, in due course, have their own
decisionmaking in this case and the misconduct of the `investigation'
fully exposed to public scrutiny.''

The news of the charge also provoked instant outrage from the Metro
Toronto Police Association.

``This is an absolute disgrace,'' said association president Paul
Walter, in a prepared statement.

``Mr. Marin and the special investigations unit are on a crusade to
charge as many police officers as possible. There is a definite agenda
at play.''

According to Star interviews over the 88 days since the killing, these
are the alleged events which form the basis of the charge against
Shank:

Shank was the ``road boss'' of the operation and gave the order that
brought seven members of the east field command drug squad swarming
down on Dawson's Honda Accord at the corner of Kennedy and Danforth
Rds.

Although Boothby, on the night of the shooting, said Dawson had been
shot during a ``violent struggle,'' there were no defensive wounds on
his hands or arms.

Boothby told reporters that night: ``A violent struggle ensued. This
led to two officers discharging their firearms.''

But Dawson may never have realized who killed him, or why.

When the officers blitzed Dawson's car, they were in plainclothes and
some were not wearing body armor.

It is alleged they were not wearing anything that ``obviously''
identified them as police officers and they were never heard by
witnesses to shout, ``Police!'' nor order Dawson out of the car. No
bullhorn was used.

UNDER SURVEILLANCE

The squad knew Dawson was alone in the car because he was under
surveillance, having sold a police ``agent'' $600 worth of crack
cocaine just before Shank called in the takedown.

The officers used their own vehicles and the presence of two civilian
cars one with a family of four inside, including two children to
box Dawson's car in at the traffic light at Kennedy and Danforth.

One civilian a woman alone in a fourwheeldrive truck next to
Dawson's car was ordered to use her vehicle to prevent Dawson from
escaping, sources said.

``Ram him! Ram that car!'' one constable shrieked at the woman.

The driver who had no idea that individual, dressed in civilian
clothes, was an officer said: ``You've got to be fing kidding!''
and drove away.

Dawson's car bumped the family car, which was the unwilling rear
perimeter of the haphazard, police takedown ``box.''

Contrary to earlier reports that said Dawson was reversing at such
speed that he knocked the family car back 18 metres, the Honda was
moving at no more than 5 km/h, witnesses said. There was only a
scratch where the bumpers met.

The officers used nightsticks and the buttend of shotguns to smash
out all the deeply tinted windows of Dawson's car, witnesses said.

From the driver's window, Detective Constables Phil Chan and Albert
Flis used a nightstick and the barrel of a shotgun to strike Dawson in
the face, sources told The Star.

WINDOWS SMASHED

Chan and Flis were designated witness officers right after the
shooting, but immediately after investigators saw their notes their
status was changed to that of subject officers.

A subject officer is someone whose actions may have caused the death
or injury being investigated. Because they are suspects, subject
officers are not compelled to give statements.

Later in the investigation, the SIU switched Flis and Chan back to
witness officers and they gave statements. It is possible that Flis
and Chan were not charged with a criminal offence for striking Dawson
because they were trying to disable him, to prevent him from
accelerating his vehicle and fleeing.

As Chan and Flis were pounding Dawson, Shank came diving through the
front passengerside window with such force that only his legs
remained sticking outside the car, sources said. He ended up parallel
to the seat.

According to sources, Shank then shouted: ``He's got my gun!''

Detective Constable Rajeev Sukumaran, who was also at the driver's
side, then allegedly pulled the trigger of his Glock pistol once.

The bullet hit Dawson in the left arm, sources said, and he reared
back, throwing up his arms whether in reflex or surrender is
unclear.

It was then that Shank allegedly pulled the trigger of his
semiautomatic 10 times.

All the shots hit Dawson in the torso and powder residue indicates all
were fired from within onethird of a metre of his body, it is
alleged. Gun experts point out that the Glock is not an automatic
pistol that will keep firing once the trigger is held down.

``It is a semiautomatic pistol,'' said one firearms expert. ``You
have to pull the trigger each time to discharge a round.''

All the spent cartridge casings were inside the car, indicating that
none of the shots had come from outside the vehicle.

The car was smothered with residue from spent gunpowder. Dawson's
fingerprints were not found on Shank's gun.

The officers waited three days before turning their firearms over to
the SIU. None of the officers involved in the fatal shooting were ever
tested for drug or alcohol use.

The operation took place on Easter Sunday, when all the squad members
were off work. They had to be called in to make the bust.

In the statement issued by lawyer Black, he claims Shank ``was engaged
in the lawful execution of his duties,'' that there was a violent
struggle that endangered the lives of all the officers, and that no
charge should have been laid against Shank.

Black also represents Sukumaran, although Black himself has
acknowledged in the past that one lawyer should not represent both the
subject and witness officers in a SIU investigation.

Sukumaran, whose status was altered from subject officer to witness
officer, has refused to submit to an SIU interview, although he was
ordered to do so by his chief. For refusing a chief's direct order,
Boothby has said, the officer is to be charged this week under the
Police Act.

But Black's statement yesterday was nowhere near as vitriolic as the
one issued later by the police association.

In its release, the association described the SIU as ``discredited,''
and having no credibility with police across Ontario.

Walter also said: ``We will be exploring all options, including legal
means, to expose this biased body and its director.''

Kerr said he could not comment on the case or the investigation in
order to preserve Shank's right to a fair trial.

SIU `DISCREDITED'

But he did note: ``There are no winners. We have the Dawson family
themselves and what they have been going through. We have Detective
Constable Richard Shank he, himself and his family members and
friends, what he is now going through.''

Kerr told The Star: ``The public has a right to feel concerned.''

Shank is on his regular days off at present. But Kerr said Boothby,
who will be returning to the office today, will make a decision on
whether Shank should be suspended.

Dawson's brother Errol Brown said last night: ``It is hard for us to
accept the fact that he's dead. There's no closure for us and as long
as I live there will never be closure.''

His aunt, Iocent Taylor, said she felt more than one officer should
have been charged. ``A charge of manslaughter does not really provide
the answers.''

The family's lawyer, Deryk Gravesande, praised the ``diligent work''
of SIU investigators. He said they faced ``huge constraints''
investigating police officers.

``However, this charge should make it clear to his (Shank's) fellow
officers and to the chief that not withstanding their being an
integral part of the state apparatus, they are subject to the same
laws as the rest of us.''

_________________________________________________________________

With files from Jennifer Quinn