Civilians tried to help man bear-sprayed in Vancouver’s Downtown Eastside, police viewed him as a threat: IIO

From Aug. 2022: A man in distress on Vancouver's Downtown Eastside died after police shot him with a beanbag gun.

The civilian agency that investigates police use of force in British Columbia has cleared officers of wrongdoing in the death of a man in Vancouver’s Downtown Eastside three years ago.

Jessica Berglund, the chief civilian director of the Independent Investigations Office of B.C., found no evidence that any of the Vancouver Police Department officers who responded to the Aug. 22, 2022 incident had committed a crime.

However, Berglund’s report, published Friday, deems it “noteworthy” that the police officers at the scene seemed more threatened by the man than the numerous civilian witnesses the IIO spoke to during its investigation.

The IIO report does not name the deceased, but he has previously been identified as 42-year-old Christopher Amyotte, an Indigenous father of seven who was visiting Vancouver from Winnipeg at the time of his death.

• Read more: Indigenous father of 7 identified as man who died after being shot with Vancouver police beanbag gun
• Family of man who died in police custody travels to Vancouver for answers

Pepper spray and milk theft

The report is based on interviews with 17 civilian witnesses, three paramedics and 16 police officer witnesses, as well as police records, 911 audio, cellphone and surveillance videos, medical records and more.

It describes civilian witnesses—referred to anonymously as CW1, CW2, and so on—encountering a naked man running down East Hastings Street, “rubbing himself” as though he had been pepper-sprayed.

The witnesses watched the man—referred to in the report as the “affected person” or AP—enter a convenience store and exit with a jug of milk, which he then poured over his head.

Multiple witnesses told the IIO the man did not appear to be threatening anyone or behaving aggressively, and the witness who called 911 reported approaching two police officers who were nearby and asking them to help the man.

“The officers told CW1 that they intended to wait for more police to arrive,” the report reads. “CW1 said he did not understand this, as the AP was clearly not in possession of any weapon.”

For their part, the witness officers—referred to in the report as WO1, WO2 and so on—generally told the IIO the situation involved at least one crime in progress, and said they believed the man was a danger to himself or others.

One of the officers described the man as “flailing, shouting and appearing panicked” as he fled one convenience store and entered another.

“He said pedestrians were moving out of the AP’s path as he went from the first store to a second one, coming out a short time later with a jug of milk,” the report reads. “WO1 said he believed the AP had stolen the milk and was about to ‘flee the scene.’ He also said that, based on his belief that the AP was in a state of ‘excited delirium,’ he was concerned the AP might die if not immediately apprehended.”

Police use of force

The officers who were waiting for backup at the scene were joined by others who had “less lethal” weapons with them, including a Taser and a beanbag shotgun, according to the IIO report.

The subject officer, or SO, ended up firing two shots from the beanbag gun into the man’s buttocks.

Subject officers are not required to speak to IIO investigators, and the subject officer in this case chose not to do so. However, he did allow the IIO to review his written police report on the incident.

“I believed the male was arrestable for indecent act, causing a disturbance and being intoxicated in a public place, on top of suspecting him of having just committed a theft,” the SO wrote in his report, as excerpted in the IIO document.

“Furthermore, given the male’s state of intoxication by drugs and his apparent state of psychosis, I believed the male to be a danger to himself and others and believed it was in the interest of public safety to take him into custody as soon as possible.”

Witness officers told the IIO the man ignored multiple shouted commands and appeared to be fleeing from police when he was shot with the beanbag rounds.

Civilian witnesses, meanwhile, described “yelling at police that the AP had been pepper-sprayed and needed assistance,” according to Berglund’s report. They said none of the police officers made any attempt to converse with the man or determine what had happened to him before shouting at him to get on the ground and shooting him when he did not comply.

“CW1 told IIO investigators that he saw approximately eight officers form up in a V-shape and start to approach the AP,” the report reads.

“CW1 saw an officer load his shotgun, and CW1, who was still on the phone with the 911 operator, yelled at the AP to get down. The 911 operator, he said, told CW1 to stop talking to the AP, so he hung up the phone and continued trying to warn the AP to get down on the ground. ‘There were eight police officers,’ said CW1, ‘and none of them took the time to say, “Hey buddy, what’s going on, why are you naked?”’”

After he was shot with the beanbag rounds and placed under arrest, the man went into medical distress, according to the IIO report.

Responding paramedics found him in cardiac arrest and were unable to resuscitate him. The autopsy report listed his cause of death as “Combined effects of bear spray (capsaicin) exposure, methamphetamine and fentanyl use, cardiomegaly, obesity, and physical restraint.”

“There were no signs of asphyxia caused by restraint and there were no significant injuries,” the autopsy report reads, as quoted in the IIO document.

“The non-lethal rounds fired by police caused skin and soft tissue injuries, but no injuries that would have caused or contributed to his death.”

The IIO’s conclusion

Berglund’s report concludes that the force the subject officer used could not be described as “unnecessary, excessive or unreasonable to an extent that would amount to a criminal assault or manslaughter.”

According to the document, this conclusion was based, in part, on court decisions holding that “police use of force cannot be judged, in hindsight, against a standard of perfection.”

One of the witness officers who spoke to the IIO suggested police could have surrounded the man to “contain him from all sides” and determine what assistance he needed, only resorting to force if the man tried to push past them.

“It is an approach that would have offered the possibility of defusing the situation and ending the incident with an outcome where the AP did not die,” the report notes.

Other witness officers disagreed with the suggestion that this was a viable course of action, however, and the report adds that “in most cases” the use of a beanbag shotgun and a brief struggle against restraints would not be expected to cause serious injury or death.

“The contrast between the responses of civilian bystanders and attending police officers to the AP in this case is noteworthy,” Berglund’s report reads.

“Several civilians immediately recognized that the AP appeared to be a victim in distress and attempted to communicate with him and offer assistance. Police officers, on the other hand, seemed to see him as both a risk to himself as well as a threat to public safety that needed to be taken down and overpowered as quickly as possible.”

Ultimately, though things could have gone differently, the approach police took was not unreasonable and not criminal, Berglund concluded.

Vancouver police weigh in

In a statement Friday evening, VPD Deputy Chief Howard Chow offered condolences to Amyotte’s family, saying he recognizes “the ongoing pain and tremendous loss” the family has suffered.

The police statement also emphasizes the finding that officers were not criminally responsible for Amyotte’s death, and notes that the incident “led to speculation and public commentary,” as well as “serious allegations against the officers involved.”

“These officers followed their training and acted within their legal authorities,” said Chow. “This three-year investigative process has been difficult for the family of the man who died, and for the officers who have been under investigation. We appreciate the IIO’s diligence in seeking the truth, and we extend our continued condolences to everyone impacted.”

“This process has demonstrated why it’s important to allow a thorough investigation to take place, that provides answers for everyone involved,” he added.