Article content continued

What was in the slender 18-year-old’s mind the night he was shot and killed by Forcillo on a downtown streetcar? What could he have been thinking? Why did he go from sitting quietly at the rear to suddenly exposing himself and swinging a switchblade at a young female passenger?

Read more…

[/np_storybar]

The “early intervention” process, as it’s called, is aimed at identifying officers who, in the words of the professional standards unit, “may be at risk of entering the disciplinary process.”

An officer who points his Glock .40 calibre semi-automatic gun at a person three times within a rolling 12-month period is the trigger for the early warning system to kick in and issue an alert.

At the time, the 32-year-old officer would have been working in the downtown 14 Division almost three years.

It’s unclear what happened after the alert was issued late in 2012.

Several sources suggest Forcillo was counselled by a supervisor, monitored for a time and perhaps even briefly re-assigned.

Some of those he used his gun to control, one source said, were people “you’d never draw your firearm on.”

But Peter Brauti, Forcillo’s lawyer, said neither the counselling nor monitoring happened.

Brauti said that after a second three-is-too-many alert, a supervisor simply told Forcillo that the incidents in question would have to be reviewed.

After that, Brauti said, nothing happened so far as his client knows.

An officer’s internal record is presumptively inadmissible at trial, and in fact, prosecutors never tried to have any of this information go before the jurors.