Rob Maltar didn't believe it when the province's Special Investigations Unit ruled his brother had killed himself with a police officer's gun. But he didn't know where to turn.

Early last year, Maltar took the case to the Ontario Ombudsman, complaining the SIU was biased in favour of the police. After receiving 20 similar complaints, Ombudsman André Marin announced a full-scale probe into the civilian agency on June 7, 2007.

The Maltars were hopeful, if skeptical, that something would come of their complaint.

Yesterday, something did.

In a scathing 121-page report, Marin hammered the SIU for allowing the police to control its investigations and adopting an "impotent stance" when challenged by police.

"There's no doubt in my mind that an SIU investigation is one which is currently done through blue-coloured glasses. There is no doubt that there is a police bias in their approach to investigations," Marin said at Queen's Park yesterday.

"The SIU has not only become complacent about ensuring that police officials follow the rules, it has bought into the fallacious argument that SIU investigations aren't like other criminal cases and it is acceptable to treat police witnesses differently from civilians," the report said.

Marin issued 46 recommendations aimed at the SIU, the Ministry of the Attorney General and the province on how to move forward.

"There's a point when you can't unring a bell," he said, referring to cases that were cleared years ago. However, he added, "the SIU may well decide to take another look at a case" in light of his findings.

That's what the Maltars were counting on.

"Our lives have been on hold while we waited for this. To see what it would say," said Rob Maltar. "What this report means for us is the door has not been completely closed. We are going to be requesting on or about Oct. 16 (the date the new director assumes the post) that SIU re-evaluate this case."

On Sept. 18, 2005, James Maltar was shot in a Port Credit police detachment after being arrested. Six months into an 11-month probe, the SIU redesignated one of the subject officers as a witness officer and ruled James had shot himself.

It was one of eight cases highlighted in Marin's report, "Oversight Unseen." The investigation, one of the largest in the history of the Ombudsman's office, was released yesterday afternoon at Queen's Park – nearly a year behind schedule.

Among the most serious problems identified, Marin noted police are rarely interviewed within the regulated time frame – no later than 24 hours – following an incident.

"(Interviews) are all too often postponed – for weeks, sometimes even months," Marin said in the report. "Rather than vigorously inquiring into and documenting delays and other evidence of police resistance, the SIU deals with issues of police non-co-operation as isolated incidents. It ignores systemic implications."

But, as the report later details, it may be difficult for SIU officials to monitor problems since the majority of its recordkeeping is on paper.

"Unlike most of the police forces it oversees, the SIU does not have a computerized case-management system, making systemic monitoring and analysis virtually impossible," Marin said in the report. "The SIU's antique technology also hampers its investigative ability. There is no easy way to cross-reference cases to determine if particular police officers or services display a pattern of conduct."

Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading...

Marin also found that notification is a problem. Police forces are legislatively required to contact the SIU immediately whenever officers are involved in the serious injury, sexual assault or death of a civilian. Being on the scene quickly is imperative to any investigation.

"Unfortunately, in many cases involving the SIU, the `golden hour' has often come and gone well before the SIU is even aware that an incident within its mandate has occurred," Marin noted.

"Often police union lawyers are at the scene before the SIU," Marin added at yesterday's news conference. That's an issue that Judge George Adams also highlighted in his review of the SIU back in 1998. Despite a decade of supposed progress, it seems little has changed.

In Maltar's case, four of the eight SIU officers didn't arrive on scene until up to five hours after Maltar had been shot, the report says.

Marin went on to hammer the Attorney General's office for sitting on the "sidelines."

Following an investigation, the director of the SIU – currently James Cornish, who will be replaced by Crown attorney Ian D. Scott in two weeks– submitted a report to the Attorney General. In 1998, Adams recommended these reports be made public when a charge is dismissed. In 2003, Adams again reviewed the agency and noted the reports were still not released.

Yesterday, Marin again reiterated the need for the release of director's reports when an officer has been cleared of wrongdoing to promote transparency and public trust.

Following his announcement, Marin was congratulated by Toronto lawyer Julian Falconer.

"That's a courageous report," said Falconer, one of the first to bring concerns to Marin in late 2006.

At the time, Falconer was representing Hafeez Mohamed. Mohamed was arrested for impaired driving on May 23, 2006. Falconer said the arresting officers used "such force as it ended up leaving him in the intensive care unit at St. Michael's Hospital for some 57 days." The SIU determined no charges should be laid.





Read more about: