Article content continued

We apologize, but this video has failed to load.

tap here to see other videos from our team. Try refreshing your browser, or

The lawsuit against the police services board, Chief John Pare and 10 unnamed officers also takes aim at the warrant that brought police to the house two days before Christmas, saying it didn’t include vital information about Maloney’s history of violence, the possibility of weapons in the home and that children would likely be there.

But police say they were aware of the couple’s record for violence and weapons, Maloney’s anti-authority attitude and the likelihood of weapons inside the home, the statement of defence says.

No reason was given why that information wasn’t included in the search warrant application, written by an officer who had never completed one before, said the SIU report that criticized London police over the warrant’s contents.

Police launched an investigation into offensive social media posts attributed to Maloney on Dec. 5, 2016, the statement of defence says.

Statements of claim, and defences filed in response, include allegations not yet tested in court.

Police obtained a warrant on Dec. 21 to search Maloney’s home weeks after a manifesto that included anti-Semitic material was sent to newsletter subscribers at the Hyland Cinema, where Facciolo managed the theatre’s website and sent out email bulletins and Maloney was helping develop its software, the SIU report said.

Police planned to arrest Maloney when he left his house, but they decided to force their way inside to carry out the search warrant after he didn’t come out in two days. Officers announced their purpose for being inside, the statement of defence says, noting Maloney knew about the police presence from a surveillance system.