Citizens have a right to film police but must comply with officer commands, Ontario’s Special Investigations Unit has concluded in clearing Toronto police in an arrest that left a hotel guest with a broken rib and other injuries.

“There is no law that I am aware of that prohibits citizens from recording police activity in public areas,” SIU director Ian Scott said in a news release.

“However, the right to record police activity should not be confused with the authority of the police to require citizens to comply with lawful commands to control a disorderly situation.”

Karl Andrus of St. Catharines, a 35-year-old dispatcher for an IT company with no criminal record, recorded video on his smartphone of arrests of two members of a family at Toronto’s Sheraton Centre Hotel on the night of Aug. 29, 2012.

After a couple of minutes of recording from an area where other hotel guests were also standing — and some of them making recordings as well — Andrus was told by an officer that he’d “filmed enough” and was in the way, and was told by police repeatedly to move back.

Andrus, who is suing police over what came next and whose story was featured in the Star, said he felt he had the right to be where he was and continue recording.

Andrus moved back to where he started his filming, again, with other guests beside him. After being warned he would be arrested, an officer approached him and started moving him back.

At one point in the video, Andrus, smartphone in one hand, raises his other arm.

The SIU concluded that the arm motion was “aggressive” and justified a subsequent takedown by a number of officers that left Andrus with bruises, bumps, an abrasion on his head and a broken rib.

The arresting officer, Const. Jeffery Riel, had the “lawful authority to arrest him for assaulting a peace officer. As well, other officers had the authority to assist in that arrest,” Scott said in an unusually lengthy and detailed statement released Thursday.

“Given Mr. Andrus’ resistance, I am of the view that the involved officers did not use excessive force in effecting this lawful arrest. Accordingly, I have no reasonable grounds to believe that the subject officer committed a criminal offence.”

Scott said “the subject officer (Riel) was attempting to control a difficult situation, and had the lawful authority to require Mr. Andrus to step away from the arrest scene whether or not he was video-recording the involved officers’ actions.”

Andrus, who can be heard on video saying he was not resisting, couldn’t be reached Thursday.

It was his civil lawyer, Barry Swadron, who notified the SIU of the case.

“I can’t understand how any reasonable person would watch the video and come to the conclusion that the raising of his hand was assaultive,” Swadron said in a telephone interview.

“It was clearly defensive. We’ll let the court decide.”

Andrus, who was charged with assaulting and obstructing police, is seeking $1.35 million in damages and an admission that police violated his rights. The criminal charges against him were withdrawn in an arrangement that saw him do 25 hours of community service at a food bank.

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

In a statement of defence, police deny Andrus’s rights were violated and argue that any injuries caused were not their fault. None of the allegations have been proven in court.

The incident was captured on hotel security cameras and Andrus’s smartphone.

Read more about: