The Sammy Yatim case is one of many cases that thoroughly indicated how injustice is shown of individuals suffering from mental illnesses by the police force. This is through the use of police brutality, incorrect sentencing, and misconduct of the police policies under the National Use of Force Framework.
On the night of July 27, 2013, on Dundas Street, a shooting occurred and Toronto Police officer James Forcillo committed a crime of murder to a boy named Sammy Yatim. Forcillo, standing on the street alongside with at least 20 other policemen, fired nine shots at Yatim. He stood in the empty streetcar, carrying a penknife and acted erratically with all the confusion, as he was suffering from a psychological mental illness, yet faced at gunpoint. The officer proceeded to burn six more shots even after he had been hit with the initial three shots, which had injured him as he laid thrashing. Forcillo shot Yatim 9 more times, and 6 of them Yatim. But, the first 3 that hit him killed him. Many in the vicinity, recorded the full shooting, which aired immediately drawing everyone’s attention towards this incident.
Yatim’s death caused all of Toronto to question the authority and reasoning of police brutality caused by the Toronto Police force. Under The Law Dictionary police brutality is defined, as “Police brutality is the use of excessive and/or unnecessary force by police when dealing with civilians.” (S Danilina, 1891-1910). Although it may seem like a one-sided debate, one would argue justice for Sammy, as they believe what the police did was wrong and cruel. These individuals would want to see the police officers responsible for his death to be charged and arrested due to the actions they took, as they were incorrect. This was shown on August 19, 2013, when the jury got up with the verdict of attempted murder in relation to the second burst of six bullets. Forcillo was not charged with murder even though he fired extra 9 shots, yet Yatim was down with the first three. In rendering a verdict of attempted murder, the jury created a big difference within the number of shots, stating consequences for the first round of shots was justifiable, but ignoring the fact that the second round was clearly shown as an overkill.
Furthermore, Forcillo was convicted of murder three years later stated in Toronto Star ‘Const. James Forcillo sentenced to 6 years in Sammy Yatim shooting’ staff reporter Alyshah Hashamstaff states;
“Const. James Forcillo will spend his first night in jail following a precedent-setting sentence of six years in prison for shooting 18-year-old Sammy Yatim on a streetcar in July 2013 but may be released on bail pending appeal in time for the long weekend” (Hashamstaff, 2016)
This may be considered “justice” to some; I believe it is not as the officer was still given the opportunity to be bailed out of his charges, and along with the many years it took in order to fully agree upon the final murder charges he faced.
Proof of this was also shown in CTV News On ‘Toronto Cop Sentenced To Six Years In Shooting Of Teen On Streetcar’ Paola Loriggio states,
“ The last three years have been difficult for everyone involved, including the families of Sammy Yatim and James Forcillo,“ Saunder said. The Toronto police service will continue to protect and support the public, and each other, and I am certain members will continue to do jobs professionally and with respect.” (Loriggio, The Canadian Press, 2016).
In my opinion, I believe the officer is very dangerous and incompetent as his conviction took many years to establish. It indicates justice for the officer and his department of not being convicted of murder, rather attempted murder. It is unjust and bias for Yatim himself, his family and the public that want justice for him. Constable Forcillo’s first conviction should have been punished for overkill within the multiple rounds of shots hitting the poor disabled child who suffered from mental health issues. Police offices tend to take advantage of their use of a pistol in situations like this; their job is not to wound innocent civilians. That one officer indicated this in the video itself with two rounds of shots ending up to the death of an innocent mentally ill civilian.
In an interview conducted by CBC News upon a security expert and ex-Toronto police officer Ross McLean about the killing of Sammy Yatim by Constable James Forcillo, he said, “This officer’s going to have to explain why he used the level of force he did.” He went on to say, “He (Yatim) was fairly contained. He was in the streetcar. He (Forcillo) could have let that guy sit there all night.” (CBC News, Nathan Denette, July 2013) This proves that Sammy did not receive any justice at all which I believe is wrong due to officer Forcillo’s actions. Adding on, the only officer to fire any shots was Forcillo; others were near the front door of the streetcar restrained or stayed watching as no one from the back fired. With Forcillo as the lone gunman who shot at Yatim, the Crown and Jury may argue that Forcillo acted in such reckless way due to fear. Yet, he fired a large amount of shot that ended his life. This indicates the injustice, as many officers and the public, did not support the action officer Forcillo had taken causing the death of Sammy Yatim. This led to no justice achieved for the boy and his family along with many individuals in the public and police force who disagree with Forcillo’s actions.
The police also have their own conduct and policies that are necessary to follow. Under the article The Shooting of Sammy Yatim ‘Justified or Not?’ the author James G Jewell discusses the National use of force Framework;
“ In order to accomplish the use of deadly force, three necessary elements are required a present weapon, intent of a crime, and the way its delivery such as if mens rea/ actus reus is present, using the weapon against one.” (James G Jewell, 2013)
I disagree with this statement as this is misconduct of the police officer duty, the officer could have shot a couple times in the air, asking Sammy to go on the ground, which would have simply been enough. Therefore, one would raise a valid question regarding the justification for the use of deadly force after the first three shots were fired. I believe that there was no justification for additional shots, as they must meet the same criteria used to assess the first three shots fired. This explains injustice for Sammy Yatim because the delivery system of the way the boy acted did not exist after the first round of shots; he was knocked out on the floor. Even though Sammy was in possession of a weapon (pen-knife) the fact of the matter is that he did not physically harm anyone in any way neither did he take any hostages. So, I argue with so many police officers present and some of them without weapons drawn why did this one police shoot, yet others remained standing. Only around a scene of one man holding a three-inch blade on an empty streetcar. The way this situation was escalated seemed too harsh and complicated understanding why those many shots and a tazor is needed to be used in order to suppress Yatim, trying to establish an alibi due to Sammy having a non-lethal indicating the unjust on this case. As many of these policies were present in the case of Yatim’s shooting tactical consideration was not especially with the extra 6 shot first right after he dropped after the initial three on top of that the tazoring trying to for an alibi. As well as ignoring the fact of being non-judgmental, one should be putting into consideration why one is doing such a thing rather just the facts of the issue. Allowing for the voice of one to be heard, so he/she can clarify any messages and showing empathy and justice rather the unjust in this case.
On top of that, there are many other precedent cases that evolve within the similar issues or facts based on the common law legal system, establishing previous legal cases that bind or persuade a court or other tribunals when deciding later cases as they contain similar issues and facts to Sammy Yatim’s case. There are many common cases such as the Robert Dziekański taser incident. In cases like this police judgments and actions are questioned as to a fundamental consideration about the way they escalate situations.
In February 2008, focused on the death of Robert Dziekanski in a story called Cracking Down on Tasers. Dziekanski had flown to Vancouver from Poland to see his mother. He did not know how to speak in English; he was lost and disturbed in the Vancouver airport’s for 10 hours straight. No one spoke to him or tried to help him until it was too late; the RCMP force showed up because he was forming a ruckus with some furniture nearby. The police force then used an excessive force of a taser to suppress the distressed man.
The main problem with this issue was that Dziekanski was tasered 5 times. He suffered from a psychological disorder then along with the 5 powerful high voltage charges from the tasers, lead to the man dead. Another passenger had recorded the incident on video of the brutal scene. Excessive force was used by the police force in order to detain the poor man, without the use of a tazor as a primary takedown. However, when the police officers view the video they seem to tell a different story stating; he showed mental states (excited delirium) in which was seen as a distress, he seemed to have lost himself and was unable to regain himself. Therefore the police force lost his control and had to depend on tazoring the poor guy leading towards his death. (Chau, Herman.). The video of the incident showed distress, yet the action of the police officers did not make sense as the use of a tazor is only when one is causing harm to another, as well as Robert was not posing a threat he was just mentally confused. Allegations, negligence, systemic, civil action best way change can be made through criminal proceedings on matters involving psychological damages to family members. Similar to the Yatim shooting case the article about the death of Robert Dziekanski posed many questions on justice being achieved or no, offering almost no final answer. Both, these cases raise the question of whether there is even justification for the shooting. This similar case encourages on to stay away from rushing to a final judgment.
To conclude, I believe that in the case of Sammy Yatim and justice of him was not achieved, due to this one-sided situation, factual evidence of police misconduct shown through excessive force, overkill and cruelty. Along with many legal precedent cases which evolved around the same results of action, favoring the police force rather justice for individuals due to the wrongdoing of the police department