SIU clears Halton officer over response to shooting of Toronto lawyer

Share

The Ontario agency that investigates police shootings has cleared a police officer of criminal wrongdoing in his response to the bizarre daytime shooting of a prominent Toronto lawyer last year.

In a news release issued Tuesday morning, the Special Investigations Unit said a Halton Regional Police Service officer was "legally justified" in firing his weapon at a fleeing suspect, 51-year-old Grayson Delong, last September.

The SIU statement presented a chronology of the drama that unfolded that day. Until now, details of the events before and after the shooting of 66-year-old Randall Barrs, a well-known criminal lawyer, have been vague but were known to involve a team of undercover officers working well beyond their jurisdictional boundaries.

The day began with a team of Halton officers being assigned to tail Mr. Delong, a suspect in a number of property offences in the Burlington area, according to the SIU timeline.

Mr. Delong already had an extensive criminal record of mostly low-level crimes. Earlier in 2016, he'd been charged with the break and enter of a store in Mississauga, according to court documents.

Over the course of several hours, the officers followed Mr. Delong in unmarked vehicles from a courthouse in Brampton to a downtown Toronto park, where he allegedly stopped and walked around wearing a construction vest and a blond wig. The surveillance team interpreted Mr. Delong's alleged disguise as evidence he was "preparing to commit a robbery" and alerted Toronto police.

Around 3 p.m., Mr. Delong drove to 23 Bedford Rd., the address of Mr. Barrs' law office, according to the SIU.

One of the Halton undercover officers walked past Mr. Delong's Honda Civic and saw him slouching in the rear seat, so the officer hid in a building that offered a clear view of what Mr. Delong would do next.

At some point, Mr. Delong allegedly left his car, charged toward a man standing in the driveway of 23 Bedford and fired several shots from a semi-automatic pistol. The man, later identified as Mr. Barrs, collapsed to the ground while the shooter retreated back to his car.

The officer who had concealed himself in the building heard shouting and screaming and pursued the shooter on foot with his gun drawn. He came up behind the car, pointed his firearm and yelled, "Police, police, police." The vehicle jerked forward, the SIU statement said, before stopping suddenly, allowing the suspect to shoot through a driver's side window. Just 20 seconds had elapsed since he allegedly approached the lawyer.

The car rolled forward slowly. The officer fired three times from behind the vehicle – two rounds striking the fleeing suspect – then noticed Mr. Delong "slump to the right." One of the unmarked police cars then moved in to block the Honda's movement.

Both Mr. Barrs and Mr. Delong survived the incident. Mr. Delong was charged with 15 counts, including attempted murder.

The SIU put eight investigators and three forensics experts on the case and interviewed four Halton officers and 17 civilian witnesses. The agency also reviewed the notes of Toronto police officers who arrived on the scene, plus videos, photos and gunshot evidence. The SIU determined the Halton officer was legally justified in firing his weapon because he was acting in the course of his duties and believed Mr. Delong posed a threat to police on the scene and the public. "Given that Mr. Delong appeared to have just shot somebody, and had fired additional shots from inside his vehicle, the subject officer's conclusion was more than reasonable," SIU director Tony Loparco said.

Mr. Loparco initially thought the Halton surveillance team may have been able to prevent the shooting by moving in to arrest Mr. Delong earlier, a degree of inaction that could have constituted criminal negligence. Eventually, however, he dismissed the notion. "While his activities certainly warranted suspicion, Mr. Delong was not arrestable for any offences prior to his approaching the male and discharging a firearm," Mr. Loparco said. "After Mr. Delong donned his disguise, the team consulted with nearby police services to determine if Mr. Delong matched the descriptions of any wanted persons. He did not."

Mr. Delong's lawyer, James Miglin, refused to comment on the SIU's findings.