New Paragraph

ANALYSIS: Anti-racism protests: legitimate concerns overshadowed by criminality
June 1, 2020

(Photo by Philadelphia Inquirer via AP)

The violent protests across the U.S. following the murder of African-American George Floyd at the hands of a bully white Minneapolis cop last week continue to grow in numbers and intensity. Peaceful protest is a fundamental right of both American and Canadian citizens, but the level of violence and destruction we are witnessing is disheartening and never justifiable.

 

Former officer Derek Chauvin was arrested and charged in that horrific case of police brutality. Some of his former colleagues may also be charged as a result of the ongoing investigation, so while many remain hopeful that the justice system is properly running its course in this case, millions of Americans view this as yet another act of racism and a criminal use of deadly force by police.

 

In a number of cases police have been quite justified in taking the life of a criminal who just happened to be a person of colour and race was not a factor in the decision by police. Sometimes the officer using deadly force was also African-American. These are all tragic situations regardless. In other circumstances young black lives like that of Trayvon Martin and Ahmaud Arbery have been unjustifiably taken by people who were not police officers at all, but all of this tragedy unfortunately blends into an overall mantle of real and perceived racism and police brutality.

 

Thousands have taken to the streets in protest – many peacefully and others aggressively. Protesting by yelling, marching, blocking streets and swearing at police is one thing, but a number of other people have taken it to a frightening level. Police are being viciously assaulted in cities nowhere near Minneapolis. Businesses are being looted, burned and otherwise destroyed. Many jobs are being lost at a time when employment numbers are already plummeting due to COVID-19. People are being arrested and injured. A Federal security officer was killed in Oakland. Police have no choice but to ramp up their own militarization in response and the National Guard has been deployed to Minnesota and many other states. They are trained as soldiers, not cops and their rules of engagement differ.

 

Most often, peaceful protestors and rightfully concerned citizens lose control of their legitimate agenda on both sides of our border to idiots who want nothing more than to loot, cause damage and fight with the police. Extreme left and right agitators come in from other centres and couldn’t care less about the underlying issues. The important and valid message is then lost to criminality. Well-intentioned protestors lose their voice and their credibility.

 

No good will come out of this and God forbid protestors or police officers are killed in one of these skirmishes. The resulting spiral will not be good for anyone.

 

We cannot forget that were also in the middle of a pandemic. Millions of people are out of work, with their health and livelihoods in jeopardy. This not only adds to their level of anxiety but allows them more time and freedom to get involved in protest activities. Most commonly the mob mentality takes over and people who start out as peaceful protestors get caught up in the momentum and conduct acts that they never imagined participating in.

 

The police have a critical role to play in terms of how they respond to these difficult situations. They’re often being viciously attacked and undoubtedly in fear for their own safety. They don’t want or deserve to become punching bags or have objects hurled at them because of the illegal actions of some cop they don’t even know and they would rather be anywhere on earth but dealing with a violent mob. Cop tempers are going to flare as a result, but firing rubber bullets at media representatives and/or using excessive force against peaceful protestors won’t help their credibility or public trust and support whatsoever. They are paid to be professional and judicious, so they must always take the high road and not exacerbate an already grievous situation. Then police leaders need to respond appropriately when officers don’t play by established rules. A number of Chiefs have done just that. Others are front and centre in trying to bring calm from chaos.

 

We have seen very positive instances where peaceful protestors have actually banded together to protect police and prevent properties from being destroyed. Hopefully that mindset continues and grows, as the crowd can at times more effectively police themselves than law enforcement can. Concurrently, community and police leaders must do all they can to prevent their people from committing acts that unnecessarily spark even more violence.

 

Closer to home, Toronto Police are dealing with the controversy surrounding their interaction with 29 year old Regis Korchinski-Paquet, who died after falling from the balcony of her apartment last week on May 27th. That tragedy is being independently investigated by the province’s civilian police oversight body, the Special Investigation Unit (SIU), so Toronto Police cannot publicly release any details about what their officers saw or did. Other than some rumours emanating from family and friends of the deceased, there is no evidence from video or independent witnesses that suggests any wrongdoing by police in this instance. Time will tell, but if grounds to lay charges do exist, SIU will undoubtedly lay them. SIU is often criticized by both police and the public regarding the time investigations take and on occasion its findings, but Ontario has been lightyears ahead of all provinces and most U.S. states in the efficacy of independent oversight of police use of deadly force.

 

On the heels of the Minneapolis case, this Toronto death also resulted in a massive anti-racism demonstration in Toronto on Saturday. An estimated crowd of 4000 people marched the streets – although largely very peacefully, then protested outside Toronto Police Headquarters. There was certainly some public tension along the route, but it doesn’t appear that any violence or arrests resulted. The fact that Ms. Korchinski-Paquet’s family called for a peaceful demonstration likely contributed to the calmer atmosphere. A large Vancouver demonstration also remained peaceful, but another in Montreal saw some violence occur.

 

I pray that some semblance of sanity soon prevails before this bedlam gets even worse. In my view it will take strong “leadership”, including a continuum of respectful dialogue among elected officials at all levels; police, protest, religious and community leaders; criminal justice system players; parents; community members; as well as unbiased media reporting, to at least calm the storm. From there, those same influencers need to work together and lead lasting change to prevent and eliminate racism through all sectors across the continent.

 

We will never totally end racism unfortunately. It will always exist in different ways within some cultures and among some individuals. But no matter our lot in life, we all have a role to play to set the positive example and help ensure that becomes the exception and not the norm.

Leadership involves risk, especially in policing

By Chris Lewis • March 28, 2026
Leadership is inundated with risk, every hour of every day, in all sectors. In policing, legislative authorities and established policy are the ever-present guideposts, but occasionally policy just doesn’t apply. At times someone has to just make a decision to do something, or not, or they will fail the public they serve and the personnel it is their duty to lead. If it goes bad, time to own up, do damage control, learn from it and move forward. It always frightened me when I saw some at the senior executive level in policing think that supervisors and managers operate in a pristine little bubble where nothing should ever go wrong. Then when it did because some supervisor tried their best to make something work for all the right reasons, they wanted to pigeon-hole the person that took the risk. There were times during my own career when executives were not encouraged to take any risk either. In fact, taking risk was career risk in itself. Despite the best of intentions, if it went bad, the one ‘responsible’ be forever labelled as having failed. Even if the gamble went well, the jaundiced eyes from above would still forever look at them as being a potential liability. It became the “Oh, him. He’s the one that...” At times the daily decision making of high-level commanders would be second-guessed by those in the executive suites – some of whom had never really commanded anything. My buddy retired Chief Wayne Frechette used to describe these folks as: “They’ve never been out after dark on company time.” I know this same concept was alive in many other police services. Some at executive levels actually did serve in operational roles at some point but they never took a risk. Somehow, they were fortunate to skate through difficult situations through sheer luck as opposed to good decision-making and never developed any scar tissue along the way. They didn’t learn from failure – they survived by luck. They also were viewed by weak executives above them as being golden because there was never a milli-second of negativity around them. They were Teflon. But those that worked under their “command” (for lack of a better word) had no respect for them. They simply watched them walk around with coffee in hand, never leaving the office or making a decision. It wasn’t leadership, but it did pave the way to stardom from on high, for some. True leaders do take risks at times. Many I worked with and for did it all and did it well. They did so in the best interests of those they served and those they led, because it wasn’t about themselves, but was done in the service of those that placed their trust in them. Policy simply doesn’t fit every situation. It is most often a guide that anticipates most circumstances that employees will face, particularly the more common (high-frequency) ones. But it cannot predict every possible scenario. When that happens in policing, it can occur in very unlikely situations (low-frequency) that are incredibly high-risk. Supervisors cannot say “Sorry folks, the book doesn’t cover this one” and run away crying. They also don’t have time to tell bad guys, “Hey big fella, sit tight. We need to take a pause here and get the whiteboard out so we can have a group-think about how to stop your murderous rampage.” I think that many pseudo-leaders – far too many, are afraid to make risky decisions out of fear that an error will jeopardize their career. Instead, they risk their careers by not making decisions. Or as I like to say: “their fear of career-risk, risks their careers.” This can be fatal in the policing world. When a police supervisor shirks their responsibilities or quivers, sucks their thumb, and prays for the situation to go away, thankfully constables will come forward and do their best to get their teammates through it. Sometimes that ends well and when the supervisor emerges from their fear-induced coma, they will more often than not take credit for the success. But when the situation goes to hell-in-a-handbasket – despite best efforts, the pseudo-leader will document the risk-taking employee and add another bullet-point to their list of things they’ve done to “hold people accountable.” The panel at their next promotional interview will likely hear the false rendition proudly told. I hear examples of this practise from serving police officers across North America on a much too frequent basis. True leaders develop a culture of trust among those they lead that their suggestions and feedback are encouraged and valued. Their confidence that the leader wants their input encourages them to constantly analyze situations and give thought to what policy says and the options available when policy says nothing. That is good for the employee’s development and may save the leader’s hind-end and the continuity of the team on occasion when an employee steps forward in a crisis. Having said that, there will clearly be situations where there isn’t time for the whiteboard, and a decision needs to be made by the responsible “leader.” When it doesn’t work out, the real leader will step forward and be accountable. But when it does go well, the true leader will allow the light to shine on the team they have the honour to lead. In my view, we’re not seeing enough of that in North American policing. We need more genuine leaders at all levels of law enforcement organizations. Developing and promoting real leaders that can manage risk effectively is a must. Anything less fails everyone.

Why Joint Forces Operations Are No Longer Optional

By Chris Lewis • March 26, 2026
They used to be simply a "nice to have."

Police investigating police: Is there another option?

By Chris Lewis • March 18, 2026
The March 17 th announcement by the Toronto Police Service (TPS) regarding the Ontario Provincial Police (OPP) investigation into allegations by an Ontario Justice that three TPS officers colluded and lied during a 2024 murder trial against a man that ran over and killed TPS Constable Jeffrey Northrup in 2021, has further inflamed the debate over who should investigate alleged police wrongdoing. This instance combined with the recent arrests and ongoing police investigation into several TPS officers for their alleged involvement with organized crime, has brought this discussion to a boiling point. I appreciate the public perceptions around this investigative model given that the average citizen doesn’t necessarily understand the professionalism and commitment of police investigative teams like the recent OPP Criminal Investigation Branch (CIB) group. I have all the confidence the world in that team, but I also personally know the ability and integrity of the OPP Detective Inspector in-charge. So, if these investigations aren’t carried out by police, who will do them? They do not fall under the mandate of the Ontario Special Investigations Unit (SIU), which by the way is largely comprised of former police criminal investigators and forensic identification experts, many of whom investigated homicides in police services. For SIU to assume a larger role, they would have to grow exponentially and expand their team of ‘former cops’. These cases generally do not fall under the purview of Ontario’s Inspectorate of Policing either. They would loosely fall under the oversight role of Ontario’s Law Enforcement Complaints Agency (LECA), who is responsible for receiving, managing and overseeing public complaints against police, but frankly they don’t have mandate or the horsepower to conduct complex criminal investigations. They oversee the “public complaints” that may lead to a criminal investigation, but the investigation would be the responsibility of a police service to conduct. An expansion of the LECA would require a tremendous amount of funding and human resources, most of whom would also be former police officers. Hiring and training civilians to conduct such investigations is an option, but largely an incomprehensible one. Police criminal investigators are trained officers that generally start out as uniformed officers responding to occurrences and investigating more routine and less serious crimes, i.e. minor assaults and property crimes. They build investigative expertise over time, including in interviewing and interrogation; gathering and securing physical evidence; legal processes like obtaining judicial authorizations; presenting evidence in court; and various investigative strategies. They learn how to work with special police units that provide specific investigative skills, and more. All of this doesn’t happen overnight, but over a period of years and with the tutelage of more experienced investigators along that journey. Trying to turn a group of young and well-educated civilians – no matter how intelligent and well-intended, into a team of elite investigators, would be a complete disaster and unfair to the public or to the officers being investigated. Over my many years as a member or as the Director of the OPP CIB, my colleagues and I investigated criminal allegations against cops from other agencies. Before the SIU was formed, we investigated officers from many Ontario police services – large and small, who had used deadly force. Many were cleared and a number were arrested and charged. We also investigated criminal allegations against police chiefs in Ontario. Again, several were appropriately cleared, and some were brought before the courts. Municipal, provincial and federal elected officials were similarly investigated and some charged. Our members also investigated police officers in other provinces, including high-ranking ones. I personally investigated two Royal Newfoundland Constabulary officers that were involved in an arrest that result in the death of a suspect. They were properly exonerated, but I would have charged them in a heartbeat if they had wrongfully killed than man. I arrested an OPP Sergeant for sexual assault. A CIB colleague investigated and arrested two different OPP officers for criminal offences. Both of those officers had been personal friends of mine and years later committed suicide. There are tons of similar examples that I can refer to over my career. All of these involved the oversight and legal analysis of a Crown Attorney, sometimes from another province. The interesting thing, and what most of the anti-police folks will never believe, is that in every single one of those investigations, the dialogue that I was involved in with other officers that I worked with or supervised, involved doing what was right. In other words, “If the allegation is substantiated, we will put the case together, arrest them and put them before the courts.” Not even once, did we think about or do anything that would give an officer a pass when they committed a criminal offence. Never. I have every confidence in the world that the vast majority of municipal and RCMP colleagues across Canada would operate under the same guiding principle. Has the occasional officer worked in conflict with that approach? Undoubtedly. Were some investigators not as committed or capable as they should be and perhaps did a poor investigation accidentally or deliberately? Quite likely so. But I truly believe those cases are the exception, not the rule in criminal investigations. Where I more often believe poor investigations or deliberate attempts to inappropriately give a colleague a break continues to occur, is in Police Act investigations, where policy or employee harassment wrongdoings are suspected. I like to think that the focus on that continues to improve, but not fast enough in some cases. Sadly, I know now that unbeknownst to me at the time, it happened under my watch. A focus for my next article. The public and police deserve the very best of investigators to ensure that bad cops are effectively put out of business and good officers are cleared. If there’s another effective option that would appease the doubting public – aside from using current officers from other agencies or creating a new and costly entity that would be staffed by former police officers, I’d like to hear it.