The Edmonton Police Service (EPS) opened fire with a barrage of bullets on Boxing Day to kill an armed suspect with some of their shots going through neighbourhood walls..The Alberta Serious Incident Response Team (ASIRT) concluded its investigation into the shooting and said, "The subject officers were in a dynamic situation where lives were in danger, and they responded with lethal force.".On Dec. 26, 2018, the EPS shot and killed a 34-year-old wanted man, identified. Police said he had several outstanding warrants and they believed he was armed and dangerous after a surveillance operation..EPS conducted a traffic stop with the help of a tactical unit in the area of 79 Avenue and 71 Street, near the Urban Village condo complex. Two people in the vehicle were ordered out without incident..The man with outstanding warrants remained in the vehicle and refused to cooperate with police.. SKSThe man was carrying this SKS sawed off rifle. ."He was in fact armed with an illegal semi-automatic firearm loaded with 30 cartridges. Officers formulated a plan to have Tactical section officers arrest the man once he exited the vehicle he was in," The ASIRT report stated..Unfortunately, a marked police vehicle drove up to the man and turned the situation into one where many EPS officers surrounded the man in the vehicle..The man did not exit the vehicle and instead shot in the direction of the EPS officers.."The subject officers responded by discharging their firearms and killing the man," ASIRT said.."Officers were in a dynamic situation where lives were in danger, and they responded with lethal force. Once the man discharged his firearm at the officers, the responding uses of force by the subject officers were reasonable.". Shooting sceneShooting scene .The man was treated by EMS and taken to hospital where he was declared dead..The shooting led to five bullets entering residences. One came from the man, and four came from the subject officers. The people inside of the residences had no connection to the man and were going about their lives when the officer-involved shooting occurred.."All of the elements required for a bystander to be hit by a discharge from a police officer’s firearm were present here. There were residents at home, including in the residences that were hit by bullets. At least some of the discharges had the required velocity to go through the wall of the apartment building, as shown by the box of DVDs that was hit by a bullet," ASIRT said..Some of the bullets hit areas where people could be expected, including most dramatically at head height next to a child’s bed.."To the great fortune of everyone involved, these factors did not come together for any single discharge and none of the residents were injured," ASIRT said.. Officers open fireOfficers open fire ."The vast majority of the blame for the officer-involved shooting happening where and how it did rests with the man. If the man had not discharged his firearm at the subject officers, the subject officers would not have returned fire and the apartment building never would have been struck.".ASIRT said the man had been consuming methamphetamine and was carrying an illegal, loaded firearm and, given the man's semi-automatic firearm was loaded with 30 cartridges, it's likely he would have continued to discharge it.."He was a very serious risk to the public. The police knew the man presented a serious risk to police and the public before they initiated contact with him. This was the type of risk that could lead to a shootout in public," ASIRT said..ASIRT stated the defence available to police officers executing their duties, under Sec. 25 of the Criminal Code, and the defence available to anyone defending themselves or someone else, under Sec. 34, would therefore apply to their actions. ."For these reasons, there are no reasonable grounds to believe any of the subject officers committed a criminal offence," Executive Director of ASIRT Michael Ewenson said in the report.
