Given the unusual evidence now emerging regarding the deadly, downtown Toronto altercation between former Ontario Attorney General Michael Bryant and bicycle courier, Darcy Allan Sheppard, it is now abundantly fair to question whether the Toronto Police may have jumped the gun in charging Mr. Bryant before all the evidence was in.
Mr. Bryant, 43, was charged Tuesday with criminal negligence causing death after the incident which occurred Monday evening.
Through some excellent reporting by Toronto Star reporter Cathal Kelly today, we learn that only an hour before the Bloor Street altercation that would leave Mr. Sheppard dead, he was subject of a domestic disturbance complaint by his girlfriend, and in police hands:
Less than an hour before his path would fatally cross that of former Ontario attorney general Michael Bryant, Darcy Allan Sheppard was sitting in the back of a police cruiser.
Sheppard had been trying to get into an apartment on George St., south of Allan Gardens. Until a week before, he had lived there with his girlfriend, Misty. Then he had rented a place in the west end.
On Monday night, he showed up at the rundown building near Jarvis and Gerrard Sts. After eight days of sobriety, he had been drinking. Police said they were called. When officers arrived shortly after 9 p.m., they told Sheppard, 33, to leave and not come back.
...By 9:45 p.m., Sheppard was cycling west along the stretch of Bloor St. W. often called the Mink Mile. After passing the intersection of Bloor and Bay Sts., Sheppard collided with Bryant's black convertible Saab.
...Police would later call the accident that brought the two men together a "minor collision." Sheppard appeared unhurt. He angrily slammed his bag down on the hood of Bryant's car.
Despite the evening chill, the Saab's top was down. Sheppard and Bryant began jawing at each other. Bryant's 42-year-old wife, lawyer Susan Abramovitch, was in the passenger seat... According to witnesses, Bryant cut the argument short by pulling away. As he headed westbound on Bloor St., Sheppard chased the car on foot. He grabbed hold of the vehicle on the driver's side. It's not clear if he was trying to get into the car, get at the driver or merely prevent him from leaving.
Toronto police are investigating whether a cyclist killed in an altercation with a car driven by former Ontario attorney general Michael Bryant grabbed the driver or the wheel.
Sgt. Tim Burrows said police have seized a number of video surveillance tapes from the stretch of Bloor Street where the confrontation occurred and are examining them frame-by-frame to confirm the accuracy of witness accounts that have suggested the cyclist may have been trying to get Bryant into a headlock and that the two may have been wrestling for control of the wheel.
- Garry J. Wise, Toronto
UPDATE:
I'd like to welcome readers from Bike Forums who have clicked through in response to this post at your messageboard:
Regarding Michael Bryant's murder of cyclist Darcy Sheppard, this attorney said it's perfectly acceptable to kill the cyclist when he's holding on for dear life to your car.
Bah.
If I understood the facts to be that Mr. Sheppard was "holding on for dear life," as opposed to the version of facts consistently described in news reports including those excerpted above, that Mr. Sheppard was behaving in a threatening, aggressive manner toward Mr. Bryant as this horrible episode developed, my comments would have been quite different.
If you are aware of credible, contrary evidence, please comment and let me and Wise Law Blog readers know - with links. We are interested.
- Garry J. Wise
Visit our Toronto Law Firm website: www.wiselaw.net
EMPLOYMENT LAW • CIVIL LITIGATION • WILLS AND ESTATES • FAMILY LAW & DIVORCE
ORIGINALLY POSTED AT WISE LAW BLOG • SUBSCRIBE TO WISE LAW BLOG
25 comments:
But then why did Mr. Bryant accelerate into objects and attempt to dislodge the cyclist a' la Mad Max? At the very least it's an utterly disproportional response, and if, in fact, he ran his bumper into the back wheel of the bike, in my books he assaulted the cyclist first. When you're operating something that large and powerful, you have a duty of care.
I must say that I've come to similar conclusions after reading Christie Blatchford's column today. I've been imagining being in a convertible, being approached in a threatening manner by a drunken man, and then being pursued and my driver's mirror grabbed.
I think I would have reacted instinctively just as Bryant appears to have done. I would, in brief, have tried to shake the man off. That this ended tragically does not appear to be Bryant's fault--the dead man was the author, I believe, of his own misfortune.
Well gordeauz,
Once you are attacked by a drunken cyclist suddenly at your car, get back to us and let us know how you reacted to such a situation. I know if someone attacked me and i was driving, I'd nail the gas. I suppose you would sit there, turn the car off, and lower your collar to get strangled.
When you are frightened for your life you do not realize where you are except to get the hell out of there.
If I was hit by a car, I would be angry and not want them to just drive off.
It seems like the cyclist was clearly angry (if you ride a bike that you love and have is damaged then you get angry). On top of that, in an incident with a car (which is scary and will set the adrenaline pumping), unless the driver is very apoligetic and concerned for my well being then it would probably make me even more angry.
If he then tried to drive away, it seems only natural to try to get them to stop.
I guess he didn't really think when he first clung on to the car, but once it started moving with speed, there is no way he was just going to let go. I can easily imagine getting into that situation. And once in it, very hard to get out.
There is talk that he was drunk, but it seems like many hours had passed, and the cops would not let him out if he was still drunk. So the driver would not be able to know if he had been drinking. So people's arguments that he faced a drunk angry threatening man is misleading.
Not Bryants fault?
Who had his foot on the gas pedal, and steered into oncoming traffic, then into the sidewalk to bash a human body against fixed objects at a very high rate of speed?
That was Bryant. No one else.
Further, it was described by witnesses as a confrontation, loud, mutual and abusive, stemming from a traffic incident seconds before. He was not scared, he was angry. Very angry.
You think the aggressive Bryant, a large, fit , well-trained and currently training Boxer described as having powerful arms and a grip of iron was scared? While in Yorkville in his Saab?
He could have simply punched the man, once or as many times as he would like, being a trained fighter. Having boxed I know a well trained fighter like Bryant can subdue an untrained man of lesser stature and probably confused quickly and easily.
He could have called out to the hundreds of people surrounding, for assistance.
He could have, as an officer of the court, gotten out of his vehicle and restrained, even arrested the man using any and all necessary physical force.
Because he was enraged and angry, he choose instead to violently batter the life out of the mans body using his vehicle, without regard to other road users or the pedestrians on the sidewalk.
Navigation, the PR firm hired to disparage the victim and make Bryant appear weak, timid and scared in order to justify his violence, has it's work cut out for it.
They have to convince us this rich, powerful, resourceful man trained in violence and law was fearful and fleeing a smaller, less successful, less fit man who was clearly less capable and having emotional issues.
They have to convince us that after exchanging harsh words with this lesser man, and striking the back heel of his bike with his bumper, that Bryant then somehow became afraid and entered the mentally cathartic state of flight response, fleeing without realizing the serious nature of his actions, thinking only of escape.
It just didn't happen that way. He was very angry and he killed a man when he knew very well he did not have to do it, and in a horrible way in front of many people.
Any negliegence on Sheppard's part does not necessarily excuse negligence on Bryant's part. Sheppard is dead, killed, it seems, by Bryant's car. Just because Sheppard may have acted wrongfully by grabbing onto a moving vehicle, does not mean that his life is forfeit. Bryant's response has to be proportional to the threat he was faced with. This is his responsibility as a person under our law and also as a driver under out law. This may come down to deciding if Bryant had sufficient time and opportunity to come up with something better, like, say, hitting his brake.
Just the other week, a woman was convicted of manslaughter. The facts of the case:
1. She was in her home hosting a party making food in the kitchen. A knife was in her hand as she cut food.
2. A drug dealer she owed money to came into the kitchen
3. He assaulted her.
4. She stuck him once with the knife and he died.
Result: Guilty of manslaughter
Reason: Disproportinate response to the threat at hand.
If Bryant was assualted and in a panic get to nevertheless drive in a manner dangerous to the public which was a marked departure from the standard of a reasonbly prudent driver, if not also reckless and wanton, how long do we give him driving like that before he starts to take blame for what came to pass?
I think that Bryant was in a bad spot. But this happens to drivers all the time (thoguh not this specific exotic circumstance), and it is not unusual at all for charges to be laid when there's a death. if Bryant did not clarify what happened to the police, then what the police know is that Bryant was the driver, and that a man died due to some eratic driving, when all Bryant had to do was hit the brake. There was more than enough to justify a charge at the time, and that remains true.
There is a lot of worry that Sheppard will just get demonized, and Bryant will walk. Whatever the end result of all this process, Bryant had opportunity to to do better. Certainly, if you fear for your life, driving eratically down a public road dragging and perhaps even grappling with a person while doing so is not exactly the best answer to ensuring self preservation. Is it criminal in this instance?
Well, this certainly is a fascinating legal issue. How long do we give Bryant? Five seconds? Ten? Twenty? Forever?
Jay and Dr. Dawg: First of all, this wasn't a 'sudden attack'. Michael and Al were involved in an accident moments earlier. Al didn't have a need to hang off of Michael's door until after Michael had refused to wait for the police and attempted to flee the scene of the accident.
Even with Al jumping on to Michael's car, potentially taking hold of the wheel, Michael still had full control over his pedals. Michael could have easily removed Al from his car, either by waiting for the police (as Al was so ferociously requesting), or by using his extensive boxing training. There was no reason to accelerate to 90km/hr (based on the eyewitness accounts of the city workers), mount the eastbound lane curb and smash Al in to poles and a mailbox.
Please don't mistake this post as solely supporting Al, I think he is at fault here too. His actions were dangerous, stupid, and reckless, but he certainly doesn't deserve this post-mortem smear campaign. If only calm heads had prevailed, and both parties hadn't overreacted, we wouldn't have a person lying in our morgue.
Finally, here are some questions for you, Wise Law, and anyone else who feels the need to answer. Why would Michael Bryant feel the need to flee from the scene of an accident not once, but twice in one night? Is it reasonable to assume that alcohol might have been an issue, considering he was on an anniversary date? But wait, wouldn't that information have been available to the police if he had been stopped roadside at the scene of the accident(s), instead of just outside a hotel bar that he might have visited to 'calm his nerves' while his female companion called the police?
I'm sick and tired of these testoserone pumped dudes driving around in their sports cars thinking they own the world. Guys that drive BMW's, Saabs, Mercedes,Porsches are usually compensating for a shortcoming in the manhood department. I say book 'em Dano!
Im really sick of the media spinning this to make Michael Bryant look like the victim. Did he know that Mr Shepperd had an incident with officers right before, no he didnt as I doubt Mr Shepperd mentioned it to him. Michael Bryant's foot was on the pedal. He had 2 choices stop or go. He went and he killed someone.
Bryant drinking at his dinner date? Hummm, lets see the dinner tab and see for ourselves what was on the menu. Some wine maybe? I agree the biker may have been trying to take the law into his own hands, but sounds like Bryant wanted to dash, and suspect maybe he was drunk.......... he killed this man and should pay big time. He could have taken the guy out with a boxing punch rather than driving like a mad man into trees and a mail box. Lock him up.
When I heard this the facts seemed a little hazy and they continue to be unclear. I do however, have to wonder what Mr.Sheppard was doing when he grabbed onto the vechicle. Was he attempting to grab at the steering wheel, or Mr.Bryant, or just holding on for his life?
I also think Michael Bryant did what most people would have done if approached by an obviously irate individual while driving in an open convertible with his wife; get away from the danger.
It is unfortunate that Mr.Sheppard died as a result, and no matter the details this is tragic. I do however raise an issue with individuals saying Bryant "murdered" Sheppard. It is sad and it only makes people want take a side against the militant individuals who scream this while riding their bikes down the street in a protest. The facts are still unclear, and no amount of villifying Bryant will bring back this man.
Everyone needs to take a step back, and wait before jumping to conclusions. Unless of course you think it would be just to hang someone before there is a trial... In that case it wouldn't have mattered anyway would it have...
Kathy, I enjoy seeing such a great, rational response here. I believe eye-witness reports more than Bryant or his wife (obviously biased), and eye witnesses are all saying he was ANGRY, not fearful. I'm sure he's encountered much more scary events in his years of his job than some pissed cyclist.
Maybe I'm over-reacting as Bryant did, but I think calling this anything less than murder would be an embarrassment to Toronto's law system. You don't bash someone into light posts at 40mph hoping to just "shake them off."
If you are a cyclist and a car runs into you, don't be upset about it. If the car is a convertible, don't raise your voice or touch the car. Otherwise you might be understood to be a threat to the car or persons inside it, in which case they may justifiably use their car in any way to subdue you.
That is how this works, isn't it?
Alcohol, emotional stress and a minor accident may well have contributed to the toxic condition the late Mr. Sheppard was in the night of the accident. This toxic condition, a powder-keg of sorts, loaded with booze, anger, emotional stress was ignited and exploded at the first phase of this tragic drama. Startled and threatened at the reactions and demeanor of Mr. Sheppard, I would too have opted to escape rather than duke it out on a street. Trained as a boxer or not, Michael Bryant had not only himself to worry about, but his family. A normal reaction to this type of adrenaline-rush would be fight or flight. He chose flight, and I would have done the same.
I've been in fender benders before, if another person approached my car after the accident, tried to get inside while my family was present, my first instinct would be to get everyone to safety.
I don't get how the OP can propose that this case should not even go to court. Let's hope the investigation will find enough evidence to enable the court to pass a fair verdict - be it innocent or guilty. However, given the current uncertainty around this case, I think it was the only possible choice to lay charges.
Do you people know that Bryant is an amatuer Boxer? I can't believe that Bryant was fearful for his life.
I had a similiar incident happen to me in the US a few years ago. I was cut off at high speed, I pass the car that cut me off, and gave the guy the finger. Stopped at a light, the guy jumps out of his car, rips open my car door, and starts beating me while I'm inside the car. I jump out, give the guy one punch, bloody his nose, he doesn't want to fight anymore, and I split. I could have ran the guy over no problem like Bryant did. It is true that I am a large man, bigger than Bryant.I chose to engage the guy in a fist fight which Bryant could very well also have done if he felt threatened.
Also if the biker was drunk, he would be like silly putty for an experienced boxer.
Bryant is murderer, pure and simple. I am totally disgusted by people who suggest otherwise.
I'm think'n you should change the name of your blog - you're anything but "wise".
Rush to judgement? Let's see, Bryant comes out of the police station all clean and nice - not a mark - not a scratch. And, Mr. Sheppard is, uh, dead. I sure wouldn't want to have to see his body after Bryant ran over his head.
I have yet to see anyone answer the 'foot on the pedal' point. Unless, you are one of those who subscribe to the theory that Sheppard had Bryant in a headlock, was steering the car with his other arm and, of course, had his foot in the car - firmly on the gas pedal.
Looking at the video it appears that a) Bryant purposefully hit Sheppard and b) had already repositioned his car to leave the scene long before Sheppard had even gotten back up. Watch around the 20 second mark. Bryant was not attacked by a drunken cyclist. At least not until after he had rammed him and then tried to take off.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ufM7zvX3-tM
Another "lawyer" who has been sucked into the PR machine, hanging on every word of the media with no access or want for the facts of the matter.
Yep, here's an updated edit/enlargement of the two security video clips.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RFISP_PrhFo&annotation_id=annotation_55150&feature=iv
Al was nowhere near the driver or passenger door when Bryant accelerated into him, knocking him off his bike, and then tried to flee the crime scene.
Toronto is the most dangerous city I have ever ridden my bike in, because downtown motorists by and large see cyclists as irritating pests of the road.
I used to work on Bay St., and I have heard things that made my stomach turn (hence my early retirement from that career). Most "men" like Bryant and his colleagues openly despise and fear bike couriers.
Regardless of what the law determines, ethically Bryant was in the wrong. When you steer a giant, heavy metal object amidst fragile, eco-friendly vehicles, the onus is on you to be extra-careful.
And, if Bryant is so susceptible to panic, he should not be allowed on the road. That goes for the rest of you too.
In your update you requested a source that showed that Darcy Allan Sheppard was, "holding on for dear life." Here are two witness accounts from the scene. They were working on the road in front of the 'minor collision' (read: Bryant ramming Sheppard) and witnessed most of the encounter.
http://vodpod.com/watch/2161921-witnesses-to-killing-of-darcy-allan-sheppard-by-michael-bryant
The videos tell it all. Bryant is a psychopathic murderer. I feel sick after watching the videos on youtube. If he doesn't go to jail for a long time there should be rioting in the streets. This is 1st degree murder-planned the instant he hit the gas.
"We have enough information to substantiate the charges," in the accident that caused the death of Mr. Sheppard, said Toronto Police Traffic Services Sgt. Tim Burrows.
Unfortunate that two people with obvious "issues" had to meet up that night. One is now dead, the other deserves to go to jail. Also, like one of our local crown attorneys once spouted, "If we can't get a conviction, at least we can still ruin their lives."
Post a Comment