A Toronto cop has been found guilty of professional misconduct for pointing his firearm at an unarmed Black teen in an infamous 2011 encounter — a precedent-setting decision the victim’s lawyers say could open the door to racial bias being weighed more heavily at future police misconduct hearings.The newly released decision from the Ontario Civilian Police Commission (OCPC) is the latest twist in the high-profile case involving the so-called “Neptune Four,” a group of 15- and 16-year-old Black teens who were stopped, questioned, then wrongfully arrested while walking from their Neptune Drive highrise to an after-school mentoring session. The November 2011 incident — which prompted widespread mistrust of police in Lawrence Heights and beyond — escalated within 51 seconds from a random stop to Const. Adam Lourenco punching one of the boys then pointing his firearm at others who rushed to his aid. At a 2021 police disciplinary hearing, Lourenco and partner Const. Sharnil Pais were found guilty of unlawful arrest while Lourenco’s punch was deemed excessive force. But in a ruling decried by the boys’ lawyer, Lourenco was cleared of wrongdoing for pulling out his firearm after the senior officer overhearing the case found it was in keeping with police training.That finding was called “flawed” and “infected by significant errors” in an appeal decision released last week.Police officers cannot draw their weapons unless they reasonably believe it’s necessary to protect against loss of life or serious injury, and “there is no evidence to suggest (that standard) was met” in this case, the three-person OCPC panel found.The provincial oversight body, which hears appeals of police misconduct cases, instead found “clear and convincing” evidence that Lourenco’s drawn firearm was unreasonable, including that the boys had been randomly stopped while “doing nothing wrong” and that there was nothing to suggest they were armed or had a history of violence.Lawrence Gridin and Joanne Mulcahy, lawyers for Lourenco and Pais respectively, declined to comment Tuesday, as the case is ongoing. A spokesperson for the Toronto police declined to comment on the decision but confirmed both officers remain employed by the force.The OCPC decision — which also rejected the officers’ separate appeals of the 2021 unlawful arrest and excessive force findings — could now reopen arguments over Lourenco’s penalty; the commission has asked parties if they believe it’s in the public interest to reopen those discussions, given that the incident is over a decade old.Lourenco — who has separately appeared before the Toronto police disciplinary tribunal for impaired driving — was docked 12 days’ pay in 2021, a sentence called akin to “a joke” by one of the Neptune Four complainants at the time. (Pais was docked three days’ pay.) Jeff Carolin, one of the lawyers representing the complainants, said his clients intend to seek Lourenco’s dismissal, as they did during the previous hearing. Their view remains that Lourenco “should not be armed with a gun,” he said.In an interview Tuesday, Carolin called the OCPC’s ruling “satisfying,” particularly the overturning of now-retired inspector Richard Hegedus’s finding that Lourenco’s decision to point his gun was in line with police training. “It was very troubling to us because it was very close to one of them being shot and potentially killed,” Carolin said.The Star has agreed not to name the complainants because of their age at the time of the incident. The exception is Yohannes Brhanu, who on Nov. 14, 2018, became Toronto’s 89th victim of a homicide that year and whose murder remains unsolved.The Neptune Four case is among the highest-profile recent incidents of alleged racial profiling by Toronto police. Lourenco and Pais had been with the now-disbanded Toronto Anti-Violence Intervention Strategy (TAVIS) unit, which was known for aggressively stopping, questioning and documenting citizens in non-criminal encounters, a now-banned police tactic known as “carding.” Lourenco and Pais had been at the Neptune Drive housing complex to enforce a trespassing law and soon intercepted the four boys — twin 15-year-old brothers and two friends, aged 15 and 16 — as they headed to an evening mentoring session. After one of the boys tried to exercise his right to not answer questions and identify himself, things quickly escalated, with Lourenco separating him, punching him and then aiming his firearm at the others when two of the remaining boys moved to help.During their appeal submissions, Carolin and co-counsel Nana Yanful argued that racial bias and damaging stereotypes had played a role in Lourenco’s use of force, including the perception that Black men and youth are dangerous, aggressive, more likely to carry weapons and stronger than average.In its 29-page decision, the OCPC fell short of making any ruling on the role of racial bias in Lourenco’s actions, saying it was not necessary because the panel had already determined his use of force was unreasonable on the facts of the case. But the commission stated “social context evidence” about racial dynamics was relevant, noting it could have been “taken notice of, weighed and relied upon, along with other evidence” in assessing whether Lourenco’s use of force was reasonable.According to Carolin, the finding is the first to specifically state that racial bias could impact what’s considered reasonable in a police discipline proceeding on the use of force. The decision “paves the way” for future cases to make the same consideration, he said. The ruling could encourage police tribunal hearing officers, often senior-ranking cops acting as de facto judges, to use systemic discrimination and racial profiling as a “lens” to analyze use of force and ask relevant questions, Yanful said in an interview.“Would this officer have pulled a gun on four white kids in Rosedale? Would this officer have punched a middle-aged woman in the head and in the abdomen because she was refusing to identify?” Yanful asked. Yanful called the decision significant, especially for her clients who are now young men. “This was a long time coming,” she said. With files from Jim RankinWendy Gillis is a Toronto-based reporter covering crime and policing for the Star. Reach her by email at wgillis@thestar.ca or follow her on Twitter: @wendygillis
A Toronto cop has been found guilty of professional misconduct for pointing his firearm at an unarmed Black teen in an infamous 2011 encounter — a precedent-setting decision the victim’s lawyers say could open the door to racial bias being weighed more heavily at future police misconduct hearings.
The newly released decision from the Ontario Civilian Police Commission (OCPC) is the latest twist in the high-profile case involving the so-called “Neptune Four,” a group of 15- and 16-year-old Black teens who were stopped, questioned, then wrongfully arrested while walking from their Neptune Drive highrise to an after-school mentoring session.
The November 2011 incident — which prompted widespread mistrust of police in Lawrence Heights and beyond — escalated within 51 seconds from a random stop to Const. Adam Lourenco punching one of the boys then pointing his firearm at others who rushed to his aid.
At a 2021 police disciplinary hearing, Lourenco and partner Const. Sharnil Pais were found guilty of unlawful arrest while Lourenco’s punch was deemed excessive force. But in a ruling decried by the boys’ lawyer, Lourenco was cleared of wrongdoing for pulling out his firearm after the senior officer overhearing the case found it was in keeping with police training.
That finding was called “flawed” and “infected by significant errors” in an appeal decision released last week.
Police officers cannot draw their weapons unless they reasonably believe it’s necessary to protect against loss of life or serious injury, and “there is no evidence to suggest (that standard) was met” in this case, the three-person OCPC panel found.
The provincial oversight body, which hears appeals of police misconduct cases, instead found “clear and convincing” evidence that Lourenco’s drawn firearm was unreasonable, including that the boys had been randomly stopped while “doing nothing wrong” and that there was nothing to suggest they were armed or had a history of violence.
Lawrence Gridin and Joanne Mulcahy, lawyers for Lourenco and Pais respectively, declined to comment Tuesday, as the case is ongoing.
A spokesperson for the Toronto police declined to comment on the decision but confirmed both officers remain employed by the force.
The OCPC decision — which also rejected the officers’ separate appeals of the 2021 unlawful arrest and excessive force findings — could now reopen arguments over Lourenco’s penalty; the commission has asked parties if they believe it’s in the public interest to reopen those discussions, given that the incident is over a decade old.
Lourenco — who has separately appeared before the Toronto police disciplinary tribunal for impaired driving — was docked 12 days’ pay in 2021, a sentence called akin to “a joke” by one of the Neptune Four complainants at the time. (Pais was docked three days’ pay.)
Jeff Carolin, one of the lawyers representing the complainants, said his clients intend to seek Lourenco’s dismissal, as they did during the previous hearing. Their view remains that Lourenco “should not be armed with a gun,” he said.
In an interview Tuesday, Carolin called the OCPC’s ruling “satisfying,” particularly the overturning of now-retired inspector Richard Hegedus’s finding that Lourenco’s decision to point his gun was in line with police training.
“It was very troubling to us because it was very close to one of them being shot and potentially killed,” Carolin said.
The Star has agreed not to name the complainants because of their age at the time of the incident. The exception is Yohannes Brhanu, who on Nov. 14, 2018, became Toronto’s 89th victim of a homicide that year and whose murder remains unsolved.
The Neptune Four case is among the highest-profile recent incidents of alleged racial profiling by Toronto police. Lourenco and Pais had been with the now-disbanded Toronto Anti-Violence Intervention Strategy (TAVIS) unit, which was known for aggressively stopping, questioning and documenting citizens in non-criminal encounters, a now-banned police tactic known as “carding.”
Lourenco and Pais had been at the Neptune Drive housing complex to enforce a trespassing law and soon intercepted the four boys — twin 15-year-old brothers and two friends, aged 15 and 16 — as they headed to an evening mentoring session. After one of the boys tried to exercise his right to not answer questions and identify himself, things quickly escalated, with Lourenco separating him, punching him and then aiming his firearm at the others when two of the remaining boys moved to help.
During their appeal submissions, Carolin and co-counsel Nana Yanful argued that racial bias and damaging stereotypes had played a role in Lourenco’s use of force, including the perception that Black men and youth are dangerous, aggressive, more likely to carry weapons and stronger than average.
In its 29-page decision, the OCPC fell short of making any ruling on the role of racial bias in Lourenco’s actions, saying it was not necessary because the panel had already determined his use of force was unreasonable on the facts of the case.
But the commission stated “social context evidence” about racial dynamics was relevant, noting it could have been “taken notice of, weighed and relied upon, along with other evidence” in assessing whether Lourenco’s use of force was reasonable.
According to Carolin, the finding is the first to specifically state that racial bias could impact what’s considered reasonable in a police discipline proceeding on the use of force. The decision “paves the way” for future cases to make the same consideration, he said.
The ruling could encourage police tribunal hearing officers, often senior-ranking cops acting as de facto judges, to use systemic discrimination and racial profiling as a “lens” to analyze use of force and ask relevant questions, Yanful said in an interview.
“Would this officer have pulled a gun on four white kids in Rosedale? Would this officer have punched a middle-aged woman in the head and in the abdomen because she was refusing to identify?” Yanful asked.
Yanful called the decision significant, especially for her clients who are now young men.
“This was a long time coming,” she said.
With files from Jim Rankin
Wendy Gillis is a Toronto-based reporter covering crime and policing for the Star. Reach her by email at wgillis@thestar.ca or follow her on Twitter: @wendygillis
Leave a Reply