The OPP’s handling of an incident on Friday in which it warned about two allegedly armed and dangerous men – only to then retract that information without explanation – raises questions about police tactics.
“We have very little control and transparency over these things,” said Joao Velloso, a law professor at the University of Ottawa who specializes in policing.
“We just have no idea if these two [men] are still affected.”
On Friday morning, the Ontario Provincial Police said on social media that officers were dealing with a potentially violent situation in the community of Beckwith, about 50 kilometers southwest of Ottawa.
Someone had reported that two people were armed with a pistol near the community arena. Then, at noon, an emergency alert warned of two armed suspects and urged people in Lanark County and Sharbot Lake, Ontario, in neighboring Frontenac County, to protect themselves, lock their doors and call 911 if they see anyone suspect.
The OPP also shared the name, photo and description of the two men on social media and the province’s Alert Ready website, as well as with news outlets.
Lanark County and Sharbot Lake
By mid-afternoon, the OPP said a third man had been arrested while the original two men remained at large.
Just half an hour later, they took the men’s information offline and asked the media to stop sharing it. Ten minutes later, they said the search for the couple was over, but gave no further details.
An OPP press release later in the day said no firearm was ever involved.
OPP says situation ‘dynamic’
The connection – if any – of the two men to Friday’s incident remains unclear.
The OPP did not answer questions Friday afternoon about whether police found the men, why their information was leaked and whether they may face charges.
In response to follow-up questions on Saturday, an OPP spokesman said in an email that the investigation is ongoing and more updates will be provided as they become available.
“The situation yesterday was dynamic and evolving as we continued to investigate,” they added. “Every effort has been made to keep the public informed of the information we had when we had it.
“When there are public safety concerns, we strive to inform the public as soon as possible, using all available resources.”
Public interest versus privacy
Mike Arntfield, a former London, Ontario police officer of 16 years, agreed that police officers face difficult situations.
You could be dealing with “informed but still speculative” information, he said, such as knowing vehicle registration information without having confirmed a driver’s identity, or having only partially accurate tips from whistleblowers.
But the essentially “wholesale” withdrawal of information was something Arntfield said he had “not heard of anywhere in North America, to be honest”.
[It] speaks to a chaotic incident. – Mike Arntfield, former police officer
The conflicting information “speaks of a chaotic incident,” he added.
Lawrence Greenspon, an Ottawa-based criminal defense attorney, said there are repercussions once police reveal an individual’s name.
“The general public is certainly jumping to conclusions about these individuals,” he said, adding that the decision may depend on the nature of the allegation and “the urgency of attempting to apprehend the individual.”
Ed Ratushny, professor emeritus of law at the University of Ottawa, said good judgment is needed.
“When in doubt, protecting the public must come first in some cases,” Ratushny said via email.
Third man back in court
The man arrested by the OPP on Friday was charged with dangerously operating a vehicle, fleeing a peace officer and possessing stolen property. He appeared before a bail court in Perth, Ontario, the same day.
His next court date is scheduled for Monday.
As for the other two men, “essentially the ball is up to them,” Arntfield said of whether they want to talk about what happened.
“What they do next will determine what explanations are offered,” he said.
