Kamloops RCMP sued for hitting a 15-year-old with an unmarked car
The plaintiff, now an adult, fled from the police on his bicycle after they chased him, one in an unmarked car without his lights or sirens on
Note: Due to an absence from writing here over the summer, I have paused paid subscriptions for at least the next couple of months. I have a few more stories I hope to publish in the next month or so that I’m really eager to share.
Kamloops RCMP is facing a lawsuit over a 2021 incident in which officers allegedly used excessive force and intentionally hit a 15-year-old with an unmarked police car while he fled on his bicycle.
William Rossetti-Matthews filed the lawsuit earlier this month citing two separate assaults during the same incident, beginning with an officer hitting him with an unmarked car without his lights or sirens on.
The lawsuit also claims officers used excessive force while the plaintiff was on the ground and injured from the first assault.
The incident was investigated by the Independent Investigations Office, which recommended charges against the officer.
But the BC Prosecution Service (BCPS) declined to approve charges earlier this year, despite saying prosecutors would “be able to establish that the force used to commit the assault caused injuries that amount to an aggravated assault.”
The incident appeared to be a case of police chasing the wrong suspect based on his clothes. The lawsuit claims Rossetti-Matthews was kicked in the head by an officer while he was down and left without medical attention for his injuries while he cried out for an ambulance.
The prosecution’s statement noted that the use of a police car to hit the plaintiff at 23 km/h was “likely to cause grievous bodily harm or death,” and that could only be justified under a number of criteria. Still, the BCPS concluded that prosecutors likely would not be able to disprove any of those factors.
However, a civil court case presents an easier route for the plaintiff to succeed than prosecutors face in criminal court. Rather than needing to prove guilt “beyond a reasonable doubt,” civil cases are decided on a balance of probabilities.
The decision not to pursue charges came after the BCPS approved charges against three different Kamloops RCMP officers in 2024. They include two facing violent criminal charges and one facing charges under the Motor Vehicles Act involving an incident that left one person dead.
Neither the BCPS statement nor the lawsuit identify the officers involved.
A theft and a robbery
On Dec. 3, 2021, police received two calls police received about a theft at a liquor store and a robbery at another store. One of the suspects in the liquor store theft was described as wearing white, tie-dyed pants, and one of the suspects in the robbery was described as wearing a black hoodie.
Shortly afterwards, Rossetti-Matthews was seen in white, tie-dyed pants and a black hoodie half a kilometre from the scene of the two incidents.
Though Rossetti-Matthews was just 15 at the time, officers claimed he looked like an adult with his hood up on his bicycle.
Both the BCPS analysis and the lawsuit note that the officer who hit the plaintiff in an unmarked police car didn’t turn his sirens or lights on, but the car behind him did.
The officers chased the plaintiff into a park and drove at speeds of up to 65 km/h in the park’s 20 km/h zone. According to the BCPS analysis, the officer was down to 23 km/h by the time he hit the plaintiff.
The two accounts diverge when the officer hit Rossetti-Matthews.
According to the BCPS, he “fell off the bicycle and although injured, immediately stood up after the collision.”
The lawsuit, however, tells another story.
“The plaintiff and his bicycle went under the front of the police vehicle, pushing the bicycle handlebar into the plaintiff’s abdomen, causing a perforation,” the lawsuit reads.
“After being knocked to the ground, [the officer in the unmarked car] kicked the plaintiff in the head and plac[ed] his knee down heavily on the plaintiff’s hip and back while shouting aggressively. He then handcuffed the plaintiff and placed him in the back seat of the police vehicle, all while the plaintiff cried out, begging for an ambulance.”
Rossetti-Matthews’ lawyer didn’t respond to a request for comment from The Bind to explain the apparent discrepancies between the accounts.
The lawsuit claims the officers knew Rossetti-Matthews wasn’t the person they were looking for and that he was a minor while he cried out for medical attention.
And it claims the officers breached their duty of care to the plaintiff by leaving him injured and handcuffed in the back of the car while they reviewed the video evidence from the dashcam and discussed whether the officer exceeded the park’s 20 km/h speed limit.
Only after his injury bled through his clothes did police call for an ambulance, according to the lawsuit.
Charges denied
The BCPS found the officers involved would be able to raise defences in court that prosecutors wouldn’t have a substantial likelihood of disproving.
In particular, it noted that Rossetti-Matthews had fled from police, that police believed he was armed with a gun and that, although police had encircled the park, it would be challenging to stop Rossetti-Matthews on his bicycle by less violent means, calling the police car a “minimally violent intervention tactic, in these specific circumstances.”
The BCPS also declined to file dangerous driving charges against the officer who hit Rossetti-Matthews, despite the officer driving up to 65 km/h in a 20 km/h zone without police lights on.
Prosecutors said there were no bystanders and the officer only drove at that speed for about 20 seconds before slowing to 33 km/h and then to 23 km/h when they made contact with the bicycle.
When reached for comment, the Kamloops RCMP only said that the Department of Justice “will review the notice of civil claim and a statement of defence for the RCMP will be issued and registered through the appropriate court process.”