Skip to content

Results of ASIRT investigation into 2018 officer-involved shooting at Maskwacis finalized

Two males were shot during a foot patrol following reports of gunshots from Maskwacis residents
29620256_web1_220629-WPF-ASIRT-investigation-maskwacis-conclusion_1
(File photo)

An ASIRT investigation into a shooting involving a RCMP officer and two males in Maskwacis on Oct. 22, 2018, has officially concluded. ASIRT began the investigation following the incident where one officer discharged his service weapon shooting two males.

ASIRT outlines in the investigation report that the evening of Oct. 21, 2018, RCMP received numerous calls from residents of Maskwacis about gunshots and just before midnight. The officer who discharged their weapon and a witness officer then conducted foot patrols in the Samson Town Site to investigate the reported shots.

At approximately 12:06 a.m. on Oct. 22, more gunshots were heard where the officers were conducting patrols and in response to the gunshots, one which was believed to be aimed at the officer being investigated, the officer fired his carbine and struck two males.

Following ASIRT interviews with both males who had been shot it was discovered that they had been drinking alcohol and the second had also smoked marijuana prior to the shooting. The first male felt the shot in his leg and sat down at the rear of a house where he was approached by the officers and arrested before being taken to the Wetaskiwin hospital and then the University of Alberta Hospital.

READ MORE: Four Nations of Maskwacis anticipate Pope’s visit to bring healing, closure

After being shot in the leg the second male fled and got into a residence in Maskwacis where police found him with three wounds on his left knee and he was taken to hospital by ambulance.

Civilian witnesses say that the officers were identifiable as police and announced they were police. They also state that the police yelled at the suspects to put the gun down several times.

Following an extensive investigation ASIRT has concluded that there are no reasonable grounds to believe the shooting officer committed any offence and given that he was faced with a situation involving himself being shot at he was forced to respond with force likely to cause bodily harm or death for self-preservation.