Jeffrey Reodica Inquest Harsh realities for youth, community

Jeffrey Reodica Inquest Harsh realities for youth, community

On Sunday, May 21, some 30 people – family and friends of Jeffrey Reodica and members of the Justice for Jeffrey Coalition – walked from St. Rose of Lima Church to the spot where Jeffrey fell when he was shot by Det. Dan Belanger on the same day two years ago, to offer prayers and flowers. On Wednesday, May 24, the Reodica family went to mass and visited Jeffrey’s grave to mark the second year since his death.

It seemed fitting that last week was designated as the break from the Coroner’s inquest into Jeffrey’s death which began on May 8, and went on for the next two weeks. It gave the Reodica family time to remember Jeffrey and just grieve – something which they say they haven’t had time to do having been so busy trying to find the truth behind Jeffrey’s shooting.

But in the two weeks of the inquest which have passed, it has become apparent that the truth will not be uncovered so easily, despite the tape recordings, forensic evidence, and witness testimonies that have been heard in court.

Questionable evidence, unreliable testimonies

For one thing, the inconsistencies in the evidence and testimonies heard thus far have raised more questions than answers.

A forensic pathologist from the Coroner’s office found unexplained scratches on Jeffrey’s face and a bruise on the side of his head, aside from the gunshot wounds.

The knife, which was so central in the SIU decision to clear Belanger, was found with no fingerprints, and reports of the knife’s appearance after the shooting differed. The integrity of the knife and other items which were allegedly found on Jeffrey were questioned because of the delay in the SIU investigator’s arrival at the scene, and because some items were handled by police before they reached the SIU investigator.

The credibility of the witnesses – from the group of White youth involved in the fight with Jeffrey’s group of friends – was tested under cross-examination by the Reodica family counsel, Barry Swadron and Ameena Sultan, and counsel for the Community Alliance for Social Justice, Kike Roach and Mike Leitold.

Darren, the boy who called 911, admitted that he lied to the 911 dispatcher on the day of the incident when he told her that he didn’t know why the other group of youth was chasing him and his friends.
Several of the witnesses provided testimonies that contradicted the statements they made to the SIU in 2004. Those who said they saw a knife in Jeffrey’s hand or saw him swing at Belanger admitted that they actually did not and said that they could have been influenced by stories they had heard from other people or the media.

The testimony by the independent witness Brian LaFrance, a neighbour who witnessed the confrontation between Jeffrey and Belanger, provided a different story altogether and presented a possible explanation to the head bruise. LaFrance claimed that did not see Jeffrey pull anything out of his pocket, but did see Belanger hit Jeffrey on the side of the head with a black object.

With these inconsistencies, one would wonder what “incontrovertible evidence,” the SIU was talking about in the report it released on September 30, 2004, that allowed it to clear Belanger of any wrongdoing.

With the change in testimonies and new information from the independent witness, there seems to be enough basis to suggest that a review of the SIU decision would only be proper. Demanding that the SIU decision be reviewed, however, would entail another long struggle.

Coroner bias

As the inquest progressed in its first two weeks, it has become apparent that the coroner is biased in favour of the police and SIU.

Swadron and Roach faced objections from the SIU’s lawyer and the Coroner when they tried to question the manner in which the SIU investigated Jeffrey’s death. But as Swadron pointed out, the inquest is about Jeffrey’s death and related matters, and if the entire inquest is to be based on the evidence, it is only natural that the lawyers try to make sure that the evidence is credible.

While the Reodica family counsel and CASJ counsel have faced objections and constant interruptions during their cross-examinations, Belanger’s lawyer, Joseph Markson, seemed to have been allowed to ask questions more freely.