OPP commissioner defends probe into Toronto officers as Umar Zameer’s lawyer calls it ‘chilling’ attack on judiciary

The lawyer for Umar Zameer, a man acquitted of first-degree murder in the 2021 death of a Toronto police officer, discusses a recent OPP probe into the case.

The commissioner of the Ontario Provincial Police is defending his service’s investigation that cleared three Toronto officers of collusion and perjury in their testimony surrounding the death of one of their colleagues.

“The OPP recognizes the importance of maintaining public trust, especially when police are the subject of an investigation. We stand by the report, the expert work of our investigators and collision reconstructionist, and their finding,” OPP Commissioner Thomas Carrique said in a lengthy statement on Thursday night.

His statement comes after the lawyer for Umar Zameer slammed the OPP report and the response to it by public officials.

“We are witnessing a chilling moment in the history of the Canadian justice system,” lawyer Nader Hasan said at a news conference Thursday morning. “The moment was occasioned by an unprecedented attack against the judiciary and the administration of justice.”

Zameer was acquitted in 2024 of first-degree murder in the death of Det. Const. Jeffrey Northrup, who was struck and killed in the parking garage below Toronto City Hall in 2021.

An OPP report released this week on the testimony delivered by the three officers at his trial concluded there was no collusion between them, despite the trial judge saying it was likely.

The report was based, in part, on the analysis of an “independent” OPP reconstructionist who investigators said uncovered “additional evidence” about the collision, while casting doubt on some of the findings of the crash experts who testified during the trial.

The report led Toronto Police Chief Myron Demkiw, who ordered the OPP probe, to declare the officers had been “exonerated” and said it was a “vindication” of their conduct.

Ontario Premier Doug Ford also suggested that Ontario Superior Court Justice Anne Molloy “should apologize” for suggesting there was collusion, as did the Toronto Police Association, the union representing Toronto police officers.

Hasan slammed the comments from all three Thursday.

“The only apology that is owed is from the chief of police and the premier for attempting to undermine the sanctity of jury trials,” he said.

He called into question the validity of the OPP report and called for a public inquiry into the conduct of the TPS officers involved in the case.

“We anticipated nothing good, but what we got was far worse,” he said of the report.

Zameer not focus of probe: commissioner

Thursday’s statement was the first time the commissioner spoke about the findings of the OPP investigation.

In his statement, Carrique reiterated that the OPP conducted a criminal investigation and not a review and that Demkiw’s request that the provincial police conduct it was appropriate under the Community Safety and Policing Act.

According to him, OPP’s “highly trained” Criminal Investigation Branch led the probe to ensure there was no conflict of interest.

“Their conclusion was reached after re-examining all available evidence, following every lead and adhering with strict investigative standards and established procedures required in any criminal investigation,” Carrique said.

“As Commissioner of the OPP, I take exception to any suggestion that the criminal investigation lacked independence, failed to adhere to strict protocols or was influenced in any way by another service.”

He reiterated what an OPP spokesperson said after the report’s release: that investigators used a “trauma-informed” approach and that interviews were conducted only with the officers who were under investigation for obstruction of justice and perjury.

“The interviews were focused on obtaining information that had not already been provided under oath at trial,” the commissioner said.

As for why Zameer was not interviewed by OPP, Carrique pointed out that he was not the focus of the investigation and his version of the events was already documented.

“He had provided a statement to TPS after his arrest, testified under oath in the trial and was cross-examined by the Crown Attorney. The information provided by Mr. Zameer was sufficiently thorough for the OPP to conduct their investigation,” the commissioner said.

Zameer’s lawyer has questioned OPP investigators using another collision reconstructionist, whose full analysis was never included in the report, nor has it been tested in court.

In his statement, Carrique explained that a senior OPP collision reconstructionist, whom he described as a highly trained specialist and accredited by an internationally recognized body, was engaged to independently review the Toronto police reconstructionist report into the incident.

According to the commissioner, while no new evidence was analyzed, the OPP reconstructionist “recognized evidence that was not previously identified or noted in the TPS investigation,” which led investigators to determine that the collision needed to be re-investigated.

Carrique said the reconstructionist used all investigative material from Toronto police, including videos, photos, three-dimensional scans, a mechanical examination report, and forensic identification reports.

He added that the OPP reconstructionist also examined the vehicle and attended the scene.

Carrique noted that the reconstructionist did not read witness statements, occurrence reports, court testimony or the judge’s comments during the trial.

“Members of the OPP Technical Collision and Reconstruction Program are committed to conducting thorough, impartial and highly professional investigations,” he said.

“Our responsibility is to ensure that every investigation is conducted with fairness, independence and integrity.”

‘I accept the findings’: Demkiw

Speaking with reporters at an unrelated news conference Thursday, Demkiw refused to comment when asked whether he supports a collision reconstructionist whose work and testimony was called into question by the OPP report.

“I’m not going to comment on that,” Demkiw said. “The report was a report around the independent criminal investigation into allegations that were made in a courtroom, and that’s what the report was about, and that’s what the report speaks to, and that’s what we disclosed and are committed to being transparent about,” he said.

In a written statement released Thursday, Demkiw defended the OPP probe and said it answered the question about the officer’s conduct.

“The Ontario Provincial Police conducted a thorough, independent and professional criminal investigation. This was not a review or a commentary exercise -- it was a criminal investigation led by experienced investigators,” Demkiw wrote.

“I accept the findings. The investigation determined that our officers did not lie, did not collude to lie, and did not commit any criminal offences.”

Hasan pointed out the original evidence presented at trial stood up against scrutiny in court and said it was telling the Crown had the opportunity to appeal the decision and decided not to.

“It is extremely important to note again that the Crown chose not to appeal Mr. Zamir’s acquittal, they quite clearly made a determination that there was no basis to do so,” Hasan said.

“Now, despite that, two years later, the chief of police of the force whose members tried to railroad an innocent man has come forward and said, everybody else got it wrong.”

Groups slam ‘unprecedented attack’ on judiciary

In a statement, Criminal Lawyers’ Association President Adam Weisberg also slammed the OPP report, calling it “a repackaging of the evidence already heard by an impartial jury that unanimously rejected the officers’ accounts and acquitted Mr. Zameer.”

The group said the process was flawed and biased and that police “appointed themselves judge and jury and retried the case by accepting novel theories never tested at trial.”

Weisberg also slammed the calls from the premier and president of the Toronto Police Association for an apology from Justice Molloy.

“Judges cannot and should not change or apologize for their decisions based on requests from other branches of government or from witnesses in a case,” he said.

The Canadian Civil Liberties Association also released s a statement calling the apology suggestion from the premier and TPA “wholly unacceptable.”

“No impropriety by the judge has been alleged or occurred. It is not the role of an elected official to quarterback a trial or the judiciary,” the group wrote.

With files from Phil Tsekouras.