About 30 seconds after Northrup was run over, Consts. Tony Correa and Scharnil Pais rammed their van into the fleeing BMW, blocking it from leaving. The officers leapt from their vehicle, their weapons drawn while a third car, with Spanish-speaking occupants, broke through the parking barricade to flee in terror.<\/p>\n
Soon, the BMW\u2019s driver, a GTA accountant named Umar Zameer was handcuffed and on his knees. His pregnant wife, Aida Shaikh, stood by, distraught. Their son, aged two, wailed in her arms.\u00a0<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
Umar\u00a0Zameer,\u00a0kneeling, is seen\u00a0in a still from police body-camera footage shortly after his arrest by plainclothes Toronto police officers, including\u00a0Const. Tony Correa, right.<\/p>\n
Court files \/ Ramon Ferreira Toronto Star illustration<\/p>\n
In that moment, Northrup was dying or already dead. Forbes was with him. More Toronto police officers, some uniformed, rushed to the scene.<\/p>\n
At 12:21 a.m., Pais punched the kneeling Zameer in the face, and told him what he had done.<\/p>\n
\u201cYou just ran over a cop.\u201d<\/p>\n
The timeline is central to answering the key questions that perplexed many observers after the Crown closed its case in court earlier this spring. Foremost among them: Why was Zameer prosecuted for murder<\/a>?\u00a0<\/p>\n Drawing on more than a dozen interviews with sources close to the police investigation and prosecution, along with a review of court transcripts and decisions, this story reveals how some police leaders within the force were skeptical about the case from Day 1; how the prosecution nonetheless forged ahead based on the accounts of three eyewitness officers \u2014 Forbes, Correa and Pais \u2014 despite eventually having expert and video evidence that contradicted their accounts<\/a>; and, for the first time, reveals the trial judge\u2019s scathing written decision, delivered post-verdict, about the \u201ctroubling\u201d possibility the officers lied to put themselves in the best light, regardless of the repercussions for Zameer.<\/p>\n The interviews also reveal that, to this day, key figures maintain that the police were justified in bringing the charge and that there was enough evidence to proceed with the prosecution.<\/p>\n Said one police source: If investigators \u201chad not laid the charge, hypothetically, and the Crown dropped it, you would forever be having the (Toronto Police) Association and Northrup\u2019s family saying \u2018Hold on a second, these officers said he was standing in front of the car \u2026 yet we don\u2019t believe them?\u2019<\/p>\n \u201cThe evidence still has to be tested in court.\u201d<\/p>\n Toronto police Const. Jeffrey Northrup\u00a0was a veteran of 31 years.<\/p>\n TPS, R.J. Johnston\/Toronto Star illustration<\/p>\n Since the end of the trial, Toronto police Chief Myron Demkiw has ask<\/a>ed the Ontario Prov<\/a>incial Police to conduct a review<\/a> of officer testimony, conduct procedures, practices and training, in addition to an internal review of all aspects of plainclothes policing. Those investigations are ongoing.\u00a0<\/p>\n The three principal officers present in the parking garage on that night are prevented from making any public statements, and did not speak to the Star for this story. Similarly, lead prosecutor Mike Cantlon, who faced verbal abuse online and criticism from both defence and prosecution colleagues<\/a>, declined to be interviewed.<\/p>\n Shortly after Zameer\u2019s acquittal, Cantlon released a short statement to the media, saying: \u201cThe events surrounding (Northrup\u2019s) tragic death warranted a trial to determine accountability.\u201d<\/p>\n The minutes after<\/p>\n At 12:21 a.m., Const. Ryan D\u2019Souza arrived to find Zameer with a \u201cfixed stare\u201d as Pais informed him of the initial charge against him \u2014 dangerous operation of a motor vehicle.<\/p>\n \u201cWe didn\u2019t know you were police. You weren\u2019t wearing your vests,\u201d Shaikh, Zameer\u2019s wife, said after Pais donned a vest with the word POLICE written across the front.<\/p>\n Speaking to D\u2019Souza, Zameer told him he and his family were about to leave the parking garage when a man and woman started hitting the window and door of his BMW. He had no idea they were police. He was scared and trying to get away.<\/p>\n \u201cYou didn\u2019t see a badge?\u201d D\u2019Souza asked.<\/p>\n No, Zameer said. If he had known Northrup and Forbes were officers, he would not have gone.<\/p>\n Toronto police Const. Jeffrey Northrup and his partner Const. Lisa Forbes on the night Northrup was killed.<\/p>\n Court files\/Toronto Star illustration<\/p>\n A still from video evidence taken that night shows Northrup \u2014 a towering, 300-pound man known as the \u201cgentle giant\u201d who often shared homemade chili and brownies with his coworkers<\/a> \u2014 wearing baggy black shorts, an unbuttoned short-sleeved shirt over a camo T, with a faded ball cap. Forbes, his partner, was in jean shorts and a dark hoodie.<\/p>\n It remains unclear whether Northrup was wearing or showing his badge when he approached the Zameer vehicle; it was later recovered from the scene.<\/p>\n Forbes wore hers on a long chain around her neck.<\/p>\n By 12:50 a.m., Zameer was whisked to nearby 52 Division, home base for Northrup and the other officers on duty that night.<\/p>\n Meanwhile, Shaikh and her toddler were taken to hospital for observation.<\/p>\n Umar\u00a0Zameer\u00a0is seen here in a Toronto police photo shortly after his arrest.<\/p>\n Court files\/ Ramon Ferreira Toronto Star illustration<\/p>\n Forbes was still at the scene and received treatment in a ground-level stairwell vestibule at Nathan Phillips Square. Hyperventilating, she asked to be recorded by an officer equipped with a body camera.<\/p>\n \u201cI was worried about forgetting details and wanted to document them,\u201d Forbes later testified, explaining she feared she might faint.<\/p>\n Amid a mix of background noise, Forbes\u2019 agitated state and her use of an oxygen mask, parts of her statement are difficult to comprehend.<\/p>\n What can be discerned is the following: The vehicle that hit Northrup was likely an SUV, operated by a man with brown skin fitting the description of a stabbing suspect she and her fellow officers were looking for. Displaying her badge, she commanded the driver to halt but he began to move forward, then put the car into reverse and manoeuvred erratically. Her partner was hit around the knee by the vehicle, after which the driver accelerated rapidly. Northrup could not get out of the way. (Forbes\u2019s initial account that Zameer matched the description of a heavy-set, brown-skinned suspect with big hair was later challenged at trial<\/a>).<\/p>\n Already, while Forbes was giving her statement, the news of a Toronto police officer\u2019s critical injury was circulating within the force. Alerts soon reached then-interim Chief James Ramer and Supt. Glenn Cole, the head of 52 Division. Jon Reid, president of the Toronto Police Association, was also awakened and headed to St. Mike\u2019s hospital.<\/p>\n Homicide Det.-Sgt Terry Browne, who recently retired, and his team, including Dets. Jeff Allington and Trevor Grieve, were on call that night. They gathered at 52 Division while Ramer, Cole and a TPA representative drove to Brampton to notify Northrup\u2019s wife Margaret.<\/p>\n She was woken up by her son around 3:30 a.m.<\/p>\n \u201cHe said \u2018Mom there\u2019s a whole bunch of police at the front door,\u2019\u201d she later told Global News. \u201cI couldn\u2019t verbalize it, my knees started shaking, and all I could say was \u201cOh god, oh god.\u201d<\/p>\n By 4 a.m., Northrup was confirmed dead.<\/p>\n Margaret Northrup, the widow of Det. Const. Jeffrey Northrup.<\/p>\n THE CANADIAN PRESS\/Christopher Katsarov\/ Ramon Ferreira Toronto Star illustration<\/p>\n The morning after<\/p>\n At 8 a.m., Shaikh provided a videotaped statement that echoed her comments at the scene: She and her husband did not know the man and woman outside their vehicle were officers, and her husband locked the doors because they were afraid of being robbed. Shaikh said she saw the woman show what looked like a police badge, but it didn\u2019t look authentic.<\/p>\n \u201cShe could have bought that somewhere, that\u2019s what I thought.\u201d<\/p>\n Zameer also gave a videotaped statement, again asserting he was unaware the people knocking on his window were police. He explained that he drove the way he did because he was frightened and believed his family was at risk. He was also unaware their car had struck anyone, let alone a police officer.<\/p>\n Allington, a 25-year veteran, the last six of those years in the homicide squad, was put in charge of co-ordinating the investigation. The team set about securing the scene, conducting witness interviews and gathering evidence \u2014 including surveillance video showing the Zameer family out and about that Canada Day night.<\/p>\n Also called into work was Jeff Bassingthwaite, a veteran TPS traffic collision reconstructionist who worked separately from the investigation team.<\/p>\n Toronto police Const. Jeffrey Northrup\u2019s badge, seen here in a police evidence photo.\u00a0<\/p>\n Court Files \/ Ramon Ferreira Toronto Star illustration<\/p>\n The mood was sombre; off-duty officers were arriving with cards, flowers and a show of solidarity with Northrup, who\u2019d served for 31 years and had been with the division since 2008. He was known as the type of officer who was always ready to undertake any task, doing so with a smile.\u00a0<\/p>\n Mayor John Tory was among those who showed up at 52 Division early that Friday, as did police leaders, including Supt. Peter Code, who would later be master of ceremonies at Northrup\u2019s funeral.<\/p>\n Amid all this, the homicide team needed the police witness officers \u2014 especially Forbes, Correa and Pais \u2014 to give formal videotaped statements.<\/p>\n In her second statement, Forbes described Zameer accelerating and hitting Northrup as he was standing directly in front of the BMW. The impact caused Northrup to go flying back and land on the ground, she said. The vehicle then accelerated and drove over him.<\/p>\n Pais gave his statement at 8:29 a.m., followed by Correa at 8:37 a.m. Similar to Forbes, both officers said Northrup was standing upright, directly facing Zameer\u2019s BMW when he was knocked to the ground and run over.<\/p>\n All emphasized that despite wearing plainclothes, Forbes and Northrup were identifiable as police officers.<\/p>\n But there were discrepancies. Pais said Northrup had his badge out, while the others didn\u2019t see that. He also said he heard Forbes and Northrup shouting, \u201cpolice, police,\u201d while Correa said he couldn\u2019t make out any words due to loud fan noise in the underground garage.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n Umar Zameer was acquittal at the end of his high-profile trial, indicating the jury believed Toronto police Const. Jeffrey Northrup\u2019s death in the parking garage below Nathan Phillips Square early July 2, 2021 was a tragic accident and not a criminal act.<\/p>\n \u201cIt was the appropriate charge to lay,\u201d said a senior police source, noting the police collision report that eventually undermined the Crown\u2019s theory was not completed until months later. \u201cThis was an officer killed in lawful execution of his duties on that evening, and he was \u2026 identifiable as a police officer.\u201d<\/p>\n Or so police believed, based on the officers\u2019 accounts.<\/p>\n Homicide investigators had no choice but to press charges, based on the statements of the three officers, said another law enforcement official. \u201cIt\u2019s not up to the investigating officer to weigh the evidence, whether they believe those first responding officers or not, they still have that evidence. That was the problem in that case.\u201d<\/p>\n After Browne briefed Ramer on the decision, the chief sought advice from Meaghan Gray, the longtime Toronto police corporate communications guru, on what to tell the media. (Gray has since left the service to work for the TPA.)<\/p>\n Reporters and photographers were already gathered at the entrance to the Nathan Phillips Square underground lot; Ramer arrived just after 9 a.m.<\/p>\n Toronto police chief James Ramer during a press conference on July 2, 2021, during which he described the death of Const. Northrup as \u201can intentional, deliberate act.\u201d<\/p>\n Andrew Francis Wallace\/ Ramon Ferreira Toronto Star illustration<\/p>\n \u201cDuring the course of this dynamic event, Const. Northrup was struck by a vehicle. We believe this was an intentional, deliberate act,\u201d he said<\/a>, with Tory, the TPA\u2019s Reid and others standing nearby.<\/p>\n Back at headquarters, Ramer\u2019s words were heard live on TV, leaving some, including at least two senior officers, shaking their heads in disbelief. Why the rush to say anything beyond confirming that a revered officer had died and a suspect was in custody? Pais and Correa had only just given their formal statements a half-hour earlier.<\/p>\n The scene was secured and there was a ton of evidence to sort through. And there was also the surveillance video \u2014 it captured Zameer, his pregnant wife and young son, appearing to innocently wander the downtown core before heading down to the parking garage.<\/p>\n Umar\u00a0Zameer, with his wife and toddler,\u00a0in a still from security camera footage shortly before entering the parking garage where Const. Jeffrey Northrup was killed.<\/p>\n Court files\/ Ramon Ferreira Toronto Star illustration<\/p>\n Already, the question of motive had no clear answer: Why would this man run down Northrup?<\/p>\n But after Ramer\u2019s public statement, there was \u201cno more discussion, it\u2019s done,\u201d a veteran police officer told the Star.<\/p>\n 10 days later<\/p>\n On July 12, 2021, thousands of uniformed officers marched through the city to BMO Field for Northrup\u2019s funeral<\/a>, joined by Premier Doug Ford, Mayor John Tory, and police leaders from across Canada.<\/p>\n The tributes were heartfelt.<\/p>\n \u201cNorthrup made the ultimate sacrifice in the line of duty,\u201d said Ford, speaking near the coffin adorned with the Canadian flag. \u201cHe did so as a hero, laying down his life to serve and protect his community.\u201d<\/p>\n Northrup was remembered as a devoted husband and father, who volunteered with his daughter\u2019s Special Olympics T-ball team and coached his son\u2019s lacrosse team.<\/p>\n Const. Northrup\u2019s partner, Det. Const. Lisa Forbes, carries his hat during the funeral ceremony.<\/p>\n Richard Lautens\/ Ramon Ferreira Toronto Star illustration<\/p>\n The livestreamed service featured repeated glimpses of Margaret Northrup and her three children seated together, clasping hands, their black COVID masks not concealing their sorrow. (Northrup declined the Star\u2019s interview request.)<\/p>\n That summer<\/p>\n Allington instructed his team to investigate Zameer\u2019s history, including his social media activity. They inquired about the brief encounter the Zameer family had with a man at Nathan Phillips Square and probed why the couple had driven two vehicles downtown that Canada Day. They contacted Canada Border Services for Zameer\u2019s travel details and examined the couple\u2019s employment and educational backgrounds.<\/p>\n Ultimately, the couple\u2019s story was verified. The two-car trip? The couple were renting their second car out on a car-sharing app.<\/p>\n That summer, Mike Cantlon, in charge of one of Toronto\u2019s four Crown attorney\u2019s offices, assigned himself to the case along with Karen Simone, an experienced prosecutor with numerous murder trials under her belt.<\/p>\n They opposed Zameer\u2019s release on bail \u2014 a choice that surprised some police insiders who were aware of the weaknesses in the prosecution\u2019s case. The broader public, however, was expecting Zameer to remain behind bars.<\/p>\n A police officer was dead. The chief had said it was an intentional and deliberate act, and this was the prosecution\u2019s position at Zameer\u2019s bail hearing, held over Zoom on Sept. 7, 8, and 9, 2021.<\/p>\n His \u201cattack on the deceased indeed demonstrates a callous indifference to human life. The fact that (Zameer) took off to make good on his escape without checking on the officer, clearly shows this indifference,\u201d Cantlon and Simone wrote in court filings.<\/p>\n Letting Zameer out of jail would \u201coffend the public\u2019s confidence in the judicial system.\u201d<\/p>\n Zameer didn\u2019t have a criminal record, they noted. However, \u201che is not a Canadian citizen. He continues to have strong ties to his country of birth, Pakistan, as his mother and brother still reside there. He faces a life sentence with no chance of parole for 25 years. Given the seriousness of his charge and potential sentence, there is a risk he will not attend court.\u201d<\/p>\n At the hearing, Toronto defence lawyer Nader Hasan laid out a summary of his case, an unusual move at such an early stage.\u00a0<\/p>\n This was a tragic accident, he told Justice Jill Copeland. Zameer and his wife did not believe the people who approached them aggressively were police officers, he panicked and was trying to protect his family when he inadvertently ran over the officer.<\/p>\n But, Cantlon told the judge, three key eyewitness officers \u2014 Forbes, Pais and Correa \u2014 \u201care telling a consistent story, not identical, but a consistent story about a series of decisions made by Mr. Zameer.\u201d<\/p>\n What about the absence of motive? Cantlon agreed there was none \u2014 but stressed police were continuing to investigate. (This was two months after Northrup died, not days, the judge would later note.)<\/p>\n There were also already questions about the officers\u2019 evidence.<\/p>\n A police evidence photo shows the results of police fingerprint analysis on Umar Zameer\u2019s BMW.<\/p>\n Court files\/ Ramon Ferreira Toronto Star illustration<\/p>\n Both Correa and Pais did not complete their notes on Northrup\u2019s death until after they had taken time off due to the traumatic event they\u2019d witnessed. After they returned to duty, they went back to the parking garage to walk around the scene together. Then, on Aug. 4, 2021, they sat down with other members of the team \u2014 but not Forbes \u2014 in the same room at 52 Division and finally wrote up their versions of what they saw. (The trial judge would later refer to this as an \u201coutrageous breach of proper protocol.\u201d)<\/p>\n For his part, Cantlon warned Justice Copeland to consider Shaikh\u2019s evidence cautiously due to her apparent bias as Zameer\u2019s wife. To this, the judge interjected. \u201cThe same could be said about the officers \u2026 a close colleague, you know, has been killed in front of their eyes,\u201d Copeland said. \u201cPolice officers don\u2019t get special treatment in terms of assessment of their credibility and reliability.\u201d<\/p>\n That September, Copeland released Zameer on bail. He had spent three months in jail; missing the birth of his daughter.<\/p>\n However, a standard publication ban meant the public did not learn about the evidence heard at the hearings, nor an explanation of the judge\u2019s logic, until after the verdict, two-and-a-half years later.<\/p>\n In the 53 pages of her reasons, Copeland \u2014 who has since been elevated to the Ontario Court of Appeal \u2014 described the case for first-degree murder as \u201cweak\u201d more than a dozen times.<\/p>\n The prosecution\u2019s theory that Zameer \u2014 \u201cout for a normal family evening with his pregnant wife and young son\u201d \u2014 would suddenly and intentionally kill a police officer \u201cruns contrary to logic and common sense,\u201d she wrote.<\/p>\n Her critique foreshadowed what the trial judge would repeatedly tell prosecutors \u2014 and ultimately the jury \u2014 at Zameer\u2019s trial: There was no evidence to support a murder conviction. However, Copeland did find there was a \u201creasonably strong\u201d case for manslaughter, which would not require the Crown to prove Zameer knew Northrup was an officer and meant to kill him.<\/p>\n Zameer\u2019s release, under strict house arrest and subject to electronic monitoring, was met with immediate outrage. Ford tweeted, \u201cit was beyond comprehension\u201d and \u201ccompletely unacceptable\u201d that he would be released on bail. Patrick Brown, mayor of Brampton, called it \u201cdisgusting and disturbing.\u201d John Tory, then Toronto mayor, also tweeted, \u201cIt is almost impossible to imagine a circumstance in which an accused in a case of first-degree murder would be granted bail.\u201d (He has since apologized<\/a>.)<\/p>\n <\/p>\n
On the eve of trial, Umar Zameer\u2019s lawyer gave a rare, prophetic, news conference on the steps of Toronto\u2019s Superior Court \u2014 \u201cI promise in due <\/p>\n <\/p>\n
On the eve of trial, Umar Zameer\u2019s lawyer gave a rare, prophetic, news conference on the steps of Toronto\u2019s Superior Court \u2014 \u201cI promise in due <\/p>\n Amid this outrage, Hasan went back to court to ask Copeland to partially lift the publication but the judge declined, reasoning that even partially lifting the ban \u201cis likely to do more harm than good to the fairness and integrity of the trial process.\u201d<\/p>\n Publication bans routinely prevent the reporting of certain arguments or evidence that are otherwise discussed in open court and can be found in court records. Generally speaking, these bans are meant to protect an accused person\u2019s right to a fair trial but do not prevent journalists \u2014 or anyone else, including politicians and their staff \u2014 from attending hearings or reviewing documents for their own information. (A Star reporter monitored Zameer\u2019s September 2021 bail hearing and was aware of Copeland\u2019s reasons.)<\/p>\n The next year<\/p>\n In March 2022, lawyer Nader Hasan was in his downtown office when the accident report of Toronto police reconstruction expert Bassingthwaite landed in his email inbox.<\/p>\n Hasan had to read it twice. It was entirely consistent with the defence case.<\/p>\n Bassingthwaite reported the BMW first struck Northrup while reversing, causing him to fall to the ground towards the centre of a parking lot laneway. The BMW was momentarily not visible to an underground camera, due to obstruction by a pillar. Northrup was then prone on the ground as the BMW then ran over him. The officer could not have been struck head-on while standing up, as Forbes, Pais and Correa had said.<\/p>\n The hood of Umar Zameer\u2019s BMW. The lack of damage \u2014 such as a dent \u2014 was cited as evidence against the claim\u00a0Zameer\u00a0hit Northrup head on with the front of the car.<\/p>\n Court files\/ Ramon Ferreira Toronto Star illustration<\/p>\n The dirt on the car\u2019s front fender was smeared in a manner suggesting it had brushed against the clothing of a person struck as the vehicle moved in reverse, Bassingthwaite noted. Additionally, there were no dents or significant damage on the hood<\/a> to indicate a direct collision with a large man of six-foot-three.<\/p>\n Bassingthwaite later testified that after submitting his report in the spring of 2022, he did not have any in-depth discussions with the police or prosecutors until the eve of the trial, two years later.<\/p>\n By then, Hasan had hired his own accident reconstructionist, Barry Raftery, who reached the same conclusion as Bassingthwaite: Northrup fell to the ground following glancing contact with the driver\u2019s side fender of the reversing BMW. If he had been hit while standing in front of Zameer, he would have fallen onto the hood and caused damage.<\/p>\n (Prosecutors received Raftery\u2019s report only after they closed their case at the trial.)<\/p>\n Margaret\u00a0Northrup, left,\u00a0with Toronto Police Chief Myron Demkiw.<\/p>\n Andrew Francis Wallace\/ Ramon Ferreira Toronto Star<\/p>\n The preliminary hearing got underway in February 2023 at Old City Hall. Margaret Northrup was there, supported by members of the Toronto Police Association. At seven days, the hearing was relatively short, but it gave Hasan his first opportunity to cross-examine Forbes, Correa and Pais.<\/p>\n At the end, Hasan told the judge that although the defence had \u201csignificant concerns about the credibility and reliability of certain Crown witnesses,\u201d there was sufficient evidence for Zameer to stand trial for murder.\u00a0<\/p>\n Asked by the Star why he did not fight committal at this stage, Hasan noted that the legal test at a preliminary hearing is whether there is evidence that, if believed, could establish the elements of the offence. The question of whether witnesses may be lying does not enter into the analysis, he explained.<\/p>\n Within prosecution and police circles, Hasan\u2019s decision continues to be regarded as confirmation of their reasoning to move forward.<\/p>\n The trial of Umar Zameer<\/p>\n Ultimately, the trial in the spring of 2024 hinged largely on the accounts of the three police witnesses who said firstly, that Northrup and Forbes had clearly identified themselves as police officers, and secondly, that Northrup was standing directly in front of Zameer\u2019s BMW as he drove forward and fatally ran him over him.<\/p>\n If what the three officers said they saw was true, this was an act of first-degree murder.<\/p>\n In his opening statement, Cantlon explained the nuances to the jury. \u201cThe issue in this case is why Mr Zameer chose to make a series of (driving) manoeuvres,\u201d the veteran prosecutor said. \u201cThe issue is also whether Mr. Zameer knew or was wilfully blind that officer Northrup was a police officer acting in the execution of his duties.\u201d<\/p>\n The Crown\u2019s theory, he explained, wasn\u2019t necessarily that Zameer intended to kill Northrup, but that he intended to inflict bodily harm and knew the officer\u2019s death was likely.<\/p>\n As the trial proceeded, Cantlon and Simone continued to believe they still had a \u201creasonable prospect of conviction.\u201d<\/p>\n That standard does not require a \u201cprobability of conviction,\u201d law enforcement sources stress. \u201cIf the evidence makes out the essential elements of the offence, and there are challenges and inconsistencies between the experts and eyewitnesses \u2026 That\u2019s why we have trials,\u201d said one senior legal official.<\/p>\n Some law enforcement officials believe that the pressure on prosecutors to proceed with the trial should not be underestimated, particularly because it involves the death of a revered officer, whose widow had been vocal about her desire for \u201cjustice.\u201d<\/p>\n <\/p>\n
During his trial, Umar Zameer and his wife had told their children their father was busy working on \u201ca project.\u201d\u00a0On Sunday, they were able to tell <\/p>\n <\/p>\n
During his trial, Umar Zameer and his wife had told their children their father was busy working on \u201ca project.\u201d\u00a0On Sunday, they were able to tell <\/p>\n Toward the end of the trial, after the jury had heard all of the evidence, Cantlon and Simone acknowledged the inconsistencies in the accounts of Pais, Correa and Forbes. Simone told the jury to consider whether the officers were not lying, but rather genuinely mistaken that Northrup was hit standing up in the laneway \u2014 a reasonable assumption because that is where his body ended up.<\/p>\n Justice Molloy saw it differently. In a remarkably frank written ruling \u2014 released after the verdict \u2014 the judge summed up her opinion:\u00a0<\/p>\n \u201cIt is possible that Officers Correa and Pais did not see what happened, but decided to back up what Officer Forbes said, honestly believing she must have gotten it right. It is also possible that all three of these officers deliberately made up this story because they did not see what happened and thought that this version was logical. More troubling, it is possible they invented this version to put themselves and Officer Northrup in a better light and were indifferent to the implications for Mr. Zameer.\u201d<\/p>\n Forbes? Her memory could have been affected by the trauma of losing her partner, Molloy wrote.\u00a0<\/p>\n \u201cThe one thing I know for sure \u2026 is that Officers Pais and Correa did not see Officer Northrup standing upright while being run down by Mr. Zameer. Further, the fact that their versions dovetail so closely with each other and with Officer Forbes leads me to the inexorable conclusion that they not only lied, but they colluded to lie.\u201d<\/p>\n (At the close of trial, Molloy pointed jurors toward this conclusion<\/a>, posing the question: \u201cWhen three versions of an event are wrong, and wrong in the same way, you must also consider whether there has been collusion between those witnesses,\u201d she said \u2014 adding, \u201call of the officers denied collusion.\u201d)<\/p>\n The experts\u2019 evidence received significant media attention during the trial for how it contradicted the Crown\u2019s theory; the prosecutors tried to downplay this discrepancy by reminding jurors that even experts can make mistakes or have shortcomings.<\/p>\n A trail of evidence markers shows the scene on P2 of there underground garage where Const. Northrup was killed<\/p>\n Court files\/ Ramon Ferreira Toronto Star illustration<\/p>\n Bassingthwaite, for example, could not explain how Northrup\u2019s body got from the point of contact to where it ended up seconds later. And Raftery\u2019s explanation, that Northrup was pulled or pushed by the BMW, also lacked physical proof \u2014 there was no debris or dust movement on that dirty garage floor.<\/p>\n The prosecutors stressed to the jury how improbable it was that Zameer drove over a 300-pound man and he and his wife did not know it. The couple both testified they thought they were driving over a speed bump.<\/p>\n When it came time to deliberate, Zameer\u2019s jury had the option to consider the lesser included offences of second-degree murder and manslaughter. By the end, Cantlon and Simone\u2019s closing arguments pointed more strongly to those lesser charges.\u00a0<\/p>\n Still, the prosecutors did not concede that there was no reasonable prospect of conviction on the charge of first-degree murder.<\/p>\n According to the Crown Prosecution Manual, when prosecutors ask whether or not they have a reasonable prospect of conviction, they must make \u201can assessment of the credibility and competence of witnesses, without taking on the role of the trier of fact.\u201d<\/p>\n In other words, they must not take on the role of judge or jury \u2014 that\u2019s why trials are held.<\/p>\n On April 21, 2024, Zameer was acquitted.<\/p>\n The jury\u2019s verdict on both murder and manslaughter definitively rejected the Crown\u2019s theory that Zameer had intentionally hit Northrup, knowing he was an officer.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
\n
\n <\/a><\/p>\n
\n
\n <\/a><\/p>\n<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
\n
\n <\/a><\/p>\n
\n
\n <\/a><\/p>\n<\/p>\n