ASIRT says an RCMP officer was justified in using lethal force during a volatile and dangerous incident inside a rural Bonnyville-area home, where an armed and intoxicated man advanced on police despite repeated warnings.

The Alberta Serious Incident Response Team released its full decision on January 15, 2026, concluding there are no reasonable grounds to believe a criminal offence was committed by the officer involved in the February 9, 2024 shooting. The investigation examined hundreds of pieces of evidence, including civilian and police witness statements, 911 calls, radio traffic, scene analysis, and audio and video recordings.

A Chaotic and Escalating Family Dispute

ASIRT’s report outlines how the situation unfolded rapidly inside a crowded rural residence.

Police were called shortly before 10 p.m. after a family member reported the affected person was intoxicated, violently damaging the home, and threatening others inside. Several occupants, including the man’s sister and her fiancée, barricaded themselves in a bedroom using a mattress while the man continued yelling, banging on doors, and smashing property. An elderly family member and a friend were also inside the home.

Multiple 911 calls captured screaming, crying, and pleas for help in the background as the caller urged police to arrive quickly.

Police Arrival and Discovery of a Firearm

When RCMP arrived, officers identified themselves and entered the residence. Family members were visibly distressed and directed police upstairs, where the man had retreated.

ASIRT confirmed the man threatened officers, stating he would shoot them if they came upstairs. Officers observed him holding a revolver at the top of the staircase. Despite commands to drop the weapon and come down safely, he refused and continued threatening police.

At one point, the man briefly placed the gun down, then picked it up again and retreated upstairs, where officers could hear loud banging and noises consistent with barricading.

Movement Down the Stairs Triggers Shooting

The situation escalated when the man suddenly began coming down the stairs while still armed.

ASIRT found the hallway was dark, cluttered, and narrow, leaving officers with limited cover and no safe retreat. Family members were still inside or attempting to re-enter the home, repeatedly yelling that the man did not have a gun or that it was only a pellet gun.

As the man reached the bottom of the stairs, he advanced toward officers and raised the revolver, pointing it directly at one officer. ASIRT accepted the officer’s account that the firearm was levelled in a firing position and that he believed his life, and the lives of others, were in immediate danger.

The officer fired three shots over approximately 10 seconds, stopping once the firearm fell from the man’s hand.

Firearm and Scene Evidence

Investigators later confirmed the weapon was an unloaded Colt .45 single-action revolver. While unloaded, ASIRT emphasized officers could not have known this at the time. Additional firearms, a pellet rifle, and ammunition were also located elsewhere in the residence, reinforcing officers’ concerns that weapons were accessible.

A mattress propped against a bedroom door corroborated witness statements about occupants barricading themselves.

Serious Injuries but Survival

The man sustained gunshot wounds to his wrist, chest, and neck, resulting in extensive surgery and a lengthy hospital stay. ASIRT documented visible scars, broken bones, and ongoing numbness during a later interview.

The man told investigators he had no memory of the incident and denied knowing firearms were in the house. ASIRT found those statements unreliable and inconsistent with witness evidence and prior reported incidents involving firearms and threats of self-harm.

Witness Accounts and Prior Concerns

Civilian witnesses consistently described the man as highly intoxicated, aggressive, and threatening throughout the evening.

ASIRT also considered testimony from a former partner who described previous violent behaviour while intoxicated, including threats to provoke “death by cop” and a prior incident where the man allegedly threatened to shoot himself with a family member’s handgun.

Legal Analysis and Justification

ASIRT’s legal analysis focused on whether the officer’s use of force met the standards of necessity, proportionality, and reasonableness under the Criminal Code.

The report concluded:

• The officer was lawfully performing his duties

• A pointed firearm created an immediate risk of death or grievous bodily harm

• No lesser force options were realistically available

• The officer stopped firing once the threat ended

Investigators stressed that police decisions must be assessed in real time, not with hindsight, especially in dynamic, life-threatening situations.

Final Decision

ASIRT determined the officer’s actions were justified under sections 25 and 34 of the Criminal Code, covering lawful use of force and self-defence.

“The use of force was proportionate, necessary, and reasonable,” the decision states. “There are no reasonable grounds to believe an offence was committed.”

The decision was signed by Acting Executive Director Matthew Block and officially released January 15, 2026.