Ottawa police called in to investigate death of Clyde River man: Nunavut RCMP

“An officer became involved in a use of force situation and discharged their firearm”

Ottawa Police Service investigators are en route to Clyde River to investigate the death of a 31-year-old man. Nunavut RCMP say the man died on Tuesday, May 5, after an officer “became involved in a use of force situation and discharged their firearm.” (File photo)

By Nunatsiaq News

Ottawa Police Service investigators are on their way to Clyde River today to investigate an RCMP shooting incident that left a 31-year-old man dead.

In a news release, the Nunavut RCMP said that on Tuesday, May 5, shortly after 11 p.m., officers in Clyde River responded to a disturbance at a residence in the community of about 1,200.

“While at the residence, an officer became involved in a use of force situation and discharged their firearm,” the news release states.

“A 31-year-old man from Clyde River was immediately transported to the health centre and was pronounced deceased.”

The Nunavut RCMP calls on the Ottawa police to conduct third-party investigations of incidents involving the Nunavut RCMP that result in serious injury or death.

Share This Story

(10) Comments:

  1. Posted by Jonasie on

    Such a sad turn of events,dont the rcmp have access to non lethal weapons ? They have tasers right?

    • Posted by Violence on

      Rcmp usually go on a call late at night to some type of violent behaviour taking place. Many times they are preventing an innocent person from getting assaulted or fatally wounded. It’s reported that they were called to a disturbance, so there you go. And a dangerous job. Not to infer the facts of the situation, but I’m with the RCMP on this one. Back in the day, that 31 year old, would be still alive, and would be continuing the disturbances. Today, people must realize that these old behaviours, of which there was no consequences, are now being dealt with differently. Less tolerance and smarter intervention, even thou some see it as the most unacceptable, but , there’s a newer, yes unfortunately lethal methods, and best for all society as a result.

      • Posted by John Paperboy on

        You think the best result for society is for police to be allowed to go into someone’s home and kill them, and everyone just supports that decision without knowing anything at all about what happened? That is literally terrifying.

        • Posted by Darek B on

          Society would best be served if you learned how to read and understand what you read.

          The article above clearly states that “officers in Clyde River responded to a disturbance at a residence in the community”. They were called to the scene because of an issue. You twist this into, “family sitting at home eating ice cream and cop kicks down door gunz-a-blazin’ ”

          Police officers shot and killed what, without knowing all the facts I’m willing to bet was a case of a drunken guy physically attacking an officer who was responding to a domestic violence call.

          Would you be happier if the police officer arrived on the scene and help the guy beat up his girlfriend? If the officer got a few kicks and punches in on the woman to help this guy out… would you then praise the officer.

          So much talk about protecting indigenous women, yet when officers do step in to stop the violence, they get some fool defending the wife beater.

          How about we wait for the facts, then we can avoid ignorant judgments that take the side of drunks who would harm women and children.

          • Posted by John Paperboy on

            You can’t “bet” on what the facts are and then tell someone else to wait for the facts. My comment, if you can read as well as you tell me I need to, distinctly discourages people from taking sides and making judgments before knowing what happened. The ONLY information we have is that the police responded to a disturbance and they killed somebody as a result. Since you’re such an incredible reader, you’ve probably noticed that the article doesn’t say whether the person who was causing the disturbance is the person who got killed. My comment stands. Your comment is ridiculous. That you would sarcastically ask if I would applaud the officer beat up a woman is despicable. I do not respect you.

            • Posted by Darek B on

              So we agree on two things.

              1) A police officer helping a thug beat someone up would be despicable and horrific. You see it, I see it, everyone should see it. Yet despite this obvious agreement we all have, you chose to speak ill of the officer who came to bring peace to a “domestic disturbance” to protect people from abuse, while siding with someone willing to threaten the peace officer to the point the officer feels forced to defend themselves or others by use of lethal force. Defending a person who makes a choice to get into a fight with the peacekeepers and protectors should also fall into the same category instead of assuming that the officer was in the wrong or somehow at fault.

              2) Let’s wait for the facts to come out.

  2. Posted by Paul Murphy on

    Where are the facts published that would lead you to believe a taser would have been suitable? Or is this more rumour leading?

  3. Posted by Same old on

    As far as I’m concerned, many times this fatality if not that person, would eventually be a innocent person at the hands of that person. This may seem cruelly and unnecessary, but not as far as I’m concerned, surely many people feel that way too.

  4. Posted by Taser or lethal weapon? on

    I’m hearing it all the time after a violent person was shot and killed by police. Why didn’t the police use a taser. I mean if the person is threatening someone or the police with a weapon, why not shoot the person, why use a taser? Police have to make a choice that’s very difficult. Why give a violent person any chance to kill someone?

  5. Posted by Jim on

    I hope these Ottawa police will be tested for Covid-19 before they travel up.

Comments are closed.