Medical Testimony to Continue at Matters Inquest
Thursday, October 10, 2013 @ 4:00 AM
Prince George, B.C. – It is expected there will be more medical testimony today at the Coroner’s inquest into the death of Greg Matters.
The 40 year old Canadian Armed Forces veteran was shot to death by the RCMP on his family’s farm property in September of 2012. The shots fired after a standoff that initially began as an altercation with his brother.
Yesterday, Vancouver based clinical psychiatrist, Dr. Greg Passey, who was treating Greg Matters for post traumatic stress disorder, said he had received a call from an RCMP officer who told him they were in a standoff with a veteran. Passey told the inquest he had asked to speak to Greg Matters, but the officer “deflected that request and said she needed some more information.”
According to Dr. Passey, a second call from the same officer ended with the officer suggesting Matters had come out of the building . Passey said he believed at that point the incident had resolved itself peacefully.
He said he didn’t know until the next day , that Greg Matters had been shot and killed.
Dr. Passey has made several suggestions to the inquest jury for consideration as possible recommendations. Those suggestions include the use of video cameras whenever an emergency response team is called into action. He said the technology is available and it should be used. He also called for in depth training at all levels of police forces on post traumatic stress disorder, as once people understand PTSD, they can find ways to de-escalate a situation. He spoke of being called to talk a veteran out of jumping off a bridge, a talk that resulted in the veteran surrendering to police and getting treatment. He also made reference to a call from a veteran who was in a volatile situation and again, the situation was resolved without injury or death. “I know that if I had been able to speak to Greg, I could have talked him out of the building. If I had flown here, I would have walked him out.”
Comments
that’s all very well and good, Doctor, but how would you have talked him down while he was charging at you with an axe or hatchet?
Having been involved with an administrative appeal on behalf of an individual who had PTSD, it is very simple.
Had the RCMP removed themselves from the visual field of Matters and allowed someone who understood PTSD and understood how to defuse a situation involving an individual with PTSD to negotiate, it is highly likely that the outcome of this would have been different.
We often see the type of equipment the RCMP get which provides them with tools more aligned with forceful response such as armoured vehicles. I have yet to see that the RCMP have received better tools to allow them to defuse such situations without ending up with a dead subject.
A different understanding and mindset is required than the one you and some others display, Imorge.
We all come armed with different skill sets. Negotiators have different skill sets than the local RCMP from the evidence of this event.
You ask “how”. There is no single “how to book” when it comes to negotiation skills that are not supported by the show and threat of force. It is a give and take, an understanding of what is being said and a thinking on your feet ability by the negotiator.
Was there something wrong with his phone? He was calling 911 from the house, could his family or doctor not have picked up the phone and called at any time?
Not to be a pickle but just a question as I don’t see that the phone line was cut in any testimony or article
Nobody was allowed to talk him down. That’s the core issue here. I don’t think its the fact that a tactical team moved in and shot him in the back. It’s the lack of what common sense thinkers would deem as a required element in a hostage situation, a homeless guy with a knife etc. If it only took a 5 minute talk with his Doctor or maybe his mother, he could be in therapy and getting help for his issues. (his issues directly attributed to serving his country).
He had his own phone plus his mothers cell phone. He knew his doctors number and could have called any time. And PGguy he was shot in the chest not in the back. He had over 30 hours to turn himself in and would be alive if he did so.
Advancing toward,coming toward, charging at, These are the words I am reading. He was shot in the back!! what was he doing? running backwards with the hatchet in his hands?
Oh, PTSD has been around for a very long time. I am sure it has been recognized as a mental health issue since WW1. So don’t give me this line about oh we didn’t know how to deal with PTSD. Surely a highly trained individual on a ERT has been trained to deal with people with PTSD.
Was he charging at them with an axe? Or was he walking towards them with a hatchet in his hand? No one will ever know.
The IIO said that there was inconsistencies with the testimony of the officers involved, but that was because they saw things differently.
But that was okay, but if you and I saw things differently, and gave different testimony, they would say we were lying, and were therefore guilty.
“Surely a highly trained individual on a ERT has been trained to deal with people with PTSD.”
Will the Coroner hear from that highly trained individual that is with the local RCMP?
He spoke posted: âOh, PTSD has been around for a very long time. I am sure it has been recognized as a mental health issue since WW1. So don’t give me this line about oh we didn’t know how to deal with PTSD. â
In the past
â¢PTSD was once considered a psychological condition of combat veterans who were âshockedâ by and unable to face their experiences on the battlefield.
â¢Much of the general public and many mental health professionals doubted whether PTSD was a true disorder.
â¢Soldiers with symptoms of PTSD often faced rejection by their military peers and were feared by society in general.
â¢Those with PTSD symptoms were often labeled as âweakâ and removed from combat zones, or sometimes discharged from military service.
To me, that sounds very similar to what some on thus site are posting.
Today
â¢In 1980, PTSD was recognized as a disorder with specific symptoms that could be reliably diagnosed and was added to the American Psychiatric Associationâs Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders.
So, until 1980 it was not in the âbooksâ as far as mental health diagnosticians were concerned.
Do not expect a person to react the same as individuals with PTSD when it comes to suggestions such as âhe/she should have known betterâ. Any guidelines of normal expectations are out the window. Unless one knows the trigger points with the individual, chances of a resolution are slim.
PTSD is one of those disorders that has the stigma of weakness associated with it.
I forgot to provide the source for those who love cut and paste ….. http://report.nih.gov/nihfactsheets/ViewFactSheet.aspx?csid=58
All I see in news reports is that he was shot twice in the back.
I see nothing about charging with an axe.
So will someone who believes the last statement please show me where he was charging with an axe and that the shots were frontal. Perhaps it was in the internal investigate report.
http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2013/10/08/greg-matters-inquest_n_4062682.html
Would have, could have, should have are all hindsight phrases and should not be allowed in a fact finding inquiry, if that is what this in fact is. I don’t understand why if he was calling the 911 dispatch that his mother would not called him at the house instead of trying to drive there after who knows how many hours, unless he was not answering – that has not been touched on in the inquiry or other news media.
If someone in fact did donuts in the yard (testimony is that Greg did not know who it was at first just chased him down) and took off how was he able to catch up with the culprit within 4 kilometers and ram him into the ditch. To get your keys, put on your shoes, run out to your pickup and get rolling implies that Trevor was not driving very fast indicative of someone doing donuts and taking off imo.
Only way to catch someone within 4km trying to get away fast is to next to impossible.
With the officers in front of him with a taser the sniper would have to have fired from roughly 30 degrees so as not to hit the officers in front of Greg in the crossfire. The Huffington Post article also has the threats to shoot Trevor and any officer dead should they show up at the property in quotes. Guess they are not to take that seriously? Imagine the press if they chose to ignore that and a uniform was shot? Once in close quarters they would not be able to take the shot, it is a few second window and to play the blame game afterwards is wrong. Period.
However this article indicates he was shot in the chest http://news.nationalpost.com/2013/05/02/na0502-th-shooting/
[url]http://news.nationalpost.com/2013/05/02/na0502-th-shooting/[url]
http://news.nationalpost.com/2013/05/02/na0502-th-shooting (oops)
So does this one http://bc.ctvnews.ca/prince-george-rcmp-cleared-in-fatal-shooting-of-gregory-matters-1.1261949
IIO report indicates the chest as well http://iiobc.ca/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/IIO_Public_Report_on_Fatal_Shooting_of_Greg_Matters_Final-April_29.pdf
Shot by the canine officer so not M-16 either, who wrote that Huffington Post piece of ??? on too much of a deadline?
According to the K9 officers testimony, shot by him because he was afraid to deploy his Police Service Dog since it could have been struck by the hatchet.
So, there were several levels of deterrents there.
The taser, the dog, the shotgun loaded with non lethal shot, and the guns.
The taser supposedly was not effective.
The K9 officer did not want to deploy the PSD.
The shotgun officer did not have a clear line of sight.
The K9 officer thought that his co-worker and possibly himself was in danger.
I am sorry, but it sounds like a gong show. The life of a person rather than the life of a dog. I have two dogs, but I an sorry, the priorities are kind of screwed up to me.
What is the protocol for the use of dogs?
The diagram in the IIO report is totally useless. No diagram of where the 4 RCMP officers were positioned in relation to Matters.
I would be ashamed of writing such a cursory and disjointed report.
http://iiobc.ca/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/IIO_Public_Report_on_Fatal_Shooting_of_Greg_Matters_Final-April_29.pdf
It’s a given that RCMP are expected to have some training on a variety of areas. When you look at the Matters case I expect most of the officers involved had little or no exposure or experience on how to deal with the behavior shown by Mr. Matters. They then in turn rely on their superiors to provide directions and there’s no training book that someone can flip open and look what should we do next My gut tells me there could and should have been alternative means to deal with this situation, if the taser didn’t work then try rubber bullets or pepper spray or bring in someone to talk him out of the situation what’s the rush he wasnt’ going anywhere. Twenty-five years ago cops in most cases just ended up in a scuffle and they took the person down and into custody. They didn’t have the pepper spray or tasers just a gun and handcuffs.
Comments for this article are closed.