Clear Full Forecast

Inquest Set For In-Custody Death In Lytton

By 250 News

Saturday, February 17, 2007 04:36 AM

    The B.C. Coroners Service has scheduled an inquest for later this spring to examine the case of a 19-year-old Lytton man, missing and presumed drowned in the Fraser River, shortly after he was taken into police custody back in May of 2005.

According to the Coroners Service, Brent Andrew Abbott was taken into custody by Lytton RCMP back on May 3rd of that year. 

The Coroner's office says Abbott was arrested for being intoxicated in a public place and was being escorted from the west side of the Fraser River, across a CN footbridge into Lytton, when it’s reported that he climbed over the handrail and attempted to jump into the river.

RCMP say that Abbott was not handcuffed at the time and had been walking between two officers, as they crossed the bridge in single file.  According to one constable, the young man struck a crossbar under the bridge before continuing to fall the more than 30-metre distance to the river below.  It’s reported that he did not re-surface.

An extensive two week search was called off two weeks later.  The Coroner’s inquest will begin almost two years to the day - it’s scheduled for May 15th through 17th in the Village of Lytton’s Council Chambers.


Previous Story - Next Story

Email Email | Print Print | Share on Facebook Facebook | Tweet! Twitter | Digg Digg | Del.icio.us Del.icio.us

Posted on Saturday, February 17, 2007 04:36 AM in News by 250 News

Return to Home
NetBistro

Comments

Comment Posted by: trusted on February 17 2007 9:32 AM
Yeah, sure, he climbed over a handrail and could not be stopped?
No witnesses other than the 2 cops?
Should be able to wrap this inquest up in record time!
I am sure glad I do not have a suspicious nature. If I did have I could be troubled by this incident.
He not only attempted to jump-it would appear he was successful.
And intoxicated yet-game over.
Comment Posted by: Raparee on February 17 2007 5:57 PM
A drunken idiot doing something stupid resulting in his death. Imagine that.
If the police are to be blamed for anything it should be for not anticipating how stupid a drunk can be.

The guy's dead as a direct result of his own actions. Period.
Comment Posted by: tazed on February 17 2007 7:02 PM
I understand why it's important to question police actions because they are in a position of great authority, but when you make ignorant comments like that it gives me the idea that you have serious police issues. Prior arrests maybe?

I don’t think you’re aware of the intense internal investigations that go on within the RCMP. They take all complaints against them pretty seriously.

People who are hurt or killed within police custody are only hurt because they put themselves in that situation. Ian Bush should not have been drinking, should not have resisted, and should not have verbally and physically threatened the officer’s life. This drunk guy is no different. If you break the law and resist arrest, the police will take physical action. That’s all there is to it.
Comment Posted by: trusted on February 17 2007 10:27 PM
Well, gracious me!
Tazed has all the answers and there is no need for inquests to be held in the future, as they prove fairly worthless.
I had no idea Bush was shot in the back of the head for threatening the officer "verbally" and must have been capable of drop kicking the officer backwards physically.
Who said the guy resisted arrest? He was supposedly crossing the bridge with the officers, single file.
Did the police take physical action?
Nah! Nobody was paying attention when he decided to heave himself over the handrail. Hard to just fall over a handrail?
But then, what do I know?
It just seems young fellows better not drink and run into the cops.
Just gives the cops too much bad publicity!
Comment Posted by: trollunderthebridge on February 17 2007 10:52 PM
Trusted, Why do you take what the media writes as the gospel? They don't allow the facts to get in the way of a good story. When an inquiry or inquest announces it's determinations in a death I think that you believe them less than the media. You speak about these tragic situations in a manner like you witnessed the event.Opinions are great but kinda scary when they are based on hearsay and assumptions.
Comment Posted by: trusted on February 18 2007 10:33 AM
Hey, did I say I even so much as had an opinion?
What seems noteworthy to me is that it is not uncommon for young inebriated men to die when in police "custody."
I neither find I have to believe, or disbelieve.
The facts, man, just the facts, good enough for me. The young men died-and that's a fact.
Do I need more?
Comment Posted by: Andyfreeze on February 18 2007 7:06 PM
Ok....what kind of idiot cops would risk a career and life in jail to throw some drunken punk over a railing? For what? That really defies all logic and does kinda seem like an "I hate cops"issue.I don't always agree with what cops do, but that is going a bit too far.Scary comment.
Comment Posted by: trusted on February 19 2007 8:49 AM
What a bunch of dip sticks!
Throw some loose canons in there with guns.
I certainly do not "hate" cops, and I sure as hell would not want their job
BUT:
they are not all the "nice" guys you think they are.
The actions accounting for "police brutality" is becoming an issue once again.
I suppose that is non existent also?
Cops are only human, and some do have a "short fuse" and are easily angered.
The new case that surfaced in Merrit is a prime example.
Did anyone say they "threw" him over? Maybe they just did not stop him!
How you people can read so much into a statement is beyond me, real attitude problems-wonder why?
As for a Career ruined? Life in jail?-get with the program.
Penalty--transfer-- or suspended with pay. Harsh price, to say the least.
Methinks we have some opinionated cops on site, or at least relatives?
Nah, couldn't happen! or could it?