Conclusion of the Police Reconstruction Report – Michael Bryant

June 11, 2014

Toronto Police prepared a detailed collision reconstruction report based on eyewitness accounts, forensic evidence and video evidence. This report was made available to Michael Bryant and his legal team BEFORE Mr. Bryant came up with his version of the events.

Note that the forensic investigation revealed that:

Blood was not located on the steering wheel, passenger side or on the tires of the vehicle. 

Below are the Conclusions of the report. The full Police Collision Reconstruction Report is available here.

Compare its contents to the Special Prosecutor’s brief in court and you will be struck by the vast differences.


 

CONCLUSION

 

Mr. BRYANT and Mr. SHEPPARD shared responsibility in the death of Mr. SHEPPARD.

 

Mr. BRYANT struck Mr. SHEPPARD not once, but twice from a stopped position on Bloor Street West east of the pedestrian signalized intersection which was captured on a building security cameras at#112 Bloor Street West.

 

The first collision occurred after Mr. SHEPPARD stopped his bike in front of the Saab. Mr BRYANT accelerated the Saab from a stopped position into the rear of the bicycle, knocking the bicycle over and jostling Mr. SHEPPARD.

 

The second collision occurred after Mr. SHEPPARD righted his bicycle in front of Mr. BRYANT. The Saab was stopped for two seconds. Mr. BRYANT rapidly accelerated the Saab again into the stopped cyclist, Mr. SHEPPARD was struck, carried on the hood of the car and thrown to the ground from the force of the impact.

 

Mr. BRYANT reversed his Saab and drove around the bicycle which was on the ground with Mr. SHEPPARD.

 

As Mr. BRYANT tried to drive around Mr, SHEPPARD and the bicycle, Mr. SHEPPARD approached the Saab and held onto the drivers’ side of the vehicle. Mr. BRYANT accelerated rapidly in a south westerly direction into on-coming traffic.

 

There was no physical evidence, or independent witness statements suggesting Mr. SHEPPARD affected the steering of the Saab, or anything to suggest he physically attacked Mr. BRYANT.

 

Mr. BRYANT drove the Saab on the roadway westbound in the eastbound lanes with Mr. SHEPPARD holding onto the drivers’ side of the vehicle.

 

Mr. SHEPPARD’s left leg struck a tree near#131Bloor Street West, and he continued to hold onto the side of the vehicle.

 

Mr. SHEPPARD held onto the side of the vehicle until his torso struck a fire hydrant.

 

Mr. SHEPPARD landed on the pavement striking his head on the asphalt.

 

Mr. BRYANT continued to drive the Saab in a westerly direction and left Mr. SHEPPARD lying on the street.

 

Mr. BRYANT drove westbound on Bloor Street West and turned north on Avenue Road. Mr. BRYANT entered the Hyatt Regency Hotel and parked his vehicle. Mr. BRYANT had a conversation with the concierge and called police. (three minutes later)

 

Mr. SHEPPARD died as a result of his injuries sustained in the collision.

 

Mr. BRYANT’s final actions in the third collision sequence led to the death of Mr. SHEPPARD. Mr. BRYANT’s failure to stop the Saab when Mr. SHEPPARD deliberately hung on to the side of the Saab, and driving his vehicle on the opposite side of the road in an attempt to dislodge Mr. SHEPPARD from his vehicle gave the appearance of a deliberate act according to witnesses.

Mr. SHEPPARD also is responsible for his actions that led up to the concluding incident.

All of these incidents were unfortunate and avoidable.

 


Collision Reconstruction Report of the killing of Darcy Allan Sheppard

June 11, 2014

Toronto Police prepared a detailed collision reconstruction report based on eyewitness accounts, forensic evidence and video evidence. This report was made available to Michael Bryant and his legal team BEFORE Mr. Bryant came up with his version of the events.

Below is the Executive Summary of the report. The full Police Collision Reconstruction Report is available here.

Compare its contents to the Special Prosecutor’s brief in court and you will be struck by the vast differences.


 

Collision Reconstruction Report

Fatal Collision 23 | 2009

Bloor Street West near Avenue Road

City of Toronto, Ontario

Monday, August 31, 2009

 

1.0 Executive Summary

On Monday, August 31, 2009 at 9:47 PM, a black Saab convertible operated by Mr. Michael BRYANT was travelling westbound on Bloor Street West. The Saab stopped at a red light for a pedestrian crosswalk near 102 Bloor Street West, Toronto.

A bicycle operated by Mr. D’Arcy SHEPPARD, travelled westbound along the center yellow dividing line on Bloor Street West. Mr. SHEPPARD abruptly turned in front of the Saab and stopped as the traffic light turned green.

Mr. BRYANT accelerated the Saab forward, and bumped the rear tire of the bicycle with the front bumper of the vehicle and stopped. This contact knocked the bicycle over, however the cyclist was able to maintain an upright position. Mr. SHEPPARD righted his bicycle.

Mr. BRYANT rapidly accelerated again from a stop and struck the cyclist from behind a second time. This time Mr. SHEPPARD was projected onto the hood of the Saab and ejected on to the roadway west of the stop line for westbound traffic.

Mr. BRYANT reversed and accelerated rapidly in a westerly direction around the bicycle that had been wedged under the vehicle, At the same time Mr. SHEPPARD stood up and approached the vehicle. Mr. SHEPPARD grabbed onto the drivers’ side door of the Saab as it accelerated. The Saab crossed the center line and continued driving westbound in the eastbound curb lane of Bloor Street West with Mr. SHEPPARD clinging onto the side of the vehicle.

Mr. BRYANT drove the Saab close to the south curb of Bloor Street West, causing Mr. SHEPPARD to strike a tree, and fire hydrant. As Mr. SHEPPARD fell from the vehicle, he tumbled on the roadway, before coming to a rest in the eastbound curb lane.

Mr. BRYANT continued westbound on Bloor Street West in the eastbound and westbound lanes. Mr. BRYANT called police from a Hotel at Bloor Street West and Avenue Road.

Mr. Sheppard died as a result of the injuries sustained in the collision.

Toronto


Lost Boy: The death of Darcy Allan Sheppard

April 30, 2014
Jennifer Wells probes the unanswered questions in the case of the cyclist who died in a collision with Michael Bryant on Bloor St.

Lost Boy Star-2

 

The email arrived in my inbox at lunchtime, Aug. 4, 2010. Allan Sheppard introduced himself in the note as the adoptive father of bicycle courier Darcy Allan Sheppard, “the young man who died at the end of August last year after an altercation on Bloor Street with Michael Bryant.”

A story I had written on the adolescent male brain had clicked with Sheppard: “I have been thinking for some time now of writing a book about my experiences as a single parent raising Darcy Allan and his brother David, both of whom faced serious psychological and psychiatric challenges as children, youth and adults,” he wrote. “Both of my sons had many encounters with child and youth mental health services, almost all of them unsatisfactory and some, I suspect, actually harmful.”

The thoughtfulness and restraint of the communiqué was compelling — but then, Sheppard had quickly gained a reputation for being introspective in the wake of the tragedy. When special prosecutor Richard Peck stood before Mr. Justice Paul Bentley the morning of May 25, 2010, requesting that the charges against Bryant of criminal negligence causing death and dangerous driving causing death be withdrawn, he extended an awkwardly phrased gesture to Sheppard Sr., “a remarkable human being, deep humanity and considerable wisdom. It is a privilege to have met him.”

Read the full story at the Toronto Star


Michael Bryant’s road rage deception

April 30, 2014

After Michael Bryant’s road rage attack and killing of Darcy Allan Sheppard he has embarked on a campaign to deceive the public by reframing, misleading and outright lying about evidence.

Michael Bryant claimed witnesses did not link his killing of Darcy Allan Sheppard with road rage but more than one witness used the term “road rage” to describe Bryant’s behaviour.

 


Part Two: The Phantom swing “sensed” by Michael Bryant

June 2, 2013

The case of Michael Bryant – A thorough investigation by the prosecution to acquit the defendant

Part Two

A cover story in Canadian Lawyer Magazine says Richard Peck is “considered a lawyer’s lawyer, the person to call when lawyers themselves get into trouble.” He is a defender and promoter of the legal profession. Peck believes you “do what you can to enhance its image and enhance its professionalism and assist those you work with.” Peck has a reputation as a precise user of language. “His language is thoughtful; he considers his words fully and truly in a way that only someone with the love for the English language can.”

As we go through Peck’s analysis and choice of words we are continually mindful of the words of Michael Code, his co-counsel in the Air India bombing case:

“He really cares about language,” Code says of Peck. “This makes him a really unusual lawyer, he loves the English language, and he thinks about the English language, he chooses his words incredibly carefully. So he is probably the best read lawyer of any lawyer I know, because he is just so thoughtful and careful about the way he uses language, real precision and care.”

We should also recognize, as Bryant proudly boasts, while he was a clerk for Supreme Court Justice Beverley McLachlin, he wrote the first draft of the majority decision (in Hundal v. Regina) that dealt with criminal negligence causing death. So Bryant was well aware of the legal requirements to defend such a charge.

Read the rest of this entry »


The case of Michael Bryant – A thorough investigation by the prosecution to acquit the defendant

June 1, 2013

The release of new documents and evidence by Darcy Allan Sheppard’s father has raised serious and troubling questions about the conduct of special prosecutors Mark Sandler and Richard Peck in the case against former Ontario attorney general, Michael Bryant. The documents released after three and a half years shed doubt upon many of the claims and statements made in court by Mr. Peck on May 25, 2010, to justify the withdrawal of charges against Michael Bryant.

A Bryant Watch investigation looked at each stage of the events on August 31, 2009, Bryant’s claims, the available evidence and how Mark Sandler and Richard Peck chose the evidence to support claims made by Michael Bryant. We will look at each stage of the investigation, what Sandler and Peck chose to investigate and more importantly what they chose not to investigate and ignore.

In a recent email to the Toronto Star, Mark Sandler wrote, “it would be difficult to find a case in which the prosecution more thoroughly investigated the allegations before determining that there was no reasonable prospect of a conviction.” Mr. Sandler would only be correct if he was referring to the lengths the prosecution went to ONLY investigate and corroborate unsubstantiated claims made by Michael Bryant.

This was a homicide case. Michael Bryant was charged with criminal negligence causing death and dangerous operation of a vehicle causing death yet homicide detectives were taken off this case and it was handed over exclusively to traffic services who are not as experienced investigating a homicide.

As an introduction to this case read the “Media Backgrounder” prepared by Allan Sheppard Sr. and released in conjunction with the new evidence.

Read the rest of this entry »


Was the special prosecutor’s investigation into Bryant’s charges negligent or corrupt?

May 25, 2013

On March 25, 2010, exactly three years ago today, special prosecutor, Richard Peck dropped the charges against, former Attorney General, Michael Bryant, in the killing of Darcy Allan Sheppard on the night of August 31, 2009.

Since that time Michael Bryant has written a book that paints himself as a victim and hero. In the past few days Sheppard’s father, Allan Sheppard Sr. released new documents that raise troubling questions regarding the investigation led by Peck and his agent, Toronto defence lawyer, Mark Sandler.

Bryant Watch looked at the new evidence including the police reconstruction report and cross referenced this evidence with media reports of the case, the court record and information revealed in Bryant’s book to come up with a timeline of the investigation.

This timeline raises even more troubling questions regarding Peck’s decision to drop the charges and avoid a messy trial involving the former leader of his employer in this case and two other cases for which he had recently been hired. This “independent” prosecutor seemed to have quite the case load with the office for the Attorney General for Ontario.

The following is a partial timeline.

On September 1, 2009 – Michael Bryant charged with criminal negligence causing death and dangerous driving causing death and released from custody without bail

September 1, 2009 – Bryant hires Marie Henein, another prominent member of the Toronto criminal defence bar, as his lawyer. Bryant says he and. Henein “agreed on a basic strategy within ten days of my release from jail.”(p.232)
Their strategy was to get the charges dropped and avoid a trial at all costs.

“When it came to getting charges dropped, obtaining watertight expert evidence was the linchpin. [more on this in another article later-ed]. The prosecution could drop charges only if we could present irrefutable forensic evidence from the finest experts we could find, backed up by peer-reviewed expert analysis, and bolstered by additional expert evidence surrounding it.” (p. 234)

Bryant’s and Henein’s determination to avoid court was all about public perception and his political career. It had nothing to with a strong case. How could it? They hadn’t even started to build their defence when they made this decision.

“But we knew exactly how the trial would go. Some days are good days for the defence but inevitably some are bad. In the early days the prosecution would present its case, including witnesses with perhaps damning testimony; sometimes there would be a break between the witnesses’ examination on the stand by the prosecutor and Marie’s cross-examination. If one of those breaks was at the end of the day, or before the noon-time broadcasts, then the news the next day would be the damaging assertions, only later dismantled by Marie. For those who tuned into the trial randomly, that day’s news would be all they remembered about the trial.” (p231)

Read the rest of this entry »


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.