Montsion should have known the harm his assault gloves could cause, argues Crown

The force used by Const. Daniel Montsion to arrest Abdirahman Abdi was excessive and he ought to have known the damage his assault gloves would cause, argued the Crown in closing arguments Tuesday.

Montsion has pleaded not guilty to charges of manslaughter, aggravated assault and assault with a weapon in Abdi's death on July 24, 2016 in Hintonburg.

• Montsion's assault gloves part of his uniform, defence argues
• Difficult to prove punches killed Abdirahman Abdi, pathologist testifies

Montsion punched Abdi, 37, in the head numerous times during a violent arrest outside Abdi's apartment complex while wearing assault gloves with reinforced knuckles. 

"He reached for a weapon which he had to know was likely to inflict the kind of damage that, in our submission, it actually did," said Crown attorney Philip Perlmutter.

Perlmutter described the gloves, which are central to the weapons charge against Montsion, as a "weapon of opportunity," likening it to the way a hockey stick is sometimes used by a professional athlete.

"A hockey stick is part of the equipment that a hockey player uses. Unfortunately, far too frequently we've seen the way those sticks get used," said Perlmutter.

"They weren't designed as weapons, they weren't intended as weapons, but they're used as weapons. The Crown submission: the gloves were used in exactly the same fashion."

Deescalation should have been an option

Perlmutter said while Montsion didn't have a legal obligation to deescalate the situation when he arrived on scene to assist another officer, he should have considered it as a course of action because Abdi — although strong and resistant to arrest — was contained and unarmed.

"He wasn't going anywhere by that point," said Perlmutter. "The use of deescalation is not a duty. The duty is to consider it as a tactical option.

"By the failure to consider it as part of the assessment ... that's failing to conform to training."

'You don't need an expert to figure it out'

Montsion's defence lawyer Solomon Friedman stated the Crown had the opportunity to conduct testing regarding the force generated by the use of Montsion's gloves, but they didn't.

However, Perlmutter argued that tests aren't necessary to assess the degree of harm such gloves could cause.

"You don't need an expert to figure it out any more than you need an expert to figure out what a baseball bat will do to somebody's head or a two-by-four," said Perlmutter.

"A layperson who conducts a rudimentary examination using common sense can figure out what happens when somebody puts those gloves on and punches someone else in the head."

Closing arguments in Montsion's case continue Wednesday.