Police Watchdog Clears Five Officers in Fatal Shootout—Family of Bystander Calls It ‘Gross Negligence’
Alberta’s police watchdog has ruled that five officers acted legally when they fatally shot a robbery suspect in 2022—but in the process, a stray bullet from one of their rifles killed an innocent man sitting in his basement suite.
The decision, released Wednesday by the Alberta Serious Incident Response Team (ASIRT), concluded that Edmonton police were within their rights to use deadly force. However, the family of 59-year-old James Hanna, the bystander killed in the crossfire, isn’t accepting that explanation.
What Happened That Night?
On February 23, 2022, 36-year-old Michael Potts was suspected of robbing a liquor store while carrying what looked like a firearm. When officers found him outside an apartment complex near 105th Street and 107th Avenue, they repeatedly told him to drop the weapon. Instead, Potts turned and pointed it at them.
Police opened fire. Potts was hit and later died. But in the chaos, a bullet from one of the officers’ rifles entered the building behind him—hitting and killing Hanna, who had recently moved into the basement suite as the building’s manager.
The officers later discovered Potts’ weapon was a replica gun.
ASIRT’s Ruling: No Wrongdoing by Police
After a nearly three-year investigation, ASIRT determined that the five officers involved didn’t commit any crimes. Under Section 25 of the Criminal Code, police are legally allowed to use force—including lethal force—if they believe there’s an imminent threat to themselves or others.
“The officers were defending themselves from what they believed was imminent harm,” ASIRT’s executive director Michael Ewenson wrote in the decision.
The report, however, didn’t address whether Hanna’s death could have been avoided through better policies, training, or equipment—saying those issues fall outside ASIRT’s mandate.
The Family’s Fight for Answers
For Hanna’s family, the report doesn’t provide closure—it raises more questions.
His sister, Susan Bandola, has been fighting for accountability since the day he was killed. Through her lawyer, Norm Assiff, she called ASIRT’s report “deeply disappointing” and “frustratingly vague.”
One of the biggest unanswered questions: Which officer actually fired the bullet that killed Hanna?
The autopsy confirmed the fatal shot came from one of two rifles used by officers that night—but ASIRT couldn’t determine which gun it was.
“We’re talking about a man who was sitting in his own home, minding his own business, and a police bullet killed him,” Assiff said. “How does that not warrant real accountability?”
The family has filed a lawsuit against five officers and Edmonton Police Chief Dale McFee, alleging negligence. Their claim, filed in November 2023 and amended in April 2024, argues that officers failed to consider less violent alternatives before firing.
Edmonton Police Respond
In a brief statement, Edmonton Police expressed condolences to Hanna’s family but defended their actions.
“The EPS also appreciates ASIRT’s thorough review of this incident, and its support of our officers in the findings that they were lawfully placed and assessed the public safety risks appropriately,” the statement read.
They also doubled down on the dangers of imitation firearms.
“Knowing the use or presence of an imitation firearm was a root of this tragedy reinforces the need to remind Edmontonians that officers cannot tell if a firearm is real or fake,” EPS said.
What Happens Next?
ASIRT’s ruling means the five officers won’t face criminal charges, but that doesn’t mean the case is closed. The Edmonton Police Professional Standards Branch will now conduct an internal review. They will determine whether any policies were violated or if changes need to be made under provincial police regulations.
For Hanna’s family, though, that’s not enough. They’ve taken their fight to civil court, filing a lawsuit against the five officers and Edmonton’s police chief, Dale McFee. Their claim argues that police acted negligently and recklessly. They failed to consider less lethal options before opening fire in a crowded urban area.
One of their main concerns? The lack of transparency.
“Nearly three years of waiting, and we still don’t have a clear answer on which officer fired the shot that killed James,” said Norm Assiff, the family’s lawyer. “How is that possible? If this was a civilian shooting, you can bet investigators would have figured that out.”
The Unanswered Questions
Hanna’s family isn’t just seeking financial damages—they want accountability. Their lawsuit raises several troubling questions:
- Why was live ammunition used when a stray bullet could so easily enter a residence?
- Were there alternative tactics officers could have used to avoid firing in a residential area?
- Why did it take nearly three years to release the ASIRT report, only for it to leave so many questions unanswered?
The autopsy confirmed that the fatal bullet came from one of two officers’ rifles—but ASIRT couldn’t determine which. That lack of clarity has fueled the family’s frustration and reinforced their belief that the system protects police more than victims.
Could This Happen Again?
For many, this case raises bigger concerns about police use of force, especially when bystanders are involved. If a fatality inquiry is called, it could explore whether changes in training, tactics, or equipment might prevent future tragedies like this.
Some experts have already pointed to international examples of how high-risk situations are handled differently. In countries like the UK, officers rely more on de-escalation tactics before resorting to firearms. In Canada, police training still prioritizes neutralizing perceived threats as quickly as possible—sometimes with tragic consequences.
Where Does the Lawsuit Stand?
The Edmonton Police Service has filed a statement of defense, denying the family’s claims. The officers argue that Potts’ actions left them no choice but to use lethal force. Chief McFee’s legal team, meanwhile, has distanced him from the incident. They say he had no direct involvement in the events of that night.
The case is still in its early stages, and it could be years before it reaches a resolution.
For now, Hanna’s family is left waiting—again. Waiting for answers, waiting for accountability. Will the legal system will acknowledge the cost of being in the wrong place at the wrong time.
Author: Daniel Kerrigan
Bio: Daniel Kerrigan is an investigative journalist specializing in law enforcement accountability and public safety policy. He has a decade of experience covering police oversight cases in Canada.
