(Wingham, North Huron, ON) — A witness involved in the Feb. 17 incident outside a North Huron council meeting is making his comments public after a local newspaper headline suggested he claimed Deputy Reeve Kevin Falconer’s injuries were caused by a fall.
Stephen “Buck” Hill says that is not what he stated.
A headline published in the local paper reads: “Hill says Falconer’s injuries a result of a fall, says crowd tried to help.” Hill says the headline attributes a conclusion he did not make.
“I did not say that Mr. Falconer’s injuries were caused by a fall,” Hill said. “I am not a doctor and I am not making any claim about injuries, either before or after the fall.”
Hill says his statement to the reporter simply described the sequence of events as he observed them. His written statement reads:
“Shortly after Deputy Reeve Kevin Falconer was taken to the ground by another individual, he stood up and moved several steps before losing his footing and falling again onto the pavement. From my perspective, the situation still appeared tense, and people nearby were attempting to ensure the situation did not escalate further.
Once it became clear that Mr. Falconer had fallen and may have been injured, I ensured that 911 was called. Some present attempted to assist him while waiting for emergency services. I offered Mr. Falconer a coat that was provided by a bystander to place under his head because he was lying on cold asphalt, but he declined the offer.
Approximately 10–15 minutes later, Ontario Provincial Police officers and paramedics arrived on scene. Paramedics then took over care and assessed Mr. Falconer.”
Hill says his statement was intended only to describe what he personally witnessed and does not attribute the cause of any alledged injuries.
“I described what I saw happen,” Hill said. “I did not make any medical conclusion about what injuries did or did not occur.”
An arrest related to this incident has since become the subject of an investigation by Ontario’s Special Investigations Unit (SIU).
Given the seriousness of the matter and the ongoing investigation, Hill says it is important that reporting remain accurate and avoid drawing conclusions that witnesses themselves did not make.
“Headlines that insert conclusions into someone’s statement can mislead the public,” Hill said. “Especially when the situation is still under investigation.”
Hill says he has contacted the newspaper to request that the headline be corrected or clarified so that it accurately reflects his statement.