Montsion's assault gloves part of his uniform, defence argues

The assault gloves worn by Const. Daniel Montsion during Abdirahman Abdi's fatal arrest were a part of his uniform and not offensive equipment, argued his defence lawyer Tuesday.

Montsion has pleaded not guilty to charges of manslaughter, aggravated assault and assault with a weapon inAbdi'sdeath on July 24, 2016.

Montsion punched Abdi, 37, in the head several times during an arrest outside Abdi's apartment building, while wearing gloves withreinforced knuckles.

• Assault gloves aren't approved police weapons, Montsion trial told
• Deadly weapon? Ottawa police assault gloves scrutinized after officer charged in death

The gloves, which are manufactured by Oakley, are describedas "tactical" or "assault gloves"and are central to the weapons chargeMontsionfaces.

Defence lawyer Solomon Friedman arguedMontsion's gloves arepart of his equipment like his boots and pants as a police officer.

"Const. Montsion didn't bring an unapproved weapon to 55 Hilda," said Friedman, referring to the address of Abdi's apartment building.

"It wasn't a personal choice or affectation.Instead [Montsion]was wearing the gloves that were purchased by his supervisor Sgt. Sandra Sparling."

• Red-stained 'assault gloves' among grisly evidence at officer's manslaughter trial
• 'Assault gloves' to be entered into evidence at Montsion trial

Earlier in the trial, theCrown had called use of force expertMichael Federico, a former deputy chief with Toronto police, who explainedthe gloves werenot approved by the provincial government as weaponsfor police in Ontario.

However, theCrown later conceded that a member of Montsion'sunitpurchased the assault gloves.

Friedman also contended the plastic reinforcement in thegloves are there to protect the wearer, rather than to inflict harm.

"Any such gloves are in fact protective equipment and not offensive equipment," he said.

Friedman argued the Crownhad the opportunity to conduct testing regarding the forcegenerated by theuse of thegloves, but they didn't.

'Surely,Mr. Abdi was in fight or flight mode'

The defence also focused on the issue of causation related to Abdi's death.

In June 2019, pathologist Dr. Christopher Milroy testified thatAbdi died ofhomicide by heart attack, and that the gloves Montsion wore did extensive damage to his face.

However, he stated that was not the only possible explanation for Abdi's injuries or death.

Pointing to some of Milroy's testimony, Friedman argued Abdi had an underlying heart condition and suffereda series of emotional andphysical stressors thatled to his fatal heart attack, including numerous alleged assaults at a coffee shop.

Abdi had also been kneed in the abdomen and repeatedly struck by Const. DaveWeir after being chased to his apartmentbuildingbefore Montsion arrived on scene, which could have caused Abdi's adrenaline to spike, the defence lawyer argued.

"Surely, Mr. Abdi was in fight or flight mode," said Friedman.

Closing arguments in the case continue until Wednesday.