ESTEVAN — The Saskatchewan Serious Incident Response Team (SIRT) has cleared an Estevan police officer of wrongdoing in a fatal shooting that took place inside police headquarters nearly two years ago.
The Oct. 9 public report concluded there were “no grounds to believe an offence was committed” by the subject officer involved, and no charges will be laid.
The incident
In the morning of Nov. 1, 2023, the EPS received a call for service from a residence in the 1200-block of Sixth Street in Estevan and discovered a woman who had sustained serious injuries due to a stabbing. Despite first aid and medical treatment being provided, the woman, Karie Ann Guillas, was pronounced dead and her 19-year-old son Justice, who the report says was covered in blood, was arrested.
Justice Guillas was taken to EPS headquarters to be processed in conjunction with his arrest. During the process of photographing the man, a confrontation took place and Justice Guillas gained control of an EPS-issued firearm.
One member of EPS, Sgt. Braden Lonsberry, was shot, sustaining a serious injury. A second EPS member discharged their service pistol, striking Justice Guillas with what the report called two "close-range" shots to the right side of his rear torso, entering, but not exiting, the affected person’s body causing extensive internal injury.
EPS members provided first aid until Estevan EMS arrived. They provided care to both the officer and Justice Guillas until both individuals were transported to hospital, first in Estevan and then to Regina. Guillas was subsequently declared dead at approximately 3:50 p.m. that day.
Lonsberry returned to active duty several weeks later.
Toxicology results noted the presence of methamphetamine and cocaine in Jusice Guillas’ blood, at levels consistent with intoxication but not overdose.
"He has my gun”
The report notes that at one point during the processing, Lonsberry asked Guillas to remove his clothing so it could be placed in evidence bags; Guillas would receive replacement attire. Guillas struggled with locating the zipper on his hoodie due to a tear. Lonsberry moved forward to assist, but Guillas pushed Lonsberry’s hand away. Both Lonsberry and the investigation’s subject officer (SO) reportedly did not interpret the gesture as an act of aggression.
“The affected person eventually succeeded in removing his hoodie, but instead of placing the clothing in the evidence bag that had been provided, tossed it on the table to his right.”
The report states Lonsberry then reached across with his left hand to retrieve the item from the table, and in doing so, slightly exposed his holstered pistol to the affected person. Guillas then reached forward and grabbed Lonsberry’s pistol with both hands. Lonsberry attempted to defend his pistol, but the holster detached from the belt and Lonsberry shouted “he has my gun” to the SO, who had been in the doorway.
The officer quickly entered the room and the three men struggled for control of the pistol, which was still contained within the detached holster. Guillas succeeded in removing the pistol and Lonsberry stated words to the effect of “he has it”.
Guillas fired a single shot from Lonsberry’s pistol, striking Lonsberry in the abdomen and partially emerged from the observation room into the detention area hallway, before being pulled back inside as the struggle for control of the pistol continued. The SO succeeded in pushing Guillas, still holding Lonsberry’s pistol against the rear wall of the observation room.
Lonsberry, who had sustained a gunshot wound, fell to the ground, but was able to rise to his feet and continue the attempts to regain control of his pistol. Guillas, pushed against the wall by the SO, held the pistol in his right arm and extended it forward and at an upward angle estimated at 45 degrees.
Lonsberry grabbed the slide of his pistol as the affected person succeeded in firing another shot, striking the rear wall of the observation room. Following the shot, as Guillas still retained control of the gun and began to lower it from its raised angle, the SO drew his service pistol and fired two shots from the hip in close succession, striking Guillas, who fell to the ground. Lonsberry sat down in the observation room chair.
The SO applied one handcuff to Guillas, who reportedly said words to the effect of “just finish me”. The SO radioed for assistance, stating shots had been fired and an officer was down.
Four members of EPS, who had been receiving a briefing on the ongoing homicide investigation, rushed to the detention area. Upon arrival, one of the responding members completed handcuffing Guillas.
Six SIRT representatives deployed
Following the notification, a SIRT team consisting of the civilian executive director and five SIRT investigators were deployed to Estevan to begin their investigation.
SIRT said video evidence was limited because the observation room where the incident took place was not equipped with cameras, “so as to preserve the right of an accused to speak privately with counsel.” Investigators relied on witness interviews, forensic evidence and officer accounts to reconstruct events.
“The events inside the observation room, comprising an ongoing situation where risk of death remained real and grievous bodily harm had already occurred, amply satisfy the criteria required under both S.25 and S.34 of the Criminal Code to legally protect the force employed by the SO [subject officer] to address that ongoing risk,” the report said.
Greg Gudelot, SIRT’s civilian executive director, wrote in the report: “There being no grounds to believe an offence was committed by the subject officer, SIRT’s involvement with this matter is concluded without referral to the attorney general for Saskatchewan.”
The report also stated all relevant police and civilian witnesses were interviewed, a scene examination was conducted of the incident location, and all relevant audio, video, documentary and physical evidence was seized.
Eleven police officers, including Lonsberry and the SO, were designated as witness officers and were interviewed or provided notes during the course of SIRT’s investigation.
Additional witness officers provided evidence regarding the arrest and transport of the affected person prior to the incident, the EPS response immediately following the incident, and the provision of first aid to both Justice Guillas and Lonsberry after the shooting.
Two civilian witnesses were identified and interviewed, including a civilian detention guard and a detainee present within EPS cells at the time the incident occurred.
While under no legal obligation to do so, the subject officer voluntarily provided a statement to SIRT investigators, along with access to his police notes for use in the investigation. In addition to the statement and notes, the subject officer participated in a video-recorded re-enactment of the incident with SIRT investigators.
“Evidence directly from a subject officer, when voluntarily provided, is often invaluable in cases such as this, particularly when only limited video footage is available, as it can assist both with the factual determination of what occurred, and provide evidence of the subjective beliefs and perceptions of the subject officer.”
Several physical exhibits were seized during SIRT’s investigation, with some submitted for further analysis as the investigation proceeded. These exhibits included the handgun possessed by the subject officer, as well as the handgun initially possessed by Lonsberry at the start of the incident.
The full SIRT report is available on the organization’s website.
