“now aware of the risk (the child) posed to the other child, mr. bender took two or three steps and grabbed (his) wrist, raised the boy’s arm, thereby raising his centre of gravity and pulled him approximately five steps away from the other child towards the back of the classroom.”
bender then released the child’s arm.
the child “sank to the ground” before running out of the classroom, where he “acted out violently for an extended period of time,” berg wrote.
the judge said there was no dispute over the fact bender grabbed the child by the wrist and pulled him away from the other child.
“the issue before me is whether that application of force is justified,” berg wrote.
crown prosecutor anne fitzpatrick argued that bender’s actions “were motivated by anger and/or frustration” and that bender grabbed the student’s wrist in a “punitive and retaliatory” manner.
berg disagreed.
“while there is some evidence before me that mr. bender looked angry, that is not the same as saying that his applying force to (the child) was motivated by anger,” the judge wrote. “it is clear that mr. bender’s actions here were in reaction to a situation that had been brought suddenly to his attention and which required immediate action to protect another child. moreover, the application of force was of short duration, caused no injury, and stopped as soon as (the child) had been removed from the vicinity of the other child.”