Canadian True Crime - The Death of Darcy Allan Sheppard—Part 5

Episode Date: June 22, 2022

[ Part 5 of 6 ] After the court proceeding comes to a close, things continue to snowball, leading Darcy Allan Sheppard's loved ones and supporters to press harder for the truth. Review the available evidence*:WATCH: The Surveillance Footage at the mid-block pedestrian crosswayMichael Bryant's book 28 Seconds states: "It was Darcy Sheppard who, moments later, drove within inches of my driver’s-side door, as our Saab was stopped a little farther west on Bloor Street at an intersection near Avenue Road. It was Darcy Sheppard who then pulled directly in front of our car and spun his bike around to confront us, sneering at me. “Now what’re ya gonna do?”WATCH: Eyewitness statements and 911 call audioREAD:   Collision Reconstruction ReportREAD:   Transcript from May 25 2010 Court Proceeding* Remember - none of it has been proven in court (crown or defence)Media referenced in this episode:WATCH: Michael Bryant's interview with Amanda Lang on CBC READ: Toronto Life article Michael Bryant's bad year by Leah McLaren WATCH: The Agenda with Steve Paikin - Michael Bryant WATCH: The Agenda with Steve Paikin - Allan SheppardAD-FREE episodes are available via our Premium FeedsSign up via Apple Podcasts, Patreon or Supercast Full list of resources and information sources and credits:See the page for this episode at canadiantruecrime.caCredits:Research and production assistance: Haley GrayAudio editing: Eileen MacfarlaneResearch, writing, sound design: Kristi LeeTheme by We Talk of DreamsDisclaimer voiced by the host of True Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

It's winter, and you can get anything you need delivered with Uber Eats. Well, almost almost anything. So no, you can't get snowballs on Uber Eats. But meatballs, mozzarella balls, and arancini balls? Yes, we deliver those. Moose? No. But moose head? Yes. Because that's alcohol, and we deliver that too.

Along with your favorite restaurant food, groceries, and other everyday essentials. Order Uber Eats now. For alcohol, you must be legal drinking age. Please enjoy responsibly. Product availability varies by region. See app for details. We can wait for clean water solutions. Or we can engineer access to clean water.

We can acknowledge indigenous cultures. Or we can learn from indigenous voices. We can demand more from the earth. Or we can demand more from ourselves. At York University, we work together to create positive change for a better tomorrow. Join us at yorku.ca slash write the future. Hi there, this is part five of a six-part series. And before I start, I wanted to take a second to respond to a few complaints that

I'm being perceived as biased in this series. And when listening back, it's kind of easy to see how some of you may have thought this. In parts three and four of this series, when I compared what was portrayed in court that day to a fuller account of the evidence, the overall picture does end up appearing more favorable to the side of Darcy Ellen Shepard. But to be clear, that's not the same as being biased or one-sided. Bias in storytelling happens when facts are cherry-picked to support a certain narrative, or facts that don't support that narrative are omitted. And typically when this happens, the audience is not directed to review the original documents that the story relies on because obviously the bias would soon be evident. To get away with a false narrative,

the facts have to be hidden away somewhere. And it's because of all of this that at every step of the way I've pointed you to all the facts and evidence that I've relied on in this analysis. The 911 calls, those five taped eyewitness statements, the collision reconstruction report, the transcript of the court proceeding, and of course, all the media reporting. Not only am I confident that what I'm portraying is fair and balanced, but I also like transparency, and I want you to be able to verify it if you like. Despite this, some listeners have assumed that I have a motive in this, and that I'm somehow trying to turn the tables and show that Darcy Ellen Shepard is an ideal citizen who shouldn't be faulted, and Michael Bryant should be somehow jailed for life.

This is an example of that black and white thinking that I spoke about in the introduction, and the reason why I stressed that no one is all good or all bad. Now, as I've stated quite a few times now, the conclusion of the Collision Reconstruction Report states, Mr. Bryant and and Mr Shepard shared responsibility in the death of Mr Shepard. And that brings me to the statement I made at the beginning of this series. I said that I have approached this case with no agenda. My only goal is to unravel the story in a fair and balanced way. And despite the bias that some listeners think that you may have heard, that is what I've done here. I suspect that what you may have perceived as bias is in my reaction to those facts. For example, when I commented that the Saab appeared to resemble

Christine, the possessed car from the Stephen King novel. This isn't really new, I'm an independent storyteller, and while I generally prefer to stay out of the story, I have been known to comment on facts in many episodes before. And really, facts are facts. They can be cherry-picked, omitted, or refuted by other facts, but an opinion or a reaction to a fact doesn't change it. but an opinion or a reaction to a fact doesn't change it. So if you think that I sound biased in my reporting, I invite you to review the documents and reports related to this case. I have now spent weeks and months looking at them.

Just look at the transcript of the court proceeding and compare it to the 911 calls, the full eyewitness statements that we have, as well as all the information in the collision reconstruction report. And remember, none of it has been proven in court, including the narrative presented by the Crown Prosecutor that day. And that's kind of the point. As always, links are in the show notes and on the website. My reputation is important to me, as can be seen in my body of work.

So if you find any places where I have cherry-picked or omitted facts, or even unknowingly portrayed a certain narrative that isn't quite right, please let me know exactly what it was, because I would want to fix it immediately. Thanks again for listening. And with that, it's on with the show. Canadian True Crime is a completely independent production, funded mainly through advertising. The podcast often has coarse language and disturbing content. It's not for everyone.

This is part five of a six-part series. Where we left off, we had finished unpacking Michael Bryant's version of events, as presented in court that day by the special independent prosecutor. The court heard that the eyewitness accounts coupled with the forensic examination confirm, quote, that Mr. Shepard was attempting to attack Mr. Bryant at that time. But as you'll remember, the Collision Reconstruction Report's conclusion states, quote, there was no physical evidence or independent witness statements suggesting Mr. Shepard affected the steering of the Saab or anything to suggest he physically attacked Mr. Shepard affected the steering of the Saab or anything to suggest he physically attacked Mr. Bryant.

The Reconstructionists concluded that Mr. Shepard and Mr. Bryant shared responsibility in the incident that led to Mr. Shepard's death. Pairing what the special prosecutor presented that day to the pages and pages of summarised but detailed eyewitness accounts included in the Collision Reconstruction Report, which wasn't publicly available at the time, there are clear and significant inconsistencies. The court heard nothing of this, nor was there any mention of the many eyewitnesses who perceived Michael Bryant to be the main covert aggressor. And while Darcy Alan Shepard himself was not seen as an innocent party, his conduct was perceived by the eyewitnesses more as passive-aggressive. Further to this, the court heard that the eyewitnesses reportedly said other things that were not just different, but completely contradictory to what was included in the report. For example, the prosecutor cited three eyewitnesses who reportedly said the car was not swerving, but we couldn't find a single record of an eyewitness saying this. In fact, we found four who said they did see the car swerving.

Yet in court, the prosecutor stated as fact that the car was not swerving all over the place. So what could have explained this disparity? The Crown had not re-interviewed the eyewitnesses, so it's not like they remembered new details later on, details that vastly changed the meaning of their original statements. Perhaps it's because the Collision Reconstruction Report only included summarized accounts of 19 of the eyewitness statements, presumably the ones deemed relevant to the report. There were another six eyewitness statements that weren't included, but if by chance they did report many contradictory details that the reconstruction experts chose to exclude from their analysis and report, it would likely be something the

special prosecutor would have mentioned in court, but it was not. In explaining why the charges were being withdrawn, the prosecutor had also introduced a collection of at least six incidents referred to as the Scopoliti evidence, where a person saw Darcy's photo in the press after he was killed and came forward to report they had been in a confrontation with an angry cyclist that they believed to be Darcy. A well-known Ontario Court of Appeal decision, R v Scopoliti, was cited, a case where a man charged with murder claimed self-defence, and it was determined that the prior conduct of the victim may be admissible to demonstrate the likelihood that they were the aggressor in the matter before court. Given Darcy's history, the six incidents

weren't out of the realm of possibility, but only one of them could be considered a positive identification, that's the incident with the BMW driver, that there was photographic evidence of. incident with the BMW driver that there was photographic evidence of. The court heard that because four of these incidents happened in the month before Darcy's death, it demonstrated an escalating cycle of aggressiveness towards motorists in the days leading to the fatal interaction with Mr Bryant. So after presenting the case for the Crown and now the defence, the special independent prosecutor was ready to explain the Crown's decision to withdraw the charges of dangerous driving causing death and criminal negligence causing death. When it came to the prosecution's burden of proof,

their obligation to provide proof in support of these charges, the special prosecutor stated that the version of the story provided by Michael Bryant and his wife cannot be discounted or rejected. Quote, Indeed, their accounts find circumstantial support in other reliable evidence available to the Crown. Again, it should be stated that Michael Bryant and his wife did not provide their version of events until after they were privy to all this other evidence, including the eyewitness reports and the Scopoliti evidence. The court heard that a charge of dangerous driving causing death requires proof of a marked departure from the standard of a reasonably prudent driver, having regard to all of the

circumstances, including the accused's reasonable perception of the facts. The special prosecutor explained that an accused person's fear is a relevant consideration, and the law recognizes that momentary acts of panic in relation to an unexpected situation will often fall short of establishing an act of dangerous driving. And also, a person faced with a threatening situation may not be criminally responsible for driving in a way that would normally constitute a criminal offence. He said that in this case, quote, of aggressiveness towards motorists and others. Mr Bryant and his wife were in an open convertible, adding to their vulnerability. Mr Shepard chose to jump into the vehicle, onto the vehicle. Whatever his motivations, Mr Bryant could reasonably perceive that Mr Shepard was intent

on doing he and his wife harm. End quote. In layman's terms, the prosecutor was saying that when you take into consideration Michael's fear that night, his driving was consistent with what any other decent driver would have done in the same situation. The court heard there was no reasonable prospect of conviction, and accordingly, the Crown was asking that the charges be marked as withdrawn. After Richard Peck's presentation, Michael Bryant's defence lawyer was invited by the court to provide comment. It should be noted that it's not typical to hear from a defence lawyer in a proceeding where the Crown withdraws charges. After all, the role of the Crown prosecutor is to consider the evidence in totality. The prosecutor's function

is a matter of public duty that excludes any notion of winning or losing. It's not the same though when it comes to a defense lawyer, but this case was far from typical. Marie Hennon started off by thanking the prosecution team for undertaking, quote, such a thorough and extensive review of the totality of the evidence in this case, much of which emerged only after the charges were laid. The defence lawyer went on to praise the prosecution team, describing them as the model of prosecutorial fairness and objectivity, and special prosecutor Richard Peck as Marie Hennon said she'd never had a case before where she had made the decision to quote, open up our file, expose our full defense

to the prosecutorial and police scrutiny before the case was even heard. The reason she did this, she explained, was because she had complete confidence in the strength of the defense's case and believed that when the objective facts were fully exposed and examined, they pointed to one and only one conclusion, quote, Michael's innocence. She then went over Michael Bryant's version of events and the case again, the version you would expect to hear from his criminal defense lawyer. Evidently, the Crown had already provided that version and analysis, so Marie Hennon's retelling was more succinct, but peppered with more descriptive language of her client. The court heard that the couple were out

celebrating their wedding anniversary that night. Quote, The mood was warm, it was nostalgic, it was reminiscing, like many couples do over their years together. And of course, what you always talk about, your children. Michael Bryant would publish his memoir, 28 Seconds, two years after that. And as you'll recall, he revealed that their marriage had actually been in trouble for a while. He'd spent a lot of time in the proverbial doghouse that summer. They'd been in counseling for months. He forgot their anniversary and scrambled to make plans.

He also said he was going through the pressure of a career change, a significant reorientation, and described it as maybe something of a small midlife crisis. And when it came to that night, rather than being warm and nostalgic reminiscing, Michael described tension. His wife's smile was forced and they talked, debated and argued about their marriage. At the time, he may not have wanted to disclose personal details like the state of his marriage for public consumption, which is understandable. But in effect, it changed the perception of his state of mind as he drove the Saab along Bloor Street that night. The reality was that he was a man who was under immense pressure in his career. His marriage was on the rocks, he was tiptoeing on eggshells,

and he'd had a tense evening. That was the driver who pulled up to the lights that night. But in court that day, he allowed his lawyer to portray the evening as an average happy couple, celebrating their wedding anniversary, reminiscing about their children, right up until their lovely evening was rudely interrupted. As you'll remember, after their anniversary dinner that night, Michael Bryant was trying to get to a bookstore before it closed to get his wife a book that she wanted. The court heard that to reach that bookstore, they would have had to turn off Bloor Street at Bay Street, the intersection before the mid-block pedestrian crossing. But before that, when they saw there

was traffic up ahead, they changed their mind, deciding to just go home to their children. That meant they didn't need to turn and that's why they stayed on Bloor Street. didn't need to turn and that's why they stayed on Bloor Street. This was described by Marie Hennon as a life-changing decision. Quote, that decision and that decision alone would bring Michael and Susan face to face with the rage of Darcy Shepard. That decision would bring them here today. And then when describing the part of the attack where Darcy latched on to the side of the car, Marie Hennon told the court that Michael claimed Darcy said to him, you are not getting away that easily. Now this was the first time this particular comment was mentioned in these proceedings and there's obviously no eyewitness account of this

comment other than Michael Bryant's own recollection. Despite this, it should be stated that Darcy's father, Alan Shepard, believes that this comment is consistent with something Darcy would have said, but not in the threatening way Michael Bryant was claiming through his lawyer. but not in the threatening way Michael Bryant was claiming through his lawyer. As you'll remember, after the car accelerated into Darcy and he landed on the road near the driver's side, three eyewitnesses had heard Darcy saying to bystanders, you're all witnesses to this. One of them said he was gesturing at the Saab as he said this. But the special independent prosecutor did not mention anything about this in court that day.

Perhaps it's because it seems obvious that Darcy likely wanted people to bear witness to the fact that he and his bike had been hit from behind by a person driving a car. behind by a person driving a car. And as Victoria, one of the eyewitnesses, said, it didn't appear that Darcy wanted to attack the driver, rather he didn't want the driver to leave the scene. So when considered in the context of Michael Bryant asserting that Darcy said you're not getting away that easily as he clung to the side of the car, it takes on a whole new meaning. As you'll recall, one of the narratives planted in the media was the attempted carjacker story that Darcy had tried to grab the wheel and fought for control of the car as Michael Bryant tried to defend himself from behind the wheel. A narrative that we now know is completely untrue, but it made an appearance in court that day. Michael Bryant's defence lawyer said, quote,

As Darcy was deep into the vehicle with his entire upper the only way to get away from Darcy's attack. Quote, Throughout this brief but frightening attack, his wife thought they were both going to die. The court heard that they drove to safety around the corner to the Park Hyatt Hotel where they called 911. If there was any question as to what was in Michael's mind at that moment, there can be no question when you hear his 911 plea for help. He requests that the police come because he has just been attacked. It is the call of someone terrified for his and his wife's life. It is the call of someone who has just been attacked. Obviously, the court never heard that call because this wasn't a trial. Marie Hennon's comments ended with this statement, quote,

At the end of the proceeding, Justice P. Bentley praised both the Crown and the Defence. Quote, in this case, both counsel for the Crown and the Defence worked above and beyond what I have seen in many, many years. And all I can say is that to all counsel, you represent the best interest, the best interest of the justice system. Now it should be noted that this judge wasn't a trier of law or fact in this proceeding. In this pre-trial court proceeding, his mandate from the Attorney General is to facilitate agreement between the Crown and the Defence, with the goal to avoid the expense of a trial. So given they had essentially done just that, it was a good outcome for everyone. But this isn't what usually happens when the Crown and the Defence reach an agreement. It's usually through compromise where the Defence makes admissions in exchange for concessions from the Crown.

But in this instance, Michael Bryant didn't make a single admission about anything he may have done wrong that night. He maintained that the car stalled, that Darcy took a swing at him, that the car then stalled a second time and as he tried to get it started again in a state of panic, it essentially accidentally accelerated forward two car lengths, Michael looking down the whole time. And when he looked up, he saw Darcy on the hood and hit the brakes. And then as he tried to drive off, Darcy latched on to the side of the car and Michael insisted that he struggled to maintain control of it, so that's why he ended up driving on the wrong side of the road. Michael Bryant made no admissions of guilt and when asked what he would have done differently,

the only admission he gave was that he wished he'd stayed home. mission he gave was that he wished he'd stayed home. Because it was such a high-profile case, there was a news conference held after the court proceeding. Special Prosecutor Richard Peck told reporters that Michael Bryant was, quote, confronted by a man who unfortunately was in a rage. In such circumstances, he was legally justified in trying to get away. The case could not be proved. When Michael fronted the press, he stated that he'll never forget what happened that night, describing it as an unnecessary tragedy. A young man is dead, and for his family family and friends that remains the searing memory.

To them I express my sympathies and sincere condolences. I have grieved that loss and I always will. While he felt terrified and panicked during the ordeal, he said he has no anger towards Darcy Ellen Shepard. And he described the whole experience as being incredibly humbling, given he went from being attorney general to being cuffed in the back of a police car. Quote, This is not a morality play about bikes versus cars, drivers versus cyclists, or one about class privilege or politics. It's just about how in 28 seconds everything can change and how time marches on, and so will I, end quote. He said he was looking forward to going back to work

at Toronto law firm Ogilvy Renault. CTV News reported that in response to criticism that Michael continued to drive erratically while Darcy was hanging onto the car, a reporter asked him why he didn't take his foot off the pedal. Michael paused and said that he'd thought a lot about what he would do differently if he had the chance, but, quote, and said that he'd thought a lot about what he would do differently if he had the chance.

But quote, What happened has been really exhaustively described by the prosecutor and that's what happened. I obviously wish that none of it had happened. None of it. You can get anything you need with Uber Eats. We'll see you next time. by region. See app for details. We can wait for clean water solutions. Or we can engineer access to clean water. We can acknowledge indigenous cultures. Or we can learn from indigenous voices. We can demand more from the earth. Or we can demand more from ourselves. At York University, we work together to create positive change for a better tomorrow. Join us at yorku.ca slash write the future. Hi everyone. Today we're talking passion projects that turn into careers, a topic that obviously

resonates quite a bit with me. In collaboration with the Ontario Cannabis Store and ACAST Creative, I want to introduce you to someone who took his passion for cannabis, turned it into a career and is now an industry trailblazer. This is Nico Soziak. He's the chief financial officer of Canara Biotech, a prominent producer based in Montreal. Nico, I know that you've had a passion for cannabis for quite a few years, but you seem a lot younger than what I was expecting. I have to know how and when you got into the cannabis business. Yeah, absolutely. I look younger, but I'm aging by the day. But no, I'm 35 years old. I got into cannabis about five years ago. I started with Canara.

But you were a consumer before that. Yeah, I've been a consumer. I had friends in the legacy side of the business and watch what they did. I tried the different strains and genetics, watched how they grew, really found a passion for cannabis and the products. But my professional career is an accountant. So while I had a passion for cannabis, I was also a straight A student. Wow. And then Canada decided to legalize cannabis. And that was when I was like, okay, this is kind of my calling. I have to try to figure out how do I can get into the industry. And Canara had just became a public company. I joined them in April, 2019 and built the finance department here at Canara and worked with the founder. And at one point, I was given the keys to that. And now I'm here today.

Wow, that's such a cool story. So how do you feel about being called a trailblazer in the legal market now? It's an honor. I've looked up to many trailblazers in this industry today that come from the legacy side that went to legal. You know, I'm happy to be part of that. So actually, I wanted to ask you about the legacy market. How did you incorporate it into operations on the legal side? I don't pretend that the cannabis market just got created in 2017. Right. For me, legacy means that everyone that's been working, all the businesses that have been in the industry pre-legalization. I'm not going to reinvent the wheel in terms of thinking I know what consumers want.

There's been an industry that's been built for many, many, many years. So it's all the ideas and creations that were pre-legalization, figuring out how do we evolve that into the legal side with all the regulatory frameworks. What would you say is the best part of working in the legal market? Knowing that your product is clean, knowing what you're consuming, we're ensuring quality, we're ensuring the price. I think we're ahead of other industries. Okay, so final question. What gets you excited to go to work every day?

This is my dream. This is my passion. I get excited. Work doesn't feel like work for me. When you're creating things that you dream about, I give the idea to the team. The team is able to execute different innovations. That's what really gets me excited.

Thanks for listening to this Trailblazers story brought to you by the Ontario Cannabis Store and ACAST Creative. If you like the trail Nico Soziak is blazing, you will love what's happening in legal cannabis. Visit ocs.ca slash trailblazers to learn more. Darcy's adoptive father, Alan Shepard, was in court that day, along with Misty, Darcy's partner. Both were described by CTV News as being visibly emotional after the proceedings.

Alan told reporters that, quote, is in this circumstance. I'm not happy with the result, but I don't know what would have made me happy. He added that the people who made the decisions, the lawyers, talked to him with great respect. He believed all they had to say and, quote, they've made a decision that I'll accept. Misty was described by CBC News as being a bit more direct. She said, quote, The message I'm getting is that we deserve to die for riding a bike. There's no repercussions. Behind the scenes, Alan Shepard Sr. was aware of the outcome before the court proceeding started. He had been invited to a meeting with Richard Peck and his local representative Mark Sandler, as well as Detective Constable Arthur Lane from Toronto Police Traffic Services and some others. There, Alan Shepard was given the news that the charges were going to be withdrawn, along with a short presentation of what the Crown was going to be saying in court. But after the proceeding,

he couldn't help but feel a bit blindsided. And it's not because of the inconsistencies between the Crown's presentation and the Collision Reconstruction Report, because the report, of course, wasn't public at the time. And nor did Alan feel blindsided because the charges were withdrawn. He would say in an interview with Canada Land years later that he had accepted that the lawyers would likely arrive at that decision because when considering Darcy's background and history in the context of the criminal justice system, he could understand why the lawyers might feel that they weren't likely to get a conviction. Instead, his feeling of being blindsided was related to the fact that when explaining a decision to withdraw charges against Michael Bryant, he didn't expect to hear such a detailed

history of Darcy's childhood, including his psychiatric, psychological and clinical background. That would have been expected from Michael Bryant's defence team as part of a trial, but not the Crown prosecutor and certainly not the special independent prosecutor. Allen also did not expect the Crown to imply that while what happened to Darcy in his childhood wasn't his fault, it contributed to him turning into what amounted to an angry criminal who battled addiction. And as you'll remember, the prosecutor had stated, quote, Given what we know about Mr. Shepard, it is not surprising that he would go into a rage from time to time. And, you know, it was quite an amazing story.

Most people are ill-situated to overcome the obstacles this man faced. The implication was that it was inevitable that someone like Darcy would eventually do something like what happened to Michael Bryant. In the eyes of Alan Shepard and Darcy's supporters, it amounted again to the completely unnecessary demonization of Darcy Ellen Shepard, the man who wasn't able to tell his own side of the cyclist and bike messenger community had been gathered outside the courthouse and the decision dismayed and angered them.

Yvonne Bambrick, then executive director of the Toronto Cyclists Union, was quoted in the Canadian press saying there were too many unanswered questions in the case. Quote, Cyclists get a $110 ticket for not having a bell. A cyclist in this case was killed by a driver who made a wrong decision, and there's no repercussion whatsoever. That just doesn't seem to make much sense or seem fair. She added in reference to Michael Bryant that everyone knows what adrenaline does, it's unpredictable. Quote, but with that said, he had a choice, and that's where the law comes

into play. I'm disappointed. I speak for thousands of Torontonians and people across the country who've watched this case. I don't think we're seeing justice here. In the same CP24 article, MPP Peter Kormos, then the justice critic for the NDP party, predicted that there would be a dark cloud over the case for many years to come. He referred to the questions about conflict of interest, whether the fact that the former Attorney General who once appointed judges and oversaw Crown prosecutors would receive special treatment by the justice system, and because the decision to drop the charges wasn't made by a trier of fact like a judge or a jury, and none of the evidence was actually put to court, those questions still remain.

He said, quote, Neither Mr. Shepard got justice, nor, what many would argue, did Mr. Bryant. After the court proceeding, the executive summary of the decision was distributed to the media, detailing everything that happened, including those six incidents that were accepted by the court as proof of Darcy having a history of aggression towards motorists. Within hours, those details were being published by multiple media outlets. Details were being published by multiple media outlets. The National Post published those pictures of a shirtless Darcy Allen Shepard clinging onto the BMW on the front page, with the headline, Darcy Allen Shepard taunted other drivers before Michael Bryant. The Toronto Star posted an article by Robin Doolittle and Jesse McLean, who interviewed the driver of that BMW.

The driver recalled that Darcy charged at his BMW's open window, completely unprovoked. Quote, I'm sitting in my car, the guy comes and starts screaming at me. He added that Darcy was acting aggressively, quote, insanely, sociopathically so. This incident happened in an area of Toronto's financial district that served as a hub for local bike messengers, where they congregated while they waited for the next job. The Toronto Star article described tension between the bike messengers and local businesses. The photos of Darcy Allen Shepard were taken by a lawyer on the fifth floor of the building next to this hub, who noticed a commotion with the bike messengers outside and reached for his camera. The Toronto Star also quoted a bike messenger named Nicolette, who said she was there

when Darcy attacked the BMW and she was horrified to see it happen. Quote, the driver was stuck in gridlock or something. I think he said something to Darcy. Darcy said something back. It escalated. She added, Darcy was having a bad month. and the special prosecutor's reasons for withdrawing the charges. the outcome and the special prosecutor's reasons for withdrawing the charges. The court proceeding was over and this was now part of the public record. As an article published by the Toronto Star read, quote, it had been nearly nine months since Bryant and his wife were driving along Bloor Street after an anniversary dinner when a drunk Shepard approached the convertible's window. Bryant's car had stalled, and when he tried to accelerate, Shepard landed on his hood. The cyclist became enraged and grabbed onto the side of the car.

An uncredited opinion piece in the Globe and Mail described Michael Bryant as an everyman. Quote, anyone might find himself in his place one day, reacting in fear and panic to a wild, unexpected aggressor, and subject afterwards to police charges and condemnation by the community. When criminal charges were dropped against him yesterday, it was a good day for justice. The same opinion piece pointed out that even though Michael was an everyman, he could afford top legal representation and other experts, and if every everyman were in the same position, there would be fewer miscarriages of justice. But quote, The important point is that the poisoned arrow of

wrongful accusation no longer points at an innocent man. In a column for the Toronto Star, Rosie DiMano described Darcy Alan Shepard as a quote, quixotic hothead consumed by demons from his awful past, but it was the devil inside him on the night of August 31st, 2009 that caused his death, and not the man who was once Ontario's Attorney General. Damano described Michael Bryant as merely the hapless vehicle of fate. Quote, Deranged cyclist meets car. car bumps infuriated cyclist. The cyclist was the provocateur, the driver was the terrified and disoriented wheel man. Other media outlets reported that the real issue was the need for more bike lanes in Toronto. Writing for the National Post, Peter Kutenbrauer described an

inherent imbalance between the bicycle and the motor car and added, quote, Mr Bryant is not guilty. That does not mean that he used the best possible judgment when Darcy Ellen Shepard allegedly gripped the wheel of the Saab. He stated that Michael does not come out of this a hero, but neither should he come out as a felon. Christy Blatchford's opinion was similar. Her piece for the Globe and Mail was titled, For Michael Bryant, an extraordinary kind of justice, and the first paragraph read, Look, it's the right result, but unless you were born yesterday, what Michael Bryant got by way of justice was not the ordinary sort, but the extra fair sort. She described the fact that the defense provided their full file to the Crown as practically

unheard of. There usually is a preliminary hearing before the trial, where the evidence is called and a decision is made in whether to include it. But this didn't happen here. She then referred to one of the comments made by Michael Bryant after the decision. He had said that nobody is above the law, but no one's below the law either. Quote, he didn't add that some folks get the old beta version and some get the Saab. In the aftermath of the decision, cycling advocates, bike messengers and others started to analyse what had happened. By this point, former bike courier Joe Hendry had set up a blog called Bryant Watch, where he wrote about each development of the case.

The full transcript of the court proceeding wouldn't be released for a few years, along with the collision reconstruction report, of course. hold of the 11-page executive summary that was distributed to the media and analyzed the case, pointing out that the source for much of the new evidence mentioned by the special independent prosecutor appeared to come from those interviews that Michael Bryant and his wife granted the crown months later. Joe Hendry speculated that it looked like the interviews may have been done after Michael Bryant and his wife had seen all the evidence. And as mentioned previously, this would be confirmed by Michael Bryant in his 2012 memoir, 28 Seconds. In a piece for BicycleLaw.com, former Olympic cyclist and cycling lawyer Bob Mionski pointed out that what was most remarkable was not the special prosecutor's decision to drop the charges because he couldn't win the case, because that's what they're obligated to do, to determine whether they have the evidence to go forward. Quote, In fact, prosecutors regularly make determinations

as to whether they have sufficient evidence to get a conviction, but Peck went further, seemingly taking on the role of defence attorney and presenting Bryant's defence to the court. Three months after that their goal was to remember a lost friend and draw attention to cyclist safety. The event, which was attended by dozens of cyclists, was also a place for venting about the decision to withdraw charges. One cyclist, named Sonia, was quoted saying that the outcome made her sick. One of Darcy's friends, named Brian, brought a ghost bike.

A bike painted white and placed at locations where cyclists have been killed, as a memorial. As Brian locked the bike to a pole near the spot where Darcy lost his life, he said he was disappointed with the legal system. Quote, Darcy's been failed by the system so many times before and this has got to be the biggest failure. Alan Shepard said he was still working through his grief and was disappointed that the assertions that were made in court deserved more rigorous examination than they actually got. About Darcy, he said, quote, I'm prepared still to accept that he did initiate the incident, but I need a better explanation of how that happened than what we've got so far. Allen said that he felt no vitriol towards Michael Bryant, but would like him to acknowledge

that he did play some role in Darcy Allen Shepard's death, whatever that may have been. Quote, just to say, look, what I did, I regret having done it, and I'm sorry. Just to admit some involvement. In fact, just the opposite would continue to happen. Just two weeks later, Toronto Life published a long-form article written by Leah McLaren with the headline, Michael Bryant's very bad year, his life on bail, how he got off and his surprise comeback. The piece details Michael's version of the story, the encounter with the angry cyclist tossing the garbage, meeting him again at the mid-block pedestrian crossway, the Saab stalling twice and Michael's panic in trying to restart the car that caused it to surge forward. The article did at least acknowledge that Darcy didn't just land on the hood. It described the Saab hitting him hard enough that he toppled onto the hood.

But the rest of that paragraph states, Elsewhere in the article, Michael provided an explanation for why he had a suit delivered before he was released from custody to awaiting media. The former attorney general said his kids were used to seeing him on TV in a suit, so if he suddenly appeared in a t-shirt, they would have known that something was amiss. The article also described the role of his wife, Susan Abramovich, describing her as one of the most influential entertainment lawyers in the country. Someone who spent that next day, quote, attacking the situation like the high-functioning, crisis-managing type A personality that she is.

She'd already spoken to the city's best criminal lawyers, reassured friends, consulted with associates, fended off the press and talked to Jamie Watt, head of the PR firm Navigator, who, being a friend, offered up his services for free. Now as you'll recall, it had been reported that the services of Navigator came at a rate of $600 per hour, a rate that presumably Michael Bryant had been fortunate to be in a position to pay. But in fact, it had been more of a mates rates deal, that rate being free. In the piece, the author described the media turning on Michael Bryant, with early speculation that he was seen with an unidentified woman in what was described as a luxury convertible, prompting questions about whether he'd been

having an affair. The author of the piece described it as the story of the year, and quote, Now it should be noted that this early speculation actually dissipated within hours. Today, the only reference that seems to remain is in an article released the same night as Darcy Allen Shepard's death by CTV News. It reads, quote, Bryant was also seen at the scene of the crash. A woman in a red dress accompanied Bryant. She attempted to block TV cameras from filming at the scene. She is not facing any charges in connection with the incident. In any event, as soon as the media learned that the woman was in fact Michael Bryant's wife, that story was thwarted,

soon to be replaced by a new narrative forming that would ensure it was Darcy Allen Shepard who was demonised. Liam McLaren's Toronto Life article then goes into a detailed background of Michael's history, how he liked to point out that he grew up in a family in which politicians were respected public servants, insisting that government was not something to be sneered at, but an agent for good. The author commented, quote,

The article details his impressive education, his silver medal for the second highest marks at Osgoode Hall Law School, how he was only one of 27 students from the best law schools in the country to be selected to clerk at the Supreme Court of Canada, and then how he, quote, laid the groundwork for a career in politics the old-fashioned way, by cultivating relationships with people in power. Michael Bryant was described as someone who built up a big fat Rolodex. He was a master of managing his public image, someone who actively courted the press and wasn't afraid of making controversial decisions,

like banning pitbulls and destroying cars that had been modified for street racing. He was described as someone who liked to appear tough on crime. The author wrote that Michael Bryant's fall from grace was as stunningly dramatic as his ultimate vindication in court, and apparently most who knew him believed that a political comeback was on the cards. Quote, those close to him say he is a changed man, full of contrition, humility, and lingering contempt for his cavalier former self. The author ended the piece by stating, quote, This Toronto Life article has nearly 70 comments, a majority complaining that it was a one-sided piece. Others asked questions like, What would you do if a mentally ill man attacked you in your car?

End quote. As for the people calling him a murderer, shame on you. This guy's career could have been destroyed by a tiny encounter with someone who shouldn't have been on the streets to begin with. Another reader, who said they were saddened to learn the outcome of the case, added, quote, there is clearly no doubt the cyclist Shepard was harassing and intimidating. Still, that is no defense for the actions of driver Bryant in killing him. Shameful insider's game of justice. You can get anything you need with Uber Eats. Well, almost almost anything. So no, you can't get snowballs on Uber Eats. But meatballs and mozzarella balls, yes, we can deliver that.

Uber Eats. Get almost almost anything. Order now. Product availability may vary by region. See app for details. In the months after the court proceeding, Alan Shepard tried to make sense of what had happened and spoke with two of the main investigating officers from Toronto Police Traffic Services,

Detective Constables Arthur Lane and Lester Leller. They told Alan about the three eyewitnesses in the Collision Reconstruction report who mentioned that Darcy Allen Shepard had called for witnesses after the sub accelerated into him and went to drive off. These three eyewitnesses were not mentioned in the presentation in court that day, which caused Allen to wonder. The special independent prosecutor's presentation was centered around the belief of Michael Bryant and his wife that Darcy Allen Shepard intended to harm them that night. So if this were the case, why would Darcy call for witnesses? And further to this, why did the special independent prosecutor state that Darcy

was the main aggressor? There were many more questions than this, and Allen knew that he had to continue to go down the rabbit hole. After a few more months, he finally got the transcript of the court proceeding. As you'll remember, only the 11-page executive summary had been released to the media, but this was the full 68-page transcript. Alan had been in court that day and had seen and heard the presentation, obviously, but he was distraught and emotional at the time. When reading the full transcript with a clearer head, it became evident that there were holes and outright errors that he hadn't noticed. One of the most striking things Alan remembered noticing was the part where Richard Peck told the

court, quote, when the vehicle stopped, Mr. Shepard fell off the hood and then stood up within about two seconds. He clearly was not seriously injured at that time. The special independent prosecutor was not a qualified medical professional, nor did he mention consulting with one. So why did it appear that he was actively trying to minimise what happened to Darcy? trying to minimize what happened to Darcy. Alan Shepard would write that he understood and accepted that the Crown prosecutor does not represent the victims or survivors of a crime, nor does it speak for them. The role of the Crown is to speak for the community as a whole,

a function that is a matter of public duty that excludes any notion of winning or losing. The puzzling question was, how was this strategy to minimize what happened to Darcy that night considered to be in the public interest or the best thing for the community? It just didn't make any sense. didn't make any sense. Alan had since been joined by others, including a large number of eagle-eyed members of the Toronto bike messenger community. Two notable members were cycling advocates Joe Hendry, who manages the Bryant Watch blog, and also the late Wayne Scott, who had already won a significant court battle against Revenue Canada, his arguments being the reason why today bike couriers are entitled to claim food as a fuel expense on their tax returns. They all got together and felt that not only was something amiss,

but something seemed significantly wrong with how the case had played out, and it resulted in Allen applying to the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act to see if he could get any more information related to the case. Those who are familiar with cases from the United States would also be familiar with Freedom of Information, also referred to as FOIA, but in Canada it works differently because of that protection of privacy part. Rather than applying for the full file, a person in Canada can apply for specific pieces of information or documents, but the protection of privacy requirement needs to be satisfied for every identifiable person or entity.

So that's why, for example, we don't have the transcript or audio of Michael Bryant's 911 call, because he didn't give permission. There were other 911 calls made as well, besides Steve and Victoria's, but those people didn't give permission either, nor did any other eyewitnesses who gave statements. The ones that you've heard from Steve, Victoria, the parking garage guy, and the two construction workers all gave permission. The rest were gleaned through that collision reconstruction report. So after the various freedom of information and protection of privacy requests had been filed, the wait began. And during that wait, there were

more developments, as it had been reported that Michael Bryant was writing a memoir. You've heard that memoir mentioned several times throughout this series. It's called 28 Seconds, A True Story of Addiction, Tragedy and Hope. The promotional copy states that the book is about how a night that began with a dinner to celebrate his wedding anniversary ended in a jail cell for Michael Bryant. The charges were eventually dropped, but nothing could undo what had happened to Shepard, or Bryant. Several media outlets supported the launch of this book by publishing excerpts of it, Michael Bryant's direct version of what happened, a version that came from him this time and not the special independent prosecutor,

a version that contained even more details about what happened that night from his point of view. He wrote about Darcy's life, stating that, quote, For most of his troubled 33 years, Darcy Shepard had fought addiction to alcohol and crack cocaine. On this day, his string of eight sober days had come, once again, to a dispiriting end. Michael Bryant started his version of the night by stating, quote, This particular night, our wedding anniversary was surely destined, just like everything else I touched, to turn out golden. He added, quote, The eggshell crunches of the marriage were deafening,

as he went on to describe the tension in the air that night. He talks about his first encounter with Darcy, the encounter that came before the altercation at the mid-block pedestrian crossway. He wrote, Again, no other motorists or passengers came forward to report any such disturbances, like a cyclist forcing them off the road, on the same stretch of road that was just minutes before the incident that would cause Darcy's death. Michael Bryant then states, It was Darcy Shepard who, moments later, drove within inches of my driver's side door, as our Saab was stopped a little farther west on Bloor Street at an intersection near Avenue Road.

It was Darcy Shepard who then pulled directly in front of our car and spun his bike around to confront us, sneering at me. Now what are you going to do? The 28 seconds began, end quote. Now this statement that Darcy spun his bike around to confront the Saab is at best completely contradictory to both eyewitness statements and the surveillance footage. Even though the footage is grainy, it clearly shows Darcy facing forward the entire time, his back to the Saab, driven by Michael Bryant, which then surges forward twice, the second time taking off out of the frame with Darcy on the hood. At no point can Darcy be seen doing anything that could be considered flipping his bike around to face the Saab. If you're keen to review it, there's a link in the show notes to watch a 30-second video that shows what happened,

and I've also included the full quote from the book as well for comparison. quote from the book as well for comparison. Moving on, Michael wrote that as he waited at the lights, he felt trapped, describing Darcy as big, drunk and raging. Quote, I wondered if he had a weapon on him. He said because Susan, his wife, was in the car, he needed to get away, but he'd stalled the car and as he kept trying to restart it while keeping an eye on Darcy, it stalled again. When it came to the second time the car stalled and lurched forward, the point at which we know Darcy was jostled and had to pick up the bike and right himself again, Michael wrote that there was still no contact with Darcy or his bicycle. wrote that there was still no contact with Darcy or his bicycle, but the quote, growling man saw this, the car lurching, and he seemed to get more and more agitated. He seemed to be howling at me. Michael wrote that he gave up on keeping an eye on Darcy. Quote, I looked down at the pedals and

the stick shift and the ignition to see why the Saab wouldn't start. As my eyes darted back up, I saw that it finally was moving forward, for all of a second. I hit the brakes, another second. Now, Darcy Shepard was draped over the hood of the car. He then goes on to state that it was at a low speed, brief in duration and because Darcy was already so close to the car, it left no discernible injury. But then, quote, He screamed at people on the sidewalk, Now, this was the first time that Darcy's call for witnesses was mentioned.

The evidence that strongly suggests Darcy's motive was not to attack Michael, but to stop him from leaving. And here, Michael at least acknowledges that Darcy was furious, but there is much that can be read into the fact that he also refers to him as a growling man, screaming at people on the sidewalk, and then in a subsequent paragraph, he also calls Darcy a beast. But in reality, Darcy Alan Shepard was not a raging hulk that came out of nowhere. He was a cyclist who had just been hit from behind by a car, who was carried forward on the hood of that car for two car lengths before landing on the road, and he soon saw that his bike, integral to how he earns his living, was crumpled under the bumper. It's difficult to comprehend a situation in which a person in

this position wouldn't have been furious, especially as he saw the driver of the car might have been trying to leave, which of course he was. Michael wrote that Darcy's backpack contained a heavy bike lock, which is a new detail, and apparently he hurled it at the car and it went sailing over Michael's head. He states that as he tried to drive around Darcy, the man got up and chased them, leaping at the Saab. Michael described Darcy as an enraged man, a stuntman with superhuman strength. He wrote that the car suddenly swerved sharply to the left, almost 45 degrees, and while he had no recollection how it happened, he wrote that Darcy must have grabbed the wheel. Quote, in wrestling for control of the car, we crossed to the south side of the street. Michael Bryant wrote that he realized his attempt to escape had

failed, so he slammed on the brakes, but he noted that the stop wasn't sudden enough to dislodge him. Quote, nevertheless, there was a fair bit of torque. I could see him bending forward and hanging on, the side door and him pushing back. Quote, off the car door and him pushing back, quote, then he started climbing in the car. Susan grew louder and more frantic. Michael says he'd stopped and started the car a few times and it felt like the twilight zone. Quote, I couldn't take my two hands off the wheel even if I'd wanted to. I was struggling And then he was gone. Quote, Michael Bryant described feeling relief, but then he didn't know what he should do.

Quote, relief. But then he didn't know what he should do. Quote, should I stop right now? I shouldn't leave the scene of an accident, but I wanted to get away from this guy. Is he coming? I was not going to stop the car and let him come at us again after finally getting away. There was no one to help. I wanted to get somewhere safe. He then wrote about the 911 call he made when he arrived just around the corner at the Park Hyatt Hotel, saying he wanted police to get there quickly, quote, to protect Susan and me. I said we'd been attacked by a man on a bicycle on Bloor Street. A transcript was made of this, of course, end quote. He wrote that when the police arrived, he assumed they were there to rescue them. But when the constable got out of the cruiser, he realized

that something was wrong. Michael Bryant described being manhandled, pushed and poked by the constable, who told him that he was in a lot of trouble. Michael wrote that it wasn't registering. Quote, Why was I in trouble? I felt like we just had to get that have you been drinking part over with and then reason would prevail and he would give me an update. I was imagining that Darcy Shepard was in handcuffs right now. He described being flabbergasted when instead they put him in handcuffs. When the book 28 Seconds was released, Michael Bryant embarked on a media tour to promote it. Jennifer Wells wrote an article for the Toronto Star, reporting that this was Michael Bryant's first time speaking with a journalist since

Darcy's death. As you'll recall, she was also the one he spoke to in the months before Darcy's death, when he said that road rage was back in his life. In this article, she wrote that he could have let the story rest, so she asked him why did he write the book, and his response was, quote, It's an offering, that's what it is. She added the qualifier that it was an offering to other high-functioning alcoholics deluded into thinking they have nothing in common with the drunk on the street. This was the first time that Michael Bryant had confirmed he was an alcoholic,

how he had given up drinking several years before Darcy's death. And in this book, he said he saw many Darcy Allen Shepherds in the 12-step recovery rooms he attends. Quote, There's a lot of tattoos and hoarse voices and close-cropped hair and scars, bones out of joint, and that look of indescribable pain on their face. He said that when he first saw Darcy throwing garbage, quote, He again recounted his version of the details of that evening. When it came to the part where the car accelerated into Darcy, Jennifer Wells wrote that he made a slapping sound with his hands.

In another interview for CTV News, he told Vanessa Grieco that many had begged him not to write the book for fear that he would reignite debate of Darcy's death. And to that, he said, quote, To be accused of killing someone is awful. But on the other hand, that's not a good reason not to do a book because I might subject myself to criticism. I wanted to try and share my experiences and hope around recovering from that crucible. And then the media tour continued. The morning show's Lisa Fromer asked him why he hasn't reached out to Alan Shepard, Darcy's father. And he replied, quote, I don't know why I haven't been able to figure out what I might say or do that might provide him with comfort because I don't want to cause him any more discomfort.

I'm terribly sorry for what happened to his son. A time will come and an opportunity will come where I will be able to say something. When he was told that Alan Shepard had said that it's too little too late, Michael said, I understand that and I have to respect that. He also responded to questions that the book was strategic and signalled a possible return to politics. He replied that this wasn't why he wrote the book and insisted that it's not a prelude to a return to politics. Quote, I tried to be as honest as I possibly could and knew there were things in it that might actually mean there would never be a career in politics in the future. I haven't had plans to do that in quite a while.

In his memoir, Michael Bryant also criticizes the Toronto Police for rushing to judgement on his guilt. He wrote, He also accused the police of failing to follow up with the other motorists who came forward to report incidents with an angry cyclist that they believed was Darcy Ellen Shepard. Those incidents referred to as Scopoliti evidence. In an article for Globe and Mail, author Kelly Grant quoted Toronto Police spokesperson Mark Pugash, who denied that they failed to return calls from potential witnesses, and added that the force has never received a complaint, whether formal or informal, about how Michael Bryant was treated. Quote, The article states that Michael declined to respond specifically to these comments. This Globe and Mail article also described how Michael Bryant's legal defense cost hundreds of thousands of dollars, a bill that he expected to continue paying off. And while he didn't expect sales of his book to add much of a dent to that, he said that if there were any proceeds, he planned to donate it to the Pine River Institute, an addictions treatment center for adolescents. Pine River Institute, an addictions treatment center for adolescents. The article points out that despite Michael Bryant's resulting financial woes, he details in the book how he tried to help Darcy Ellen Shepard's two eldest children, the ones who were in foster care, to gain visitation

with their mother. He said he arranged a high-profile family lawyer to work pro bono on the case, which at the time had yet to be resolved. He also stated that he paid the firm's out-of-pocket costs himself. As mentioned in an earlier episode of this series, Michael Bryant wrote about the fact that his legal strategy was developed in the days and weeks after Darcy Allen Shepard's death, and going to trial was the last thing he and his legal team wanted. They designed a strategy to achieve that result, and as we know, it worked. But if another special independent prosecutor had have been appointed, and the case did go to trial, what might have happened? Since many details and Michael's version of events was not consistent with the findings

of the collision reconstruction experts, nor was it supported by 19 of those eyewitness statements, the only way that his full version of events could have been entered into evidence is if Michael Bryant testified in court in his own defense. And if it did go to trial, it's likely that some or all of the eyewitnesses would have provided sworn testimony as well, like Victoria and Steve, the parking garage guy and the construction workers. the parking garage guy and the construction workers. On cross-examination, Michael Bryant would have had to explain why his account of the night was so different. We'll obviously never know how this would have gone, but perhaps a clue can be found in one of the interviews he gave in promoting his book.

One of the main features of Michael's media tour was an almost hour-long CBC interview with high-profile Canadian business journalist Amanda Lang. Since Michael had been a high-profile figure himself, the former Attorney General of Ontario, he was used to media appearances and going on TV shows, and it showed in his confidence in speaking and the way he deported himself. But this CBC interview shows a different Michael Bryant. He's clearly very uncomfortable most of the time, as he's asked to recount his version of events, verbally, in detail. You can find a link to watch it in the show notes. During the interview, Amanda Lang mentioned that she'd known Michael Bryant a long time,

which prompted accusations of a conflict of interest as it related to her ability to be impartial when interviewing him in her role as a journalist. The CBC ombudsman would conclude that while she should have disclosed their relationship earlier in the interview, it was still fair, the line of questioning was determined to be professional and of a high standard, and was not a breach of CBC journalistic standards and practices. Now, the interview could hardly be compared to what would have been a cross-examination, but there were a few hard-hitting questions thrown his way. When he mentioned that Darcy Allen Shepard took a swing at him as he rode past, Amanda asked, took a swing at you why? To which Michael essentially said he didn't know. Another question she asked was quote

there's a moment that you detail in the book where the car turned the wheel turned in the book you say you don't know who turned it whether it was Darcy or you. Michael replied that it was one of two things either he turned it for reasons that he can't figure out, or Darcy grabbed the wheel and turned it. He fumbled with his words a bit before adding, quote, Amanda asked him if knowing whether he turned the wheel or not would have made any difference to him, and Michael struggled to answer for a bit but landed on no, saying that part of it wasn't definitive, and quote, the definitive parts for me are when he, you know, the moment where I try and get away and he jumps on the car. And he just continues talking, going deeper and deeper into

the details without being prompted by any questions. CBC doesn't typically give permission to use clips, so I'll just read out the bit from the transcript. Quote, um, and then at the end, but I don't remember what happened at the end. Not that I don't remember, I don't know what happened. I mean, I now know what happened, but I was just trying to control the car. He added, quote, Now, I also found out he'd had by his own account about 10 concussions in the past, and I don't know if that had an impact on him dying from that. Michael continued talking for a bit longer,

but I wanted to point out that out of the blue, he just brought up the fact that Darcy apparently said he had 10 concussions, and then suggested it may have been a factor in his death, something else at play other than that collision with the Saab. Amanda also asked him what he could have done differently and whether it was necessary to hire Navigator, the PR firm. His response was that he didn't hire anyone. His friend Jamie said he'd help and never sent an invoice. Jamie is of course Jamie Watt, the firm's executive chairman. At the end, she asked him, is it because you feel a level of kinship with Darcy Ellen Shepard that you're talking publicly

for the first time about being a recovered alcoholic? And he responded, yeah, but added that he didn't want to overstate it. Quote, Like, you know, we might have been in the same rooms of recovery at the same time. He said that when he was sobering up, it helped him to hear the stories of others, and he saw his book as an opportunity to give back with his experience as well as some hope. That was the longest of Michael Bryant's interviews, but he was also invited to share his side of the story on several other shows, including The Agenda with Steve Paikin. This was a show he had appeared on often when he was Attorney General, and the two clearly had a warm familiarity. One of the first questions Steve Paikin asked was,

I've known you since 1999 when you got into public life. I had not one clue that you were an alcoholic. Was I typical in that respect? Michael nodded and said only those close to him could see the signs. Steve then commented on how the book detailed that Michael would be frequently hungover, ending up in the gutter as the cliche goes, and he still managed to do his job as Attorney General. How did he do that? Michael replied that he was a high-functioning alcoholic, and when he denied it to his doctor, his doctor replied that Winston Churchill saved the Western world while drinking a lot every day and night. When asked, Michael said he was never drunk on the job though, he just drank at night because he wasn't able to turn his brain off at the end of the day without it. When Steve Paikin asked why he stopped appearing on the show, Michael said that it cut into his after-work drinking time, so he started saying no.

This led to Steve making a joke about how the producers of the show did wonder why they weren't able to book him at that time. interview, Darcy Ellen Shepard supporters started lobbying the producers of the show to hear the other side of the story, which resulted in Ellen Shepard being invited to appear on the show six weeks later. So that was 2012. The following year, Ellen Shepard received the full Collision Reconstruction report. As he read it in detail, taking it all in, he started to realize that what was in the report was vastly different to what had been presented in court that day, that Michael Bryant was just reacting to Darcy's aggressive behavior, his attack. Ellen saw that several eyewitnesses painted Bryant's behavior in a harsh light, yet none of that information had been presented in court. When Allen got to the end of the report, the conclusion, he stopped in his tracks.

It read, quote, And then, several sentences down, it states, there was no physical evidence or independent witness statements suggesting Mr. Shepard affected the steering of the Saab or anything to suggest he physically attacked Mr. Bryant. Alan Shepard had stated many times that given the circumstances and his son's background, he knew that getting a conviction would have been difficult. In fact, he did expect the charges to be dropped. But he would write that he was amazed, shocked might be a better word, at the degree to which some of the new material challenges the version of events given in court that day by the special independent prosecutor, Richard Peck. Quote, I emphatically reject Mr Peck's explanation of his decision. Information

obtained through freedom of information access does not and cannot support the exoneration implicitly given to Mr Bryant by Mr Peck. The documents say that my son and Mr Bryant were both responsible for what happened. And that's where we'll leave it for part five. In part six, the final episode, we'll explore what happened with those documents, where Michael Bryan is now, and more. Thanks again for your patience with this series. Special thanks also to Eileen McFarlane from Crime Lapse Podcast for audio editing on this episode. I could not have done it without her. I could not have done it without her. Thanks also to Hayley Gray for research and production assistance and Ellen Shepard, who set up the Darcy Ellen Shepard Files blog, as well as cycling

advocate Jo Hendry, who manages the Bryant Watch blog. For a link to these blogs and to view the full list of sources and resources used for this episode and anything else you might want to know, see the show notes or visit the page for this episode at canadiantruecrime.ca. The host of True voiced the disclaimer and We Talk of Dreams composed the theme songs. I'll be back in a week with part six. See you then. Thank you.