Re: Claton Rivert death and Questions Swirl around SIU investigation.
Post is nail. Hedo2002 is jello.
Post is nail. Hedo2002 is jello.
|
|
|
Clayton Rivet death and Questions Swirl around SIU investigation.
- Thread starter CafeRay
- Start date
- Status
Re: Claton Rivert death and Questions Swirl around SIU investigation.
While there are times that legislation has been put in place that in some way abridges charter rights, under specific circumstances, I cannot recall any case in which those laws specifically abridge the right against being required to provide evidence against oneself.
While there are times that legislation has been put in place that in some way abridges charter rights, under specific circumstances, I cannot recall any case in which those laws specifically abridge the right against being required to provide evidence against oneself.
Re: Claton Rivert death and Questions Swirl around SIU investigation.
Speaking to clear the air and providing evidence against yourself are entirely different things. If cop is afraid of being tripped up because he has something to hide he is well advised to not speak. Takes away from squeaky clean but well worth it.
Speaking to clear the air and providing evidence against yourself are entirely different things. If cop is afraid of being tripped up because he has something to hide he is well advised to not speak. Takes away from squeaky clean but well worth it.
Re: Claton Rivert death and Questions Swirl around SIU investigation.
Actually no, they aren't.
11. Any person charged with an offence has the right... (c) not to be compelled to be a witness in proceedings against that person in respect of the offence;
Statements can be spun in some rather remarkable ways. Not giving evidence cannot be construed as evidence of guilt. If dealing with the possibility of criminal charges you are generally far better off to not speak, allowing communications to be handled by someone who is more familiar with the law, its enforcement, and the legal system (a lawyer). Should you choose to speak then that is also your right, having weighed your options, but it cannot be compelled.
Actually no, they aren't.
11. Any person charged with an offence has the right... (c) not to be compelled to be a witness in proceedings against that person in respect of the offence;
Statements can be spun in some rather remarkable ways. Not giving evidence cannot be construed as evidence of guilt. If dealing with the possibility of criminal charges you are generally far better off to not speak, allowing communications to be handled by someone who is more familiar with the law, its enforcement, and the legal system (a lawyer). Should you choose to speak then that is also your right, having weighed your options, but it cannot be compelled.
Re: Claton Rivert death and Questions Swirl around SIU investigation.
Actually they are 2 different things. What is done externally to the statements is something else again. Also not giving evidence can be construed as evidence of guilt in the court of public opinion. Lesser of the bad choices if guilty.
Actually they are 2 different things. What is done externally to the statements is something else again. Also not giving evidence can be construed as evidence of guilt in the court of public opinion. Lesser of the bad choices if guilty.
ddusseld
Well-known member
Re: Claton Rivert death and Questions Swirl around SIU investigation.
In an ideal world I tend to agree with you. Really, why should you be hesitant about speaking if you are innocent? But, in today's world, it seems to me that even the innocent are better off not speaking or speaking through their lawyer. It is kind of sad.....
In an ideal world I tend to agree with you. Really, why should you be hesitant about speaking if you are innocent? But, in today's world, it seems to me that even the innocent are better off not speaking or speaking through their lawyer. It is kind of sad.....
BigEvilDoer
Well-known member
Re: Claton Rivert death and Questions Swirl around SIU investigation.
So basically you are saying that if you choose to become a police officer, you should need to sign a waiver stating that you are willing to void your basic charter of rights, or at least certain portions of it?
That's a slippery slope to start on - if that would be OK'd, it wouldn't be long before just about every other industry would be clamouring for the same thing to be applied to them.
So basically you are saying that if you choose to become a police officer, you should need to sign a waiver stating that you are willing to void your basic charter of rights, or at least certain portions of it?
That's a slippery slope to start on - if that would be OK'd, it wouldn't be long before just about every other industry would be clamouring for the same thing to be applied to them.
Last edited:
Re: Claton Rivert death and Questions Swirl around SIU investigation.
The 'court of public opinion' is meaningless, when it's your freedom possibly at stake. The higher the stakes, the less you say. This involved a death. You say nothing.
The 'court of public opinion' is meaningless, when it's your freedom possibly at stake. The higher the stakes, the less you say. This involved a death. You say nothing.
Re: Claton Rivert death and Questions Swirl around SIU investigation.
Yes we know all that. We also have a situation where it has been decided that there is no reasonable chance of conviction if officer charged. That is also somebody's opinion. As you say, this involved a death.
Yes we know all that. We also have a situation where it has been decided that there is no reasonable chance of conviction if officer charged. That is also somebody's opinion. As you say, this involved a death.
Re: Claton Rivert death and Questions Swirl around SIU investigation.
Then there's that whole "presumed innocent" thing.
Then there's that whole "presumed innocent" thing.
Re: Claton Rivert death and Questions Swirl around SIU investigation.
You didn't need to quote me to post that newsflash.
You didn't need to quote me to post that newsflash.
Re: Claton Rivert death and Questions Swirl around SIU investigation.
Yes I agree, I haven't said there shouldn't be a "mechanism" or legislation to cover this off. But currently there isn't so unfortunately in this case the officer is compelled to speak.
When the court made the ruling that under the Charter, a subject officer can't be compelled to speak to investigators the government of the day, elected not to write legislation. Perhaps, they were advised it wouldn't survive a "Charter challenge". So we have the system we currently have. So I did understand tour point, it is just that until/unless the system changes it is what it is.
Yes I agree, I haven't said there shouldn't be a "mechanism" or legislation to cover this off. But currently there isn't so unfortunately in this case the officer is compelled to speak.
When the court made the ruling that under the Charter, a subject officer can't be compelled to speak to investigators the government of the day, elected not to write legislation. Perhaps, they were advised it wouldn't survive a "Charter challenge". So we have the system we currently have. So I did understand tour point, it is just that until/unless the system changes it is what it is.
Re: Claton Rivert death and Questions Swirl around SIU investigation.
No, we've been thru this before. Charged does not mean guilty. Maybe in the court of public opinion but that's meaningless.
No, we've been thru this before. Charged does not mean guilty. Maybe in the court of public opinion but that's meaningless.
Re: Claton Rivert death and Questions Swirl around SIU investigation.
This may very well be true. Let me purpose an alternative to the argument of an absolute requirement to speak. Should the subject officer refuse to interview the SIU investigaters, he/she should be placed on temporary unpaid leave until a conclusion has been reached by the SIU. This scenario is more akin to what the average employee at an average company would face if they fauqed up in a big way, or at least where suspected as such.
I suspect the union spearheaded the advisory committee. Admittedly this suspicion has no solid base, rather; a porous bias.
In situations relating to the death of a civilian. Sure. Though I doubt an actual waiver would be required, it would likely be explicitly implied via legislation
As for other industries... I will use my background as an example. If I serviced the brake system on a car, and the car's brakes fail down the road resulting in a fatal collision, a response of "I don't want to talk about it" while likely smart in terms of criminal liability, would defiantly result in CofQ suspension and being sent home, without pay, until the investigation was over. Can you tell me the same would apply to a police officer?
ref; Collage of Trades Act 2009
(3) The Board or the Executive Committee may make an interim order directing the Registrar to suspend the certificate of qualification or statement of membership of a member of the College or impose terms, conditions or limitations on a member’s certificate of qualification or statement of membership if,(a) an allegation respecting the member has been referred to the Discipline Committee or to the Fitness to Practise Committee; and
(b) the Board or the Executive Committee believes that the actions or conduct of the member directly or indirectly exposes or is likely to expose an individual to harm or injury. 2009, c. 22, s. 45 (3).
Restriction
(4) No order shall be made under subsection (3) unless the member has been given,
(a) notice of the Board’s or the Executive Committee’s intention to make the order; and
(b) at least 14 days to make written submissions to the Board or the Executive Committee. 2009, c. 22, s. 45 (4).
No hearing
(5) Except as provided by this section, the Board or the Executive Committee need not hold a hearing or afford any person an opportunity to make oral or written submissions before making a decision or giving a direction under this section. 2009, c. 22, s. 45 (5).
This may very well be true. Let me purpose an alternative to the argument of an absolute requirement to speak. Should the subject officer refuse to interview the SIU investigaters, he/she should be placed on temporary unpaid leave until a conclusion has been reached by the SIU. This scenario is more akin to what the average employee at an average company would face if they fauqed up in a big way, or at least where suspected as such.
I suspect the union spearheaded the advisory committee. Admittedly this suspicion has no solid base, rather; a porous bias.
In situations relating to the death of a civilian. Sure. Though I doubt an actual waiver would be required, it would likely be explicitly implied via legislation
As for other industries... I will use my background as an example. If I serviced the brake system on a car, and the car's brakes fail down the road resulting in a fatal collision, a response of "I don't want to talk about it" while likely smart in terms of criminal liability, would defiantly result in CofQ suspension and being sent home, without pay, until the investigation was over. Can you tell me the same would apply to a police officer?
ref; Collage of Trades Act 2009
(3) The Board or the Executive Committee may make an interim order directing the Registrar to suspend the certificate of qualification or statement of membership of a member of the College or impose terms, conditions or limitations on a member’s certificate of qualification or statement of membership if,(a) an allegation respecting the member has been referred to the Discipline Committee or to the Fitness to Practise Committee; and
(b) the Board or the Executive Committee believes that the actions or conduct of the member directly or indirectly exposes or is likely to expose an individual to harm or injury. 2009, c. 22, s. 45 (3).
Restriction
(4) No order shall be made under subsection (3) unless the member has been given,
(a) notice of the Board’s or the Executive Committee’s intention to make the order; and
(b) at least 14 days to make written submissions to the Board or the Executive Committee. 2009, c. 22, s. 45 (4).
No hearing
(5) Except as provided by this section, the Board or the Executive Committee need not hold a hearing or afford any person an opportunity to make oral or written submissions before making a decision or giving a direction under this section. 2009, c. 22, s. 45 (5).
Re: Claton Rivert death and Questions Swirl around SIU investigation.
The major flaw in the CofQ example is that is a trade organization and not a court of law. There is "more protections" afforded when it could result in charges.
I also suspect that it is a matter that no one has ever tested the requirement to provide a written "potentially self incriminating" submission. If it were challenged as violating a members eight to not self incriminate that the courts would also strike it down.
So using your example that we suspend an officer without pay. 2 years later the investigation is completed and no charges are laid. The officer on the meantime has lost his home, had his credit ruined etc as he had no income. Now, they have to reinstate the officer. Is society prepared to have their taxes increase when he sues for millions and millions for the damages he has incurred? Not to mention these are also in the contracts and does anyone think a union would permit that. I agree the police unions likely funded a good part of the charter challenge. But that is what a union is charged to do, protect it's members and their rights.
Again, perhaps not an ideal situation, but it is what we have now. It is likely an important discussion for those who has had their lives affected by the death of someone they know or identify with. But not even on the radar for the average citizen. So apathy reigns supreme.
The major flaw in the CofQ example is that is a trade organization and not a court of law. There is "more protections" afforded when it could result in charges.
I also suspect that it is a matter that no one has ever tested the requirement to provide a written "potentially self incriminating" submission. If it were challenged as violating a members eight to not self incriminate that the courts would also strike it down.
So using your example that we suspend an officer without pay. 2 years later the investigation is completed and no charges are laid. The officer on the meantime has lost his home, had his credit ruined etc as he had no income. Now, they have to reinstate the officer. Is society prepared to have their taxes increase when he sues for millions and millions for the damages he has incurred? Not to mention these are also in the contracts and does anyone think a union would permit that. I agree the police unions likely funded a good part of the charter challenge. But that is what a union is charged to do, protect it's members and their rights.
Again, perhaps not an ideal situation, but it is what we have now. It is likely an important discussion for those who has had their lives affected by the death of someone they know or identify with. But not even on the radar for the average citizen. So apathy reigns supreme.
This may very well be true. Let me purpose an alternative to the argument of an absolute requirement to speak. Should the subject officer refuse to interview the SIU investigaters, he/she should be placed on temporary unpaid leave until a conclusion has been reached by the SIU. This scenario is more akin to what the average employee at an average company would face if they fauqed up in a big way, or at least where suspected as such.
I suspect the union spearheaded the advisory committee. Admittedly this suspicion has no solid base, rather; a porous bias.
In situations relating to the death of a civilian. Sure. Though I doubt an actual waiver would be required, it would likely be explicitly implied via legislation
As for other industries... I will use my background as an example. If I serviced the brake system on a car, and the car's brakes fail down the road resulting in a fatal collision, a response of "I don't want to talk about it" while likely smart in terms of criminal liability, would defiantly result in CofQ suspension and being sent home, without pay, until the investigation was over. Can you tell me the same would apply to a police officer?
ref; Collage of Trades Act 2009
(3) The Board or the Executive Committee may make an interim order directing the Registrar to suspend the certificate of qualification or statement of membership of a member of the College or impose terms, conditions or limitations on a member’s certificate of qualification or statement of membership if,(a) an allegation respecting the member has been referred to the Discipline Committee or to the Fitness to Practise Committee; and
(b) the Board or the Executive Committee believes that the actions or conduct of the member directly or indirectly exposes or is likely to expose an individual to harm or injury. 2009, c. 22, s. 45 (3).
Restriction
(4) No order shall be made under subsection (3) unless the member has been given,
(a) notice of the Board’s or the Executive Committee’s intention to make the order; and
(b) at least 14 days to make written submissions to the Board or the Executive Committee. 2009, c. 22, s. 45 (4).
No hearing
(5) Except as provided by this section, the Board or the Executive Committee need not hold a hearing or afford any person an opportunity to make oral or written submissions before making a decision or giving a direction under this section. 2009, c. 22, s. 45 (5).
Re: Claton Rivert death and Questions Swirl around SIU investigation.
If you made that temporary PAID leave I would then have no problem with it. If you try to make it unpaid leave, for someone simply demanding their Charter rights, then you're just lofting excrement at a rotary air movement device.
If you made that temporary PAID leave I would then have no problem with it. If you try to make it unpaid leave, for someone simply demanding their Charter rights, then you're just lofting excrement at a rotary air movement device.
Re: Claton Rivert death and Questions Swirl around SIU investigation.
I can tell you both with certainty, if my CofQ was temporary revoked as part of an investigation, I would no longer be legally allowed to work under the new College of Trades Act, and thus unemployed, without pay until said investigation was completed.
There is a section in the act which addresses lost wages, but it also includes the phrase "some or all" which leaves the door wide open... I'd search and quote directly but I'm on my cell at the moment.
Regardless I feel hedo, with his seat belt story, indirectly backed the opinion of many in regards to the officer possibly withholding something with his refusal. Was it intent to injury, or did he simply misjudge the closing rate, or maybe he just didn't look.. who knows, other than him of course.
I can tell you both with certainty, if my CofQ was temporary revoked as part of an investigation, I would no longer be legally allowed to work under the new College of Trades Act, and thus unemployed, without pay until said investigation was completed.
There is a section in the act which addresses lost wages, but it also includes the phrase "some or all" which leaves the door wide open... I'd search and quote directly but I'm on my cell at the moment.
Regardless I feel hedo, with his seat belt story, indirectly backed the opinion of many in regards to the officer possibly withholding something with his refusal. Was it intent to injury, or did he simply misjudge the closing rate, or maybe he just didn't look.. who knows, other than him of course.
Re: Claton Rivert death and Questions Swirl around SIU investigation.
The flavour I'm picking up is that it doesn't matter, why are we even asking, the situation as it stands is the best we've got, citizen rider was speeding while member of blue line is member of blue line, officer presumed innocent, public opinion doesn't matter and what do we want.
The flavour I'm picking up is that it doesn't matter, why are we even asking, the situation as it stands is the best we've got, citizen rider was speeding while member of blue line is member of blue line, officer presumed innocent, public opinion doesn't matter and what do we want.
- Status
|
|
|
|
|