Law Enforcement - The Good, The Bad, The Ugly.....

Who was in the wrong?

  • Cop

    Votes: 23 20.5%

  • Dude who got shot

    Votes: 33 29.5%

  • I like turtles

    Votes: 56 50.0%
  • Total voters
    112
GreyGhost said:
Cop is ordered not to enter building and engage suspect. Cop enters building and engages. Cop doesn't see a gun on the suspect. Cop fatally shoots suspect. Siu says no charges warranted.

www.cp24.com

CP24 – Toronto Breaking News, Live Updates, Weather and Traffic Today

Get the latest breaking news headlines, weather reports, and traffic updates on Greater Toronto and the Hamilton Area.
www.cp24.com www.cp24.com
Click to expand...

Reading the whole report.. The SO didn't see the gun, but others did and communicated that to the SO. I agree with the SIU that's it's not criminal. That said.. the disobeying orders will, or should, be a separate internal hearing.
 
raginduck said:
nationalpost.com

'You are innocent': Two men convicted in 1973 killing in Winnipeg acquitted

Brian Anderson and Allan Woodhouse were sentenced to life in prison when they were teens for the killing of Ting Fong Chan, a restaurant worker who was stabbed to death
nationalpost.com nationalpost.com

I'm sure there's many more.
Click to expand...
What bothers me is that the police individuals that perverted the course of justice likely didn't miss a donut break. David Milgaard and Guy Paul Moran come to mind.

Also, the two innocents were released on parole ages ago. I thought to get paroled one had to admit to the crime and show remorse. A catch 22.
 
May belong in ~Jokes~ but when you think about it, it's true
360101740_646313877459201_4321734610261697165_n.jpg
 
GreyGhost said:
I highly dislike that the homeowner was forced to spend many thousands on a legal defence. Justice system is broken.
Click to expand...

When the Crown throws out the "no reasonable prospect of a conviction" trope that sends up red flags IMO. There's more going on there. Day one I thought this was not random. Perp and victim were familiar, past beef, outstanding debt, sideways contraband deals........
 
FullMotoJacket said:
When the Crown throws out the "no reasonable prospect of a conviction" trope that sends up red flags IMO. There's more going on there. Day one I thought this was not random. Perp and victim were familiar, past beef, outstanding debt, sideways contraband deals........
Click to expand...
This incident needs to be considered on its own. You have armed intruders forcing entry to a home, where there's a (legally) armed resident. The resident used deadly force against people who threatened deadly force. The response was in scale. "No reasonable prospect of conviction" means exactly that. Theories and suppositions mean nothing in court.
 
Rob MacLennan said:
This incident needs to be considered on its own.
Click to expand...

-why does a 21 year old kid living in residential Miton need to own a firearm?
-protecting his mother? I doubt they broke in because of what she might have had in the house
-is the accused "known to police" and if so, what for?

The mother is a red herring.
They broke in at 5am to take what HE had in the house.
He had a gun to protect what HE had in the house.
 
FullMotoJacket said:
-why does a 21 year old kid living in residential Miton need to own a firearm?
-protecting his mother? I doubt they broke in because of what she might have had in the house
-is the accused "known to police" and if so, what for?

The mother is a red herring.
They broke in at 5am to take what HE had in the house.
He had a gun to protect what HE had in the house.
Click to expand...
Why? Because he was was over the age of 18, had passed the required background checks and interviews with a Firearms Officer, and was legally entitled to do so. I think that I bought my first firearm at age 23.
 
Rob MacLennan said:
Why? Because he was was over the age of 18, had passed the required background checks and interviews with a Firearms Officer, and was legally entitled to do so. I think that I bought my first firearm at age 23.
Click to expand...

When was the last time you were in Milton?
 
GreyGhost said:
I highly dislike that the homeowner was forced to spend many thousands on a legal defence. Justice system is broken.
Click to expand...
I dislike the consequences of having to defend yourself in court as well as in your invaded home but rationalize that having to justify your actions dampens your enthusiasm to go full blown American "Stand Your Ground."

This didn't go to court but the legal costs would still be five figures.

In the USA it's a turkey shoot. "I felt threatened"

In Canada one has to ask themselves if their life is worth the $50K or more for a court defense.

A week and a half in jail is IMO totally unnecessary unless there is evidence of a conspiracy.
 
nobbie48 said:
I dislike the consequences of having to defend yourself in court as well as in your invaded home but rationalize that having to justify your actions dampens your enthusiasm to go full blown American "Stand Your Ground."

This didn't go to court but the legal costs would still be five figures.

In the USA it's a turkey shoot. "I felt threatened"

In Canada one has to ask themselves if their life is worth the $50K or more for a court defense.

A week and a half in jail is IMO totally unnecessary unless there is evidence of a conspiracy.
Click to expand...
Stand your ground obviously has issues and is regularly abused. On the other hand, after an armed intruder has crossed the threshold of your house, I don't think laying the charge benefits society.
 
Rob MacLennan said:
This incident needs to be considered on its own. You have armed intruders forcing entry to a home, where there's a (legally) armed resident. The resident used deadly force against people who threatened deadly force. The response was in scale. "No reasonable prospect of conviction" means exactly that. Theories and suppositions mean nothing in court.
Click to expand...

Even if the gun was illegal.. It's still very likely the murder charge would be dropped as it was. They would still proceed with poss. of the illegal gun charges, but that would have no bearing on the murder charge.
 
GreyGhost said:
Stand your ground obviously has issues and is regularly abused. On the other hand, after an armed intruder has crossed the threshold of your house, I don't think laying the charge benefits society.
Click to expand...
Innocent until proven guilty for the homeowner and court costs reimbursed for the defense would satisfy me. I won't hold my breath. Also charges pending but not laid.

When you cross the border you are asked if you've ever been charged. Why mess with that?
Forum Sponsor
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom