No accountability yet for G20 Toronto Police Crimes

Forum Sponsor
oilycreek said:
They acted how they should have. The only moron here is you, since you can't understand that they did what they needed to do to a bunch of low life losers, I guess that includes you.
Click to expand...

Sir, if they needed to do what they did then the charges would have stuck. Instead, the vast majority of cases were dismissed.
 
D23 said:
Skipped right over that part about the badge number I see. A badge number is in fact more unique to an officer. Might be a few Smiths or Scotts etc. but there is only one. 13432

Never said it wasn't against an internal policy. I know it was made mandatory in 06 (or 08).

Said it wasn't a law....

Right there ^. You read it, quoted it, and still didn't see. :(
Click to expand...

"In terms of penalties imposed, 66 breaches of the rule requiring identifiers to be worn by Toronto Police Service officers were substantiated and led to the loss of an eight hour day of pay. Separately, 53 breaches were substantiated that lead to a penalty of two eight hour days of pay. The intentional non-wearing of a name badge by an officer carrying out his or her duties is an extremely serious offence. It is a fundamental breach of duty for police officers to remove their name badges so that they may exercise their powers with intentional anonymity."
- Independent Civilian Review into Matters Relating to the G20 Summit
http://www.g20review.ca/report.html

I guess the word LAW wasn't used so you're right in the technical sense. These officers were not wearing name badges nor badge numbers. The report uses heavy words such as "breaches of the rule", "extremely serious offence", and "fundamental breach of duty". Yet the officers found in breach were only docked 1-2 days of pay.

Again people, all the reports are out. Regardless of your own personal position, these reports are supposed to provide accountability. Without accountability the TPS loses the trust of the community.
 
no one mentions that in the weeks leading up to the G20 event some cops themselves were discussing publicly how they planned on "cracking some hippy skulls" on the blueline forums. this shows me that some officers went there with intent. blueline is a forum that verifies whether some one is in law enforcement or not before giving them access to "restricted" areas. it would be like paul requiring people to have proof of an m licence before accessing the trash.
 
rmemedic said:
True. But, as soon as ANY part of that assembly turns violent, then they are in violation by putting others at risk.
Sure, most didn't go there to do damage, and most didn't participate, but those idiots in black ruined it for all those that went there with the idea of being peaceful.
If they are to be pi$$ed off at anyone, it's the idiots that were there to cause problems, not the cops that were there trying to deal with too many people.

Just by being there when you didn't need to be, you are supporting those going for attention, and the ones getting the attention were the ones that were there doing things they KNEW were wrong and had to hide there faces. You would think, if they were so proud on their stance, they would want people to know who they are. Shows just how big of Pu$$ys they are.
It's like laughing when the class clown picks on some kid. Sure, you didn't do anything wrong, but by laughing (which is what the clown wants) you are encouraging the behavior, just like being there, giving these idiots attention (which is why they are there) you are encouraging them.

If people had a clue, and wanted the cops to get rid of the problem smoothly and efficiently, they would have LEFT, and let the cops put their limited manpower to that task, and once the problem was over, they can all join back together, hold hands and have their peaceful demonstration.
Not a hard concept.
I don't care what people were protesting, as it doesn't matter since that wasn't the issue.

How many have you have been swarmed with people where there was a possibility for violence? I doubt many have, so that's why I'm taking the side of the TPS here, as I can totally understand what type of a stress filled situation that is.
Click to expand...


You don't think that your position is a little counter-intuitive?

If you show up to exercise your right, and then some people start acting like asshats, then you have an onus to give up your rights?
that doesn't say much about the right.

Combine that with cops planting hooligans, and thats just a huge mess.

our rights have always, and will always, make it harder for law enforcement to do their jobs, I don't think its ever acceptable to ask citizens to give up charter rights to assist law enforcement, I think its ok for an indivudual to do it based on personal choice, but your scenario seems like ( willingly give up your rights or the cops will do it for you ).
 
OpenGambit said:
You don't think that your position is a little counter-intuitive?

If you show up to exercise your right, and then some people start acting like asshats, then you have an onus to give up your rights?
that doesn't say much about the right.

Combine that with cops planting hooligans, and thats just a huge mess.

our rights have always, and will always, make it harder for law enforcement to do their jobs, I don't think its ever acceptable to ask citizens to give up charter rights to assist law enforcement, I think its ok for an indivudual to do it based on personal choice, but your scenario seems like ( willingly give up your rights or the cops will do it for you ).
Click to expand...

All I'm saying is by being there, you make it harder for the cops to do their job as they then have to figure out who the ***** disturbers are. Just because they aren't dressed in black doesn't mean they weren't causing problems too.

I didn't say give up your rights. I said let the cops do their jobs, take care of the issue and then you can come back and do whatever legal thing you were there to do. By being there, those innocent people made the situation worse. If they had left, the real problem would have been taken care of and then they could have come back and done their thing. Then the attention would be on them, not on those window smashing morons.

People should have realized once crap started to happen that things weren't going to go good, and they should have left if they didn't want to be part of it.
 
even a temporary abrogation of rights is an abrogation of rights. I guess I don't see how having thousands of people leave an area and give up their rights to free speech and assembly just to make it easier on the cops to catch 50 people is an acceptable solution. Thats just the minority holding the majority hostage.

Innocent people, as long as they are not willfully obstucting the cops, are still innocent and therefore deserve the full protection of the law and the Charter. A recurring theme in our Charter jurisprudence is that the wholesale violation of innocent people's rights in order to catch criminals is unacceptable. This applies also to the G20.
 
He who rules can move the lines on the page and marginalize anyone/anything.:lmao:



OpenGambit said:
even a temporary abrogation of rights is an abrogation of rights. I guess I don't see how having thousands of people leave an area and give up their rights to free speech and assembly just to make it easier on the cops to catch 50 people is an acceptable solution. Thats just the minority holding the majority hostage.

Innocent people, as long as they are not willfully obstucting the cops, are still innocent and therefore deserve the full protection of the law and the Charter. A recurring theme in our Charter jurisprudence is that the wholesale violation of innocent people's rights in order to catch criminals is unacceptable. This applies also to the G20.
Click to expand...
 
clutch said:
Please stick to your 'are men more feminine' thread. This may be a more thought provoking subject for you :p
Click to expand...

So you are spending your time trying to convince people that don't really care what happened and why. You provided evidence/facts to what occurred yet the same people you keep trying to convince still do not accept it. You can keep e-beating them in the head with you facts and position, they just don't care...so carry on:p

I appreciate the information that you have provided and share your frustration.

beatingadeadhorse.gif
 
IV. said:
So you are spending your time trying to convince people that don't really care what happened and why. You provided evidence/facts to what occurred yet the same people you keep trying to convince still do not accept it. You can keep e-beating them in the head with you facts and position, they just don't care...so carry on:p

I appreciate the information that you have provided and share your frustration.

beatingadeadhorse.gif
Click to expand...

You are right of course, nobody does care.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom