ABadjusterrider_5
Well-known member
I'm not generally a police hater, but reading stuff like this; really makes me lose faith in our officers. How do we a trust a group of people who have been found pulling stunts like this.
TORONTO - Does Peel Regional Police Chief Mike Metcalf not have the Special Investigations Unit phone number?
In an SIU news release Monday, director Ian Scott laid out his latest grievance — a car accident last summer involving a police cruiser that put an eight-year-old boy in hospital with severe injuries.
“PRP never notified the SIU of this Aug. 12, 2011, incident. This is an apparent violation of the SIU regulation to the Police Services Act. Section 3 of that regulation states that a chief shall notify the SIU immediately of an incident involving an officer that may reasonably be considered to fall within the SIU mandate … In my view, the lack of notification in these circumstances was inappropriate and may well have impacted upon the adequacy of the investigation. SIU investigators did not attend the scene and had to rely largely upon the investigative work product of PRP.”
This sound familiar?
Remember this Aug 29, 2011, release from Scott when a young woman was chewed June 28 by a Peel police dog?
“In my view, I cannot complete an adequate investigation into this matter. First, PRP did not report this incident to the SIU when it should have been clear that the dog caused a serious injury to Ms. (Michelle) Rosales; she sustained two large lacerations that were serious enough that an ambulance was called to the scene. As a result of this non-notification, the SIU was deprived of a contemporaneous accounting of the incident.”
For the record, Section 3 of Ontario Regulation 267/10 of the Police Act clearly states “a chief of police shall notify the SIU immediately of an incident involving one or more of his or her police officers that may reasonably be considered to fall within the investigative mandate of the SIU.”
In both of these cases, it was brave Mississauga News reporter Louie Rosella who heard about the story and who in essence notified the SIU when calling them to ask about it. And it’s not like Peel doesn’t take traffic violations seriously.
Ask Mississauga firefighter Jarrett Johns, who was charged with “Red Light – Fail to Stop, under the Highway Traffic Act” for the March 6 death of a 42-year-old woman. And he was responding to a call.
This police officer was not.
In the Aug. 12 case, where a boy was badly hurt, the way Scott describes it there was no fair terms investigation into it.
“As previously outlined, the collision was significant and the injuries sustained by the eight-year-old boy were of a serious nature,” wrote Scott.
“Firefighters had to cut open the vehicle to remove the boy and ambulances were called to the scene. When an officer is involved in an incident of serious injury or death, it is not for the police service to predetermine the issue of criminality — that is the function of the SIU.”
In both cases the officers were not charged so maybe this not letting the SIU in on incidents involving them is working?
Arguably the best police service in the world, Peel police is better than shirking Police Act guidelines. I put a request into Chief Metcalf for his side of this case and to find out if there were any Highway Traffic charges.
Metcalf's spokesman Staff-Sgt. Taufic Saliba sent an e-mail response late Monday. "We will not be commenting regarding notification to the SIU. Our investigation of this accident was suspended pending the completion of the SIU investigation. In light of results of the SIU investigation being released, we will now continue with our investigation."
The SIU says the posted speed limit was 70 km/h and “as (the officer) approached the intersection of Erin Mills Pkwy. and Sheridan Park Dr., the traffic light was green in his direction and he began increasing his speed from 76 km/h.”
Scott wrote, “The pre-impact speed of the subject officer’s cruiser was 98 km/h … almost 30 km/h over the speed limit as he entered the intersection. He was not responding to a dispatched call for service and had not activated his emergency equipment. Accordingly, he does not benefit from the exceptions to obeying the speed limits found in the Highway Traffic Act which permits police officers to speed in the lawful performance of their duties.”
Yet it appears there will be no proper inquiry, like we saw with the fire truck that allegedly went through a red light and struck a car.
What I wonder about in this case is what if it had been the other way around — if it was the boy’s mother who was accelerating to 98 km and put a police officer in hospital with “a broken collarbone, bruised lung and facial lacerations,” just as the boy went through?
TORONTO - Does Peel Regional Police Chief Mike Metcalf not have the Special Investigations Unit phone number?
In an SIU news release Monday, director Ian Scott laid out his latest grievance — a car accident last summer involving a police cruiser that put an eight-year-old boy in hospital with severe injuries.
“PRP never notified the SIU of this Aug. 12, 2011, incident. This is an apparent violation of the SIU regulation to the Police Services Act. Section 3 of that regulation states that a chief shall notify the SIU immediately of an incident involving an officer that may reasonably be considered to fall within the SIU mandate … In my view, the lack of notification in these circumstances was inappropriate and may well have impacted upon the adequacy of the investigation. SIU investigators did not attend the scene and had to rely largely upon the investigative work product of PRP.”
This sound familiar?
Remember this Aug 29, 2011, release from Scott when a young woman was chewed June 28 by a Peel police dog?
“In my view, I cannot complete an adequate investigation into this matter. First, PRP did not report this incident to the SIU when it should have been clear that the dog caused a serious injury to Ms. (Michelle) Rosales; she sustained two large lacerations that were serious enough that an ambulance was called to the scene. As a result of this non-notification, the SIU was deprived of a contemporaneous accounting of the incident.”
For the record, Section 3 of Ontario Regulation 267/10 of the Police Act clearly states “a chief of police shall notify the SIU immediately of an incident involving one or more of his or her police officers that may reasonably be considered to fall within the investigative mandate of the SIU.”
In both of these cases, it was brave Mississauga News reporter Louie Rosella who heard about the story and who in essence notified the SIU when calling them to ask about it. And it’s not like Peel doesn’t take traffic violations seriously.
Ask Mississauga firefighter Jarrett Johns, who was charged with “Red Light – Fail to Stop, under the Highway Traffic Act” for the March 6 death of a 42-year-old woman. And he was responding to a call.
This police officer was not.
In the Aug. 12 case, where a boy was badly hurt, the way Scott describes it there was no fair terms investigation into it.
“As previously outlined, the collision was significant and the injuries sustained by the eight-year-old boy were of a serious nature,” wrote Scott.
“Firefighters had to cut open the vehicle to remove the boy and ambulances were called to the scene. When an officer is involved in an incident of serious injury or death, it is not for the police service to predetermine the issue of criminality — that is the function of the SIU.”
In both cases the officers were not charged so maybe this not letting the SIU in on incidents involving them is working?
Arguably the best police service in the world, Peel police is better than shirking Police Act guidelines. I put a request into Chief Metcalf for his side of this case and to find out if there were any Highway Traffic charges.
Metcalf's spokesman Staff-Sgt. Taufic Saliba sent an e-mail response late Monday. "We will not be commenting regarding notification to the SIU. Our investigation of this accident was suspended pending the completion of the SIU investigation. In light of results of the SIU investigation being released, we will now continue with our investigation."
The SIU says the posted speed limit was 70 km/h and “as (the officer) approached the intersection of Erin Mills Pkwy. and Sheridan Park Dr., the traffic light was green in his direction and he began increasing his speed from 76 km/h.”
Scott wrote, “The pre-impact speed of the subject officer’s cruiser was 98 km/h … almost 30 km/h over the speed limit as he entered the intersection. He was not responding to a dispatched call for service and had not activated his emergency equipment. Accordingly, he does not benefit from the exceptions to obeying the speed limits found in the Highway Traffic Act which permits police officers to speed in the lawful performance of their duties.”
Yet it appears there will be no proper inquiry, like we saw with the fire truck that allegedly went through a red light and struck a car.
What I wonder about in this case is what if it had been the other way around — if it was the boy’s mother who was accelerating to 98 km and put a police officer in hospital with “a broken collarbone, bruised lung and facial lacerations,” just as the boy went through?
