|
|
|
York police officer suspended, charged with impaired driving after Markham collision
- Thread starter FLSTC
- Start date
I see they conveniently omitted the 'with pay" part after suspended from duty.
AllistonGT
Well-known member
The cops essentially on Holliday.
Green Meenie
Well-known member
I'm sort of happy he's still getting paid and probably will be for some time. The civil suit, after this officer is convicted, will be sizable and insurance won't cover a dime of it. He will lose everything, assuming he doesn't liquidate his assets and hide them between now & then.
If you have a lawsuit filed against you by a co-worker for conduct towards them that is a breach of employment will HR put you on a leave of absence with pay because the legal fees and punitive judgement will be excessive when you eventually end up being found at fault?
Didn't think so.
If your part of a very powerful union you have a deal, until conviction.
you can liquidate and hide assets if your stinky super rich , average smucks cannot afford the accountants that make such things possible and dont have the depth of investment that can go offshore. Paper trails within Canada dont hide well.
you can liquidate and hide assets if your stinky super rich , average smucks cannot afford the accountants that make such things possible and dont have the depth of investment that can go offshore. Paper trails within Canada dont hide well.
bigpoppa
Well-known member
Thats the funniest joke I've heard all year
Green Meenie
Well-known member
Is it possible he could slip out of this completely by claiming -"N.C.R. due to job related PTSD which caused him to drink excessively"?
AllistonGT
Well-known member
Extremely rare to see any cop see jail time for anything. Won't happen.
Sorry to hear.
Not the first time, either. There was that cop in Richmond that killed a motorcyclist while impaired and left the scene "to take his kid home".
Innocent until proven guilty so off with pay.
This covers the administration's arse and prevents lawsuits from the perp if he / she loses a home and is later found not guilty.
HOWEVER
If found guilty the pay should be given back.
Part 2
If this is a non-work related incident shouldn't he be paying his own legal costs?
If they are paid by the employer shouldn't it be a taxable benefit? Let's see what a the taxes are like on a $100,000 defense.
Outside of the government employees don't get these perks.
This covers the administration's arse and prevents lawsuits from the perp if he / she loses a home and is later found not guilty.
HOWEVER
If found guilty the pay should be given back.
Part 2
If this is a non-work related incident shouldn't he be paying his own legal costs?
If they are paid by the employer shouldn't it be a taxable benefit? Let's see what a the taxes are like on a $100,000 defense.
Outside of the government employees don't get these perks.
Trials
Well-known member
Hey man, I worked as a government employee and we didn't see those perks either.
Very sad news story, should never happen.
The union is not picking up the tab for his criminal case. They will represent him at any internal hearings, police services act charges.. But he'll be on his own for the criminal trial(s).
This is likely an example of the application of the 2 hours after driving DUI law. He was drunk, he split...
In the olden days he would have said he drank afterwards and just got a leaving the scene (lots of examples of cops doing this in the past, they knew how it worked), now he gets the DUI (and hopefully also leaving the scene). Still not a fan of the law BUT maybe sometimes it works.
In the olden days he would have said he drank afterwards and just got a leaving the scene (lots of examples of cops doing this in the past, they knew how it worked), now he gets the DUI (and hopefully also leaving the scene). Still not a fan of the law BUT maybe sometimes it works.
|
|
|
|
|