Discussion in 'Reality Check' started by Kent Brockman, Sep 11, 2009.
We touched base ..
Great to see RC being a support to this girl is steering her in the right direction re her situation.
It's obvious she came here looking for info/help because of the initial thread; but, like Boots has alluded to...it's too bad the "argue crew" almost scared her off before she could get some real useful feedback.
I wonder why she got arrested?
Kind of irrelevant isn't it? Aren't you supposed to be treated equally during arrest regardless of the crime?
From a legal standpoint yes. Since I am not a lawyer that does not interest me.
From a human standpoint I would feel differently if she got beat up after skinning ten kids and setting their grandmother on fire, or if he had a bylaw warrant.
Mother's mother or father's mother?
Either. As long as the hair is blue.
True but there's gotta be unquestionable guilt.
I'd be happy with reasonable and probable grounds.
- - - Updated - - -
Probably also depends on how you treat the arresting officers too.
I didn't bother getting into that. For some reason everyone who gets roughed up gets it "for no reason".
you have to admit that there are some officers out there who will rough up somebody who is headed to the drunk tank just cuz they can and they think its funny, not necessarily cuz the person becomes combative.
im the first one to say if an officer gives you an order and you chose to ignore that order....you do it at the risk of being harmed...and rightfully so.
This is the problem, and why we need to hold cops to a high standard. I was hit with a drunk who and officer we used to call lurch, threw in my direction. He then proceeded to ram the drunk's head into the back door of the paddy wagon "by accident". This guy (the cop) used to instigate a lot of stuff downtown, fortunately for him this was before everyone could take video with their phones.
Depends what the order is, sometimes it is not reasonable and violence is not (and truthfully rarely is) the answer.
Officer Lurch threw a drunk and he flew into Mr. Friday
Don't become a cop then. In theory sure, no violence would be lovely.
Grants partner was kicked in the face and dick last week. And that was just the first two shifts of the set. In real life, dealing with the scumbags they mostly deal with, a strong hand is the answer when theyre faced with a lot situations, by necessity. And I don't mean taking a few sucker punches to someone's face. I mean when you're told to do some1 thing by a cop, and you kick them in the crotch, don't expect many pleases and thank yous.
And before I'm neg repped to death, I'm not biased. I think cops who blatantly fuck up should be punished harsher than the general public, because we do hold them to a higher level. Higher expectations, higher letdowns so higher punishments. But I'm also a realist. G doesn't spend hours a day escorting polite law abiding citizens to jail. I can't tell you how many times hes already been spit on, etc. Most cops aren't out to rage out and drive around beating up innocent people for bragging rights. That's a lot of paperwork. There are the few who taint people's opinions, of course. But as a general rule they're mostly good people who deal with more bullshit than anyone will understand.
Violence as a rule is not an answer, but you have I understand that of you're violent towards an officer, you are going to be subdued. People know the consequences. You need to treat people situationally appropriate, as opposed to a general rule.
- - - Updated - - -
For sure. But not as many who dont act like that.
Don't get me wrong. Cops need to put up with more than their fair share of assholes. Also, the majority of cops are good people who became cops to make, or keep, this place a good place to live. I also acknowledge that force is required in dealing with some suspects and I support their appropriate use of it. I don't think "Stop or I'll say stop again" is going to work, police need to be given the tools and ability to do their job.
Unfortunately the job also attracts (or possibly creates) power tripping assholes who think they are above the law, and to a certain extent, they are. I think police need to be accountable for their actions and harsh criminal penalties handed out where appropriate. I also think there needs to be hash penalties for officers who cover-up or do not report instances where they have seen another officer breaking the rules. This would create an environment where the police can freely report the bad cops and get them out of the system so the good ones can keep doing a good job. The public would see that the bad apples are dealt with and would give the public greater trust in the system and have more respect for them. It would also help if they did not investigate themselves. A random, outside, police force should be assigned to the case and using halifax as an example here, having truro investigate halifax and halifax truro's police force doesn't count. Too close and it will be the same people.
For the record, I haven't neg rep'd you once because you always back up your opinions so even if I disagree with you on something you could always explain exactly WHY you thought what you did. In this case I think we are actually on the same page anyway though.
I'm glad we agree on that front. A lot of good, hardworking cops get thrown under the bus when a couple bad situations come to light and its sad when they all get painted with the same brush. There's always going to be bad cops, bad system administrators, bad nurse, bad cross walk guards. But because officers are held to such a high regard, it's so much worse when they mess up. I truly feel punishment for an offense as a sworn member should be worse than for a civilian. Not only because they've been held to a higher standard, but because of the damage it does to public opinion of police in general. Whether they want to be or not, one cop represents them all. Its got to be a unified front.
Edmonton is participating in a pilot program where they're going to strap cameras to police officer's chest. An interesting way to not only provide evidence, but accountability.
I'm not sure how it works there, but here we have ASIRT to deal with police offenses, they aren't police officers, and they do all the work to make sure all cases are unbiased.
We agree 100% on this. For the exact reasons you said, I want tough punishment for cops who disregard the law.
I love the chest camera idea, great protection for everyone involved and should enable easier prosecutions.
We do have SIRT here as well but it is "independent" The director is a Crown Attorney, there are two "civilian" investigators (former police), two active duty officers, and other police resources as required.
The problem is that sill is not enough distance between the investigator and person being investigated and also makes
I'm not all anti-cop, I have family and friends that are current and former RCMP, but here in Halifax they have some serious issues to work out. A lack of accountability on their part does not help anything.
The case of a Halifax Regional Police officer charged with sexual assault has been adjourned to April.
David Bright, lawyer for Const. Christopher James Mosher, said in Dartmouth provincial court Wednesday that it could take at least a month to receive disclosure in the case.
Crown attorney Michelle Christenson said outside court that she has not yet received disclosure from investigators, either.
Mosher, 29, was not required to appear in court Wednesday.
He is facing one count each of sexual assault and administering a noxious substance related to an alleged incident involving a woman, whose identity is banned from publication, at Mosher’s Eastern Passage home on Nov. 2 and Nov. 3.
Judge Alanna Murphy adjourned Mosher’s case to April 25, when he will appear for election on the charges.
Until then, Mosher is free on an undertaking and ordered to abide by conditions, including that he have no contact with the victim or any witnesses. He is also banned from possessing a firearm and ordered to turn over any gun, along with any firearm permits, to the province’s Serious Incident Response Team, which investigated the case.
Mosher, who was arrested Dec. 11, has been suspended with pay since that time.
A police officer for four years, Mosher was in his first year on the force when he was charged with common assault after a domestic dispute in 2009. He was placed on administrative leave, but reinstated after the Crown withdrew the charges.
As a cadet, Mosher was dismissed from the regional police training program, but was later reinstated.
More on link
Everyone? What about the hundreds of videos on the internet of police abusing people?
I'm sure the aboriginal girls the RCMP has been raping was for no reason too!
You spew your hate all day long for aboriginals but when the complaints are against the police you jump on their side? Have we found a group that Rory hates more than Indians?
Out of the estimate 15 million arrests in the US per year a few hundred videos exists in total since the dawn of the internet...I would say statistically that incidents like that are quite rare overall.
So something just fell into my lap, and it wasn't dinner.
-kicked out of training and reinstated
-charged with a domestic
-the sexual assault and drugging
-major bully in high school
-raping/impregnating a girl
-used his badge on time off to get a ride home from bar goers
-violent towards women
-assaults drunk kids
How hasn't dude been fired. Thats insane! People need to straight up report shit like that so it doesn't continue.
Union rights and protecting your own more important than the public in their minds. Hard to argue it.
Are those comments fact or just comments
Dude, if all those things are true, then I really doubt many would stand behind him. No one wants someone like that ruining public image.
Easy to argue it, if you're not looking to sensationalize it.
Check out Edms news sometime.. We currently have like 8 different cops in the court system going through processes of disciplinary action. The chief has a strict policy. You lie and fuck up, you're fired. The union is actually speaking out to disagree with the policy but a lot of people support it. I do. Covering up for other officers of legitimate offenses isn't as prevalent as a lot may think.
Just comments I assume
Sounds like it may be an issue if the chief has to have a policy on it and the Union is against it
How so? The policy possibly stops it from becoming an issue, and what union isn't against something that doesn't treat its members like babies that need a million chances to do something right?
Allegation; charges ongoing.
The chief is just very cut and dry, you fuck up once, you're done. The union thinks there should be second chances in some cases. Doesn't seem like an unlikely stance on either end.
- - - Updated - - -
I agree with the policy in most cases.
Example, a chick in now in review for lying to her superiors about a relationship with one of her other superiors. She said it wasn't happening. Well, since they're married now, its well recognized she lied. The husband retired before he had a chance to face discipline. I think she should be booted. She lied. You can date a coworker.. As long as they aren't a direct superior. All they had to do was go "hey, we're dating, one of us needs a transfer" and there wouldn't be an issue. But instead, they choose to be dishonest, which is a horrible attribute in their position.
Also right now, an officer just had his job reinstated after Edmonton fired him. He... pissed on another member. Edmonton fired him, and then the like.. Canadian police board decided he deserved his job back for some stupid reason. Edmonton is able to, and going to appeal. Interesting about the dude.. He is the former sniper who held the record overseas for longest kill shot. That is insane, fire the dude. He's clearly a disrespectful piece of shit.
Situations like this, need to be a zero tolerance policy. I can see why he would just want them fired. Of course the association wants second chances for everyone, that's their job.