Toronto Police Officer Charges in Connection with Streetcar Shooting


#juan
+2
#31
Quote: Originally Posted by Goober View Post

6 shots, pause then 3 more, pause then Tasered.
The SIU in Ontario is Freaking Useless when investigating Officers that are alleged to have committed serious crimes / abuse of authority. When Marin was there it was different.

I believe it was three shots, a pause, and six more shots, at a range of what, ten or twelve feet? The guy went down after the first three shots. I don't know why the officer fired the next six shots.
 
Most helpful post: The members here have rated this post as best reply.
Cobalt_Kid
#32
Quote: Originally Posted by Goober View Post

The Officers training is to shoot to kill. Not wound, not shoot the knife out of his hand.
I smells a rat.

They're trained to shoot center of mass, not to kill. Their job isn't executioners, it's to enforce the law and protect citizens.
 
petros
#33
Quote: Originally Posted by #juan View Post

I believe it was three shots, a pause, and six more shots, at a range of what, ten or twelve feet? The guy went down after the first three shots. I don't know why the officer fired the next six shots.

That's what murders do.
 
Goober
#34
Quote: Originally Posted by #juan View Post

I believe it was three shots, a pause, and six more shots, at a range of what, ten or twelve feet? The guy went down after the first three shots. I don't know why the officer fired the next six shots.

Yes you are correct.
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/...ticle13867299/

The charge is in connection to the July 26 incident when Sammy Yatim, 18, pulled out a three-inch blade on a westbound Dundas streetcar near Trinity Bellwoods Park. The passengers and driver fled the vehicle unharmed leaving Mr. Yatim behind. When police arrived, a witness video of the incident shows a verbal interaction between Mr. Yatim and officers on the ground. The teen can be seen taking a step forward at which time an officer fires three gun shots at Mr. Yatim, at which point he falls to the floor. After a pause, six more shots are fired at Mr. Yatim. Following this, an officer can be heard using a taser in the video.
 
petros
#35
3 then 6. watch the video.
 
Goober
+2
#36
Quote: Originally Posted by Cobalt_Kid View Post

They're trained to shoot center of mass, not to kill. Their job isn't executioners, it's to enforce the law and protect citizens.

Center of body mass is kill. What do you think it means. Your heart is located in that very center.
 
Colpy
+4
#37
Quote: Originally Posted by Goober View Post

Center of body mass is kill. What do you think it means. Your heart is located in that very center.

It means STOP. Kill is irrelevant.

Quote: Originally Posted by #juan View Post

I believe it was three shots, a pause, and six more shots, at a range of what, ten or twelve feet? The guy went down after the first three shots. I don't know why the officer fired the next six shots.

Yeah....and as purely a matter of conjecture, you are correct.

There needs to be three things present to use force.

INTENT
WEAPON
DELIVERY SYSYEM.

The guy had all three while on his feet, but when he went down, he no longer had a delivery system (one would think).....and the pause gave the officer time to reconsider.

If he is convicted, the last 6 will be what does it.

BUT...I wasn't there.......
 
petros
#38
Quote: Originally Posted by colpy


If he is convicted, the last 6 will be what does it.

Those last 6 almost gave him a full on first degree murder. He was lucky the Crown didn't proceed with that charge.
 
JLM
#39
Quote: Originally Posted by Cobalt_Kid View Post

They're trained to shoot center of mass, not to kill. Their job isn't executioners, it's to enforce the law and protect citizens.

If you are shooting for centre of mass, man for all intents and purposes it's going to be fatal. Of course a real sharp shooter would just take an ear off and see if that slows him down. -

Quote: Originally Posted by petros View Post

Those last 6 almost gave him a full on first degree murder. He was lucky the Crown didn't proceed with that charge.

Nah, to be first degree it has to be premeditated and definitely not a motive of self defense.

Quote: Originally Posted by Goober View Post

6 shots, pause then 3 more, pause then Tasered.
The SIU in Ontario is Freaking Useless when investigating Officers that are alleged to have committed serious crimes / abuse of authority. When Marin was there it was different.

Also 2nd degree murder has a very high standard, that the Officer intended to kill. Rather hard to prove.
Manslaughter would have been the right charge.
The Officers training is to shoot to kill. Not wound, not shoot the knife out of his hand.
I smells a rat.

Why James Forcillo was charged with murder in Yatim shooting - Canada - CBC News
Second-degree murder implies intent to kill the victim. The Crown brings a manslaughter charge when it does not believe the killing was intentional.

Selwyn Pieters, a Toronto lawyer with considerable experience representing the families of people shot by police, told CBC News that while a charge of second-degree murder does leave the judge and jury with a number of options, including opting for a less charge, he thinks the charge in Forcillo's case should have been manslaughter.

"It's going to be a more difficult hurdle for the Crown to surmount if it's second degree," Pieters said. He described prosecuting this case as a "Herculean task."

Pieters also noted that jurors have been reluctant to convict police officers acting in the line of duty. "Rarely do we have cases where police officers are charged and heard before a jury on serious offences and a verdict of guilty is returned," he said.

It was three shots before the pause followed by 6 more shots. I'm not sure what degree of deadness he was shooting for!
 
karrie
+3
#40
Quote: Originally Posted by Colpy View Post

INTENT

DELIVERY SYSYEM.

The guy had all three while on his feet,

20 feet, with three stairs. There are an awful lot of people who dispute the claim that he possessed the delivery system.

And intent seems to be negated by ordering all the vulnerable people he had within arms reach, to leave the scene.

These are some serious questions that this officer will face.
 
grumpydigger
+2
#41
Fear....a uniform.....and a gun is what is dangerous.A kid all alone on a bus with a pocket knife is not,,,,,,,
 
Cobalt_Kid
+2
#42
Quote: Originally Posted by Goober View Post

Center of body mass is kill. What do you think it means. Your heart is located in that very center.

It means center of mass, police aren't trained killers.

My brother-in-laws brother is a Mountie and has been for over 30 years. According to him the training is;

Shoot at the center of whatever part of the body you can see, if you can only see his arm you shoot at the center of that. They aren't trained to kill, they're trained to react in defense of themselves and the public.

You're thinking of death squads in places like Central America.

btw, I don't know many people who have their hearts in their solar plexus. The heart is slightly above and to the left of the center of mass.
 
Spade
+1
#43
Nine bullets. Reloading must have slowed him down.
 
Cobalt_Kid
#44
You can't put all this on the police officers either, I've been hearing some of the officers I know, mostly Mounties, warning of declining standards for years. My sister was engaged to a recruit while he went through the RCMP training course in Regina in the early 1980s and it was intense and comprehensive. Officers left with most of the tools they needed to function as peace officers. Training has been cut back starting with the Liberals in the 1990s I think and we don't have the same quality of police training we did several decades ago.

I also had a friend who worked as a mental health professional in a provincial psychiatric hospital and he had worked at a forensic unit where the criminally insane are sent. He often had to deal with people who were psychotic and a danger to themselves and others and had extensive training in intervention. Deadly force should be used as a last resort, not as the preferred reaction to a threatening situation. True professionals know how to de-escalate most situations, which is why training is so important. If we want want professional police officers, we need to make sure they get appropriate training and support.
 
Goober
#45
Quote: Originally Posted by Cobalt_Kid View Post

It means center of mass, police aren't trained killers.

My brother-in-laws brother is a Mountie and has been for over 30 years. According to him the training is;

Shoot at the center of whatever part of the body you can see, if you can only see his arm you shoot at the center of that. They aren't trained to kill, they're trained to react in defense of themselves and the public.

You're thinking of death squads in places like Central America.

btw, I don't know many people who have their hearts in their solar plexus. The heart is slightly above and to the left of the center of mass.

Location of the heart.


You should then clarify the situations. I worked for an RCMP Officer who was on their Tactical Response Team for 9 years.

Police training: ‘You shoot until the threat has stopped,’ use-of-force trainer says | Toronto Star

“You shoot until the threat has stopped,” Valois said. Officers are not trained to shoot a weapon out of someone’s hand — something Valois said is next to impossible. They also aren’t trained to shoot out knees or other extremities. Officers aim for the largest “centre of mass,” generally a person’s torso.

“The concept is to incapacitate the threat,
” said Rick Parent, also a former police officer of 30 years in B.C. who now teaches in the police studies program at Simon Fraser University. That usually takes a least a couple of rounds, Parent said, possibly four or more. “That’s what they’re trained to do.

Though officers don’t intend to kill the person, they often do, Parent said, because the centre of mass is home to vital organs and arteries.

Both Valois and Parent said officers in Toronto and elsewhere in Canada are trained that within six to nine metres, a person armed with a weapon can close in on them before they have time to draw their weapon — a concept first developed by Utah police Sgt. Dennis Tueller and aptly named the Tueller Drill.

Parent said there is no set distance for when an officer should or shouldn’t choose to shoot someone, especially once their gun is drawn. That is up to the officer’s judgment.

“If they do move, then they’ll probably discharge their firearm,” Parent said.

He added: “Sometimes it’s a judgment error . . . They’re human beings first, police officers second.”
Last edited by Goober; Aug 21st, 2013 at 05:15 PM..
 
Cobalt_Kid
#46
Quote: Originally Posted by Goober View Post

Location of the heart.


You should then clarify the situations. I worked for an RCMP Officer who was on their Tactical Response Team for 9 years.

Police training: ‘You shoot until the threat has stopped,’ use-of-force trainer says | Toronto Star

“You shoot until the threat has stopped,” Valois said. Officers are not trained to shoot a weapon out of someone’s hand — something Valois said is next to impossible. They also aren’t trained to shoot out knees or other extremities. Officers aim for the largest “centre of mass,” generally a person’s torso.

“The concept is to incapacitate the threat,
” said Rick Parent, also a former police officer of 30 years in B.C. who now teaches in the police studies program at Simon Fraser University. That usually takes a least a couple of rounds, Parent said, possibly four or more. “That’s what they’re trained to do.

Though officers don’t intend to kill the person, they often do, Parent said, because the centre of mass is home to vital organs and arteries.

Both Valois and Parent said officers in Toronto and elsewhere in Canada are trained that within six to nine metres, a person armed with a weapon can close in on them before they have time to draw their weapon — a concept first developed by Utah police Sgt. Dennis Tueller and aptly named the Tueller Drill.

Parent said there is no set distance for when an officer should or shouldn’t choose to shoot someone, especially once their gun is drawn. That is up to the officer’s judgment.

“If they do move, then they’ll probably discharge their firearm,” Parent said.

He added: “Sometimes it’s a judgment error . . . They’re human beings first, police officers second.”

That's what I was saying, they're trained to shoot at the visual center of mass with the intent to incapacitate the threatening individual, not kill them. And the solar plexus is the center of a person's mass, the heart isn't located there.

I've known cops, mostly Mounties, all my life and the quality of training has gone down, to the the point where they are sometimes a danger to themselves as we saw at Mayerthorpe and the public as we've been seeing recently with beatings and shootings.

The level of professionalism isn't what it used to be.

Arguably shooting Sammy Yatim three times when he advanced with a knife was justified, shooting him six more times when he was down opened the officer involved to charges of murder.

Who in the hell knows what the officer with the taser was doing.
 
WLDB
#47
Quote: Originally Posted by petros View Post

Those last 6 almost gave him a full on first degree murder. He was lucky the Crown didn't proceed with that charge.

It may have actually made it easier for him. Proving first degree murder is a lot harder than second degree murder.
 
Goober
#48
Quote: Originally Posted by WLDB View Post

It may have actually made it easier for him. Proving first degree murder is a lot harder than second degree murder.

2nd Degree is almost as difficult- Must prove intent to murder.
 
SLM
+1
#49
Quote: Originally Posted by Goober View Post

2nd Degree is almost as difficult- Must prove intent to murder.

That will be all about the pause in firing.
 
karrie
+4
#50
Quote: Originally Posted by SLM View Post

That will be all about the pause in firing.

And plugging six bullets into a dying, twitching man.
 
SLM
#51
Quote: Originally Posted by karrie View Post

And plugging six bullets into a dying, twitching man.


Well that's the actual act of killing to be sure. But it was that moment, during the pause, that pretty much everyone was asking "What was he thinking?", that's the part that speaks to intent.

To be perfectly honest, if there were simply the three shots and the young man was just as dead, I could very well see myself giving the officer complete benefit of the doubt as far as justification for shooting. After all, I'm not the one staring down someone with a knife. And I've heard so much contradiction from 'experts' stating the optimum action to take in these types of situations.

But it was when he paused, he had to be considering what to do next. We know what he ended up doing. Now I want to know is why.
 
Sal
#52
it's not just his azz here... the higher ups will be scrambling and running for cover...what was his mental state, who was aware of his mental state who was in charge of him, etc... this will be complicated
 
JLM
#53
Quote: Originally Posted by Goober View Post

From what I understand officers charged in similar circumstances were all found not guilty.

That may have something to do with corruption in the system. The latest case that comes to mind is that of Monty Robinson, charged with vehicular homicide and tasering the immigrant at the airport. Did he actually spend so much as a night in jail? Things do have a habit of evening out over time and I'm guessing Mr. Robinson some day will mysteriously turn up "in a compromised condition".

Quote: Originally Posted by SLM View Post

That will be all about the pause in firing.

From what I understand, for a charge of 1st degree murder to stick, there has to be "malice aforethought" and previous planning. I doubt very much if that applies here, in a specific sense. I'm not sure how a general attitude of "blow the bastards away" would apply.
 
petros
#54
Quote: Originally Posted by JLM View Post

That may have something to do with corruption in the system. The latest case that comes to mind is that of Monty Robinson, charged with vehicular homicide and tasering the immigrant at the airport. Did he actually spend so much as a night in jail? Things do have a habit of evening out over time and I'm guessing Mr. Robinson some day will mysteriously turn up "in a compromised condition".



From what I understand, for a charge of 1st degree murder to stick, there has to be "malice aforethought" and previous planning. I doubt very much if that applies here, in a specific sense. I'm not sure how a general attitude of "blow the bastards away" would apply.

What is an appropriate length of time to think about killing somebody?
 
JLM
#55
Quote: Originally Posted by petros View Post

What is an appropriate length of time to think about killing somebody?

I don't think there is an appropriate length of time to think about killing someone. I suppose if you are thinking about the length of time to make it first degree, it would be variable. How long does it take to formulate a plan and to take the preliminary steps to one, avoid detection, two to wait for the right time and conditions and three, to perform necessary prerequisites?
 
petros
#56
Not much if you have the means and think you have the authority to do it because you're wearing a badge.
 
JLM
#57
Quote: Originally Posted by petros View Post

Not much if you have the means and think you have the authority to do it because you're wearing a badge.

You're in a realm beyond my feeble mind. -
 
petros
#58
There were plenty of other options and time to consider them but he acted as Judge Judy and executioner.
 
JLM
#59
Quote: Originally Posted by petros View Post

There were plenty of other options and time to consider them but he acted as Judge Judy and executioner.

Yeah, and she can be a bit of a bitch!
 
petros
#60
So are TO cops who think they are above the law.
 

Similar Threads

20
0
Police officer killed in shooting
by Blackleaf | May 6th, 2007
2