Firefighters not guilty in melee with police
- Thread starter petros
- Start date
My dad drove a city bus in Vancouver for 35 years. I know may drivers. They are held to a tight schedule in heavy traffic (most of which is NOT courteous), have to deal with many d*ckhead passengers from simply arrogant to beligerant to intolerable drunkards. I have no sympathy for the moron interfering with the driver's duties.
I didn't favour anyone. Perhaps you should learn to read.
Seems to me, the Judge ruled that their intervention was unlawful, because the fire fighters were just play fighting, everything after that was irrelevant.
You've already proven that you are incapable of discussing legal issues.
Or First Nations, or Israel, or, or, or...
Don't worry officers, they aren't robbing that bank, they're just kidding around.
lol. Way to prove her point.
It sure came across like you were. Still a d*ckhead, blanket statement regarding firefighters.
Here is the relevant quote from the judge again....
Lisson testified that at the very beginning, he saw Walliser choking Hamilton and that's why he took action. However, Singer did not accept that happened for a number of reasons, including that Lisson didn't mention choking in his notes and no one else, including Talloden, saw any choking.
Because there was no choking or assault going on - and there were people yelling it was a play fight - Lisson had no reasonable grounds to physically intervene, Singer said.
Talloden's testimony was also problematic, Singer said.
"It would be unsafe to convict anyone based upon the evidence of Const. Talloden, who gave confusing and contradictory evidence that was not supported, either by her partner or any of the others who were there," Singer said.
In plain English Justice Singer believed both cops were lying.
I'm quite capable of the discussion, you are just incapable of believing you are wrong.
Theres a difference between perjury and being wrong in how you perceieved a situation. Witness statements are notoriously flawed, and it sounds like these cops were no different. If they were perjuring themselves, theyd have most likely had the same story as one another.
I could possibly accept the "confusing & contradictory" testimony from a brand new officer but Lisson testified in court his reason for intervening was 'choking' when it was not in his notes or witnessed by any other person at the scene. To me that is blatant perjury in an attempt to justify his actions and he should be charged as such.
That's because you can't read.
I didn't make a blanket statement.
Tackling someone to the ground, can be viewed as assault.
Defence argued they were not executing their duty lawfully. Testimony sited was that the other fire fighters told the police the two were just playing.
I'm not wrong, this sets a dangerous precedent.
Bingo.
You are wrong. It sets the right precedent. Force should NOT be the first option of a police officer especially when they do not have a grasp on the actual situation. That is what this ruling sets and it is as it should be.
I do blame the training more than the officer because that is what they are trained to do these days. I have a friend who trains cops & border guards in small arms and hand-to-hand and he confirms they are taught to gain control by ANY means BEFORE assessing the situation.
You've said that before only to be proven wrong.
It's OK officer, he isn't raping her, it's just role play.
Saw a man tackled to the ground and what appeared to be a fight.
It's Ok officer, he isn't shoplifting, he's just playing hide the DVDs.
I just called #3 District, I'll have to wait for them to stop laughing before I can debunk that nonsense.
A completely ludicrous analogy.
Mutual combat is a legitimate defense to assault.
Another ludicrous analogy.
Sure it's nonsense, B.B (cannot give you his name for security reasons) has only worked at the training center in Chilliwack since it opened and has been with CBSA since 1992. I'm sure he is incorrect because YOU don't believe it.
It is clear from your opinion on this thread you support police brutality and misconduct (shoot first, ask questions later) so there is no point in continuing. Go ahead and keep your opinion that cops are not bound by the laws the rest of us are. I will continue to ensure they follow the law as we have to.
Yes it was.
Yup, I shoot pool with a retired RCMP officer. He was a Sergeant before he retired. Training standards are ridiculous according to him. If you feel the situation is out of control, get it under control as soon as possible. I choose to believe an experienced RCMP Sergeant over some internet wannabe lawyer.
Surely there is a common sense answer to this. I would say until you can gain control of the situation without unnecessarily harming anyone, don't barge in.
The qualifier was 'can', having to explain that to you comes as no surprise.
No it wasn't. It was the basis of the defence.
You're wrong again.
Or you can just be making it up.
Since your legal claims and many more of your claims have been shown to be suspect if not outright BS.
I see no need to take your posts with anything but a big block of salt.
No it isn't.
I said that?
You don't know some of the simplest laws, how the hell can you hold anyone else to them?
My retired RCMP officer father thinks the same thing.
Not according to you and PN.
I don't think PN is a wannabe lawyer, he doesn't know the law at all.
Last edited:
...or my ex RCMP buddy. He believes that attitude directly cause the death of Robert Dziekanski. He isn't alone.
So your exRCMP buddy doesn't believe in getting out of control situations, under control.
Interesting.
Thankfully he's an exRCMP officer.
After arrival at the scene, what kind of time frame would be reasonable to gain control?
Nice try troll. He (as well as I) believes in properly assessing the situation to determine first if it is out of control and then bringing it under control in the safest and least confrontational method possible. Sadly, the RCMP currently does not believe in that tactic and it is, unfortunately, costing us in lives and legal fees.
It was your claim.
Nice backpedal.
Maybe you should just stop making it up as you go along. You won't make as many mistakes.