Man dies after Taser shock by police at Vancouver airport

[VanIsle]

Personally I think police should wear hat cameras, its not that expensive. See what they see, hear what they hear, and make police liable for their actions like anyone else.

If that is found to be too restrictive to have law and order, then loosen the rules for everyone.

That's just silly. In almost any type of altercation, their hat gets knocked off. One of the very reasons why they quite forcing them to wear their hat at "all times". For most of them, at least anyone tall, the hat has to be removed everytime they get into the car so you get a video of the dash. The cams they are having installed will record everything and it's not being done as a watch dog effect. It's being done to protect the police in a number of ways. Truth on both sides of each story for one thing. Something a lot of the public will find difficult to swallow and in the horrible event that an officer is killed, it will record all of that as well. These days I'm sure that everytime the police arrive on any scene there will be any number of any type of recording devices being used. Neither the government or any city will have to go to the expense since the public is volunteering. Nothing wrong with that actually. It should help to keep some of the public in line right along with the police.:smile:

 

[Zzarchov]

If they have hats that come off, maybe you shouldn't give them stylish hats, but say a helmet, that provides protection and is specifically designed not to come off in the fight.

The Idea isn't based around a hat, but upon recording.

The problem is that public recording isn't eligible in court as fact, as it could have been tampered with.

I grew up in a town where the police were the drug dealers, so im not all happy with this rosy view that somehow attending a training course and having a clean criminal record makes you automatically more trustworthy than the average person.

 

[ironsides]

Stop all this bickering about a relatively harmless weapon (taser) and let the police go back to only having their 9mm & Baton to protect and serve with. There was far less complaining back before the taser. Deaths from a taser are relatively rare as opposed to using a firearm. You are worrying to much about the bad guy.

 

[VanIsle]

Stop all this bickering about a relatively harmless weapon (taser) and let the police go back to only having their 9mm & Baton to protect and serve with. There was far less complaining back before the taser. Deaths from a taser are relatively rare as opposed to using a firearm. You are worrying to much about the bad guy.

You are bang on.:lol:

 

[VanIsle]

If they have hats that come off, maybe you shouldn't give them stylish hats, but say a helmet, that provides protection and is specifically designed not to come off in the fight.

The Idea isn't based around a hat, but upon recording.

The problem is that public recording isn't eligible in court as fact, as it could have been tampered with.

I grew up in a town where the police were the drug dealers, so im not all happy with this rosy view that somehow attending a training course and having a clean criminal record makes you automatically more trustworthy than the average person.

Helmets are for bike cops. If they cannot get into the car with a forage cap on, how in the world do you think they will get in with a helmet style hat with a cam attached? LOL My husband is 6'3". He had to duck to get into the car without a hat on. I have to giggle at the mere idea of him getting in with a helmet on. A friend of ours died because of all the equipment they wear today (weight of the equipment). He hopped into a zodiac to see how the new motor was working. Just taking it for a little spin. He was one of the members who was allowed to operate the zodiac but at the time, he was not actually dressed to be on it. The motor was not functioning properly and the boat took off like a bullet. The sheer speed of the boat threw him into the water and the sheer weight of what he was wearing acted like a concrete weight. He drowned before anyone could get near him. Left two young children behind. That's about 6 yrs ago. It was a horrible shocking event. They don't need to add more to what they already have. Ironsides has the right idea.

 

[lone wolf]

IP if you're happy with bad cops painting targets on good cops, you can write the rules. As good as the Force has been to you, realizing there really are bad cops and people who use cop as gang might be akin to realizing there really is no Santa. Is the cop in your life one of those guys wearing someone else's target?

 

[VanIsle]

IP if you're happy with bad cops painting targets on good cops, you can write the rules. As good as the Force has been to you, realizing there really are bad cops and people who use cop as gang might be akin to realizing there really is no Santa. Is the cop in your life one of those guys wearing someone else's target?

Nope. He retired at a young age so he has been out of the force for quite sometime now. I probably realize even more than you do that there are bad cops out there and probably know more that have been dismissed because of it. The public thinks they know about all the bad cops but you don't. Lots of them get caught up in things like selling drugs or worse and they are fired before you ever hear about it. If you think for a moment that they don't rat each other out - you watch too much TV. I'm happy for the cameras that are being installed in the cars. This city is not the first to do that and it will help the "bad" cop situation as well as keeping track of what some criminals do. It' a win win situation. In a force like the RCMP, a good cop only has to request a transfer and then rat out the bad guys he used to be stationed with. Members get transferred all the time so all they have to do is request a transfer at the right time of the year and no one is the wiser. Nearly all transfers take place at the end of the school year. You have no idea of the depth of bad feelings a good cop has for a bad cop. It has a true ripple effect. The idea that someone you know turns out to be "bad" is a complete and utter betrayal. Good cops are revolted by this and their spouses are revolted. It's a stench that never really goes away. I know that because I still clearly remember the first "bad" cop I personally knew and that was over 40 years ago. He was a thief who lost his job and did time. To this day I still have the newspaper clippings.

 

[lone wolf]

You realize even more than I do? How bloody arrogant! Do you have any idea how many cops there are in my family? Why do you think I resent bad cops making targets of good cops so much?

 

[#juan]

As far as tasers are concerned, it must be known that some people have no tolerence to electric shock will die with one shock from the taser. The point being that the next guy/girl to be tasered could very well die and there is no way of knowing before hand. This is why taser use is irresponsible and stupid.

 

[Cannuck]

If they have hats that come off, maybe you shouldn't give them stylish hats, but say a helmet, that provides protection and is specifically designed not to come off in the fight.

Won't work. I watched the movie Aliens. They had helmet cams and they were useless.

 

[lone wolf]

As far as tasers are concerned, it must be known that some people have no tolerence to electric shock will die with one shock from the taser. The point being that the next guy/girl to be tasered could very well die and there is no way of knowing before hand. This is why taser use is irresponsible and stupid.

Easy example.... pacemaker.

 

[Zzarchov]

Side note: You can get in and out of a vehicle with a helmet on, worst case scenario you bump your head , but no problem, you are wearing a helmet.

Its not that hard. They are designed to stop shrapnel, they handle the odd bump.

Secondly, don't wear excessive gear on the water, if you are, wear a life jacket that can handle it, its the law. Common sense says you can take off the camera (which can have a weight of a pen by the way) if you are worried about weight in water.

But I don't think I'll see a beatcop drowning on 4th and main when he's busy harassing some minorities for being in a "white part of town".

The extra legal protection given to cops is the problem. Police deserve less forgiveness for breaking the law, its their duty to uphold it. If you see a cop speeding for no reason, don't give him forgiveness or a fine, boot him off the force! he knowingly broke the damn law.

 

[VanIsle]

You realize even more than I do? How bloody arrogant! Do you have any idea how many cops there are in my family? Why do you think I resent bad cops making targets of good cops so much?

Did I sound arrogant? Didn't mean to. I was really just chatting. ;-):lol:

 

[lone wolf]

Did I sound arrogant? Didn't mean to. I was really just chatting. ;-):lol:

Apologies.... I'm getting too conditioned to countering trollish behaviour. Sad, really....

 

[ironsides]

No, responsible and justified use of a taser is much better than using a firearm. You have to stop worrying about a persons physical/medical when they are committing a crime. No, a taser should not be used for riot control. Rubber bullets, gas etc. in that case, and yes they have been know to kill also. Bottom line, do not commit a crime.

 

[Ron in Regina]

Taser cams would curb reckless use

Bad rap for RCMP: is it deserved?


The Times: Bad rap for RCMP: is it deserved?

Published: Tuesday, April 07, 2009

If what we have been told about the fatal shooting of a Vancouver man by a
female police officer is true, it appears front-line cops have learned little from the
Robert Dziekanski incident at Vancouver International Airport in 2007.

It is ironic this happened just days before the Braidwood inquiry resumed with
testimony from the RCMP officer in charge the night Dziekanski died.

There are striking similarities to both incidents.

In both cases, we have a witness who disputes the official police version of what
happened.

Adam Smolcic claims police seized the cellphone he used to record the fatal
shooting. He also alleges that police deleted the video capture.

In the Dziekanski incident, Paul Pritchard also had his video camera seized by
police, and only got it back after he threatened with a lawsuit. (Police say they
needed to hang onto it until all other evidence they were looking for was in their
possession.)

Smolcic is making some pretty serious allegations: that police shot and killed
someone who could have been subdued with pepper spray or a baton, and that
police then tried to cover their backsides by tampering with evidence.

Abbotsford Police have now been tasked with investigating the shooting. That
investigation should also delve into Smolcic's allegations. Smolcic is reported to be a
marijuana activist. In the past, the word of a pot advocate wouldn't have counted
for much when weighed against the word of a police officer.

Sadly, it may be easier for the public to believe Smolcic than the police.

That's how badly the Dziekanski incident has shaken the public's trust.

We've written before that the Braidwood inquiry painfully shows what is wrong with
the RCMP culture, much like the Dubin Commission exposed the drug habits of
high-performance athletes and much like the Mitchell Report blew the whistle on
steroid cheats in baseball.

What the Braidwood inquiry won't do, however, is highlight the brilliant and
mostly unreported work RCMP officers do for us on a daily basis.
__________________________

 

[Ron in Regina]

Taser cams would curb reckless use

Cameras don't threaten the law abiding


By Wayne Moriarty, The ProvinceApril 7, 2009
Source: Cameras don't threaten the law abiding

In the dystopia of George Orwell's Nineteen Eighty-Four, telescreens maintain
minute-by-minute surveillance of everyone. This cautionary tale warned of Big
Brother using technology to maintain an omnipresent eye on the citizens of
Oceania.

Reality has turned Orwell's nightmare on its head.

It is not Big Brother who is watching every move of every citizen; rather, it is
every citizen doing his or her damnedest to watch Big Brother.

Understandably, this does not sit well with the authorities -- in particular, the
police, who now must wonder what was or was not captured on camera every time
they make a public bust.

If the police routinely acted by the letter of the law, then it wouldn't matter
what was captured with a cell camera, would it?

Unfortunately, as we all know too well, police aren't exactly embracing cameras in
the hands of anyone these days -- professional journalist or Joe Citizen with a
cellphone.

Province photographer Jason Payne was at a police incident Sunday afternoon
taking pictures. Police officers told him to stop. One officer told him he was
"obstructing justice." The cops allegedly assaulted our photographer, then
confiscated his camera. It was eventually returned.

Here are three simple facts:

- Jason was not obstructing justice.

- The police had no legal authority to tell Jason to stop shooting photographs
from a public place.

- They had no authority to take his camera.

These are not heady days for law enforcement in this country. The Braidwood
Inquiry isn't doing the RCMP any favours. Then there is that alleged incident of
drunk off-duty cops beating up a truck driver on Burrard Street. Last week, a VPD
officer fatally shot a man wrongly suspected of theft from a vehicle.

Moreover, according to the Canadian Press, a growing number of Canadian police
officers are facing charges of perjury -- the serious and usually rare crime of giving
false testimony.

If there isn't already massive erosion of public trust toward our police, there sure
as hell ought to be.

And wouldn't common sense suggest the police ought to be aware of public
perception these days and, as a result, ought to be mindfully on their best
behaviour.

Why then would anyone at the VPD put our photographer through the kind of crap
he endured Sunday?

Is it arrogance? Is it stupidity?

I suspect the police do this sort of stuff because they can. They don't have the
right to do it, but damn it all, they sure as hell have the might.

It seems more and more police officers these days can't think past "Obey me or risk
going to jail."

Might over right.

Now that's a dystopia.

-- Wayne Moriarty is Province Editor-in-chief; he can be reached at
wmoriarty@theprovince.com
___________________________

 

[VanIsle]

Is this the one about the guy who was going to crush the officer between two cars? If it is, by listening to the explanation on TV and by reading letters from people in the Vancouver Province Paper, people seem to be behind the police in this one.

 

[Ron in Regina]

Taser cams would curb reckless use

Will you hand over your cell?


By Ethan Baron, The Province April 7, 2009
Source: Will you hand over your cell?

Vancouver cops manhandled Province photographer Jason Payne and threatened
him with arrest until Payne handed over his camera, containing images from a
police-shooting scene.

If you exercise your right as a citizen to record images of officer activity, you may
find yourself treated like Payne, with your personal property confiscated against
your will.

While Vancouver police later apologized and said it wasn't department policy, there
would be no such apology in the case of an ordinary citizen.

Police say they have the right to take your camera or your cellphone even without
your consent, if they believe you may have recorded images containing evidence.

"In a major incident, that evidence can be critical," says Vancouver police
spokeswoman Const. Jana McGuinness.

Unlike media photographers and camera operators who can easily be tracked down
by police, a member of the public could disappear with photo or video evidence,
McGuinness suggests.

With the skyrocketing prevalence of small cameras and camera-equipped
cellphones, ordinary people are functioning as news gatherers.

And just as the Vancouver police stopped Payne from being able to do his job and
continue photographing officers at the shooting, seizing cameras or cellphones
from citizens stops them from continuing to gather visual information from a
police scene.

Case law appears inconclusive on this issue. Prominent media lawyer Dan Burnett
interprets the law to say that courts would uphold a seizure of a citizen's camera if
police had no time to obtain a warrant and believed evidence could be lost.

B.C. Civil Liberties Association executive director David Eby believes there's no legal
basis for such a seizure without a warrant, arrest or consent, but says the courts
might uphold temporary detention of a citizen until a warrant could be obtained, if
the person had threatened to erase images and planned to leave the scene without
providing contact information.

Certainly, the Robert Dziekanski airport-Tasering case has given media and regular
citizens reason to fear handing over cameras and phones to police. After Paul
Pritchard gave to RCMP his video of Dziekanski being Tasered, he had to sue the
Mounties to get his recording back, in spite of initial police promises they'd return
it as soon as they copied it.

Eventually, cases will arise that will allow the courts to clarify the rights officers
have to seize image-recording devices from citizens, versus the rights of citizens to
record images unobstructed — and to keep other, personal images on their devices
out of the hands of police.

Until that day comes, the best response for anyone accosted by police while
gathering photos or video at a crime scene appears to be: "No, you can't have
my camera or phone, but I'd be happy to give you my name and phone number
and you can apply for a warrant."
________________________

 

[VanIsle]

Cameras don't threaten the law abiding


By Wayne Moriarty, The ProvinceApril 7, 2009
Source: Cameras don't threaten the law abiding

In the dystopia of George Orwell's Nineteen Eighty-Four, telescreens maintain
minute-by-minute surveillance of everyone. This cautionary tale warned of Big
Brother using technology to maintain an omnipresent eye on the citizens of
Oceania.

Reality has turned Orwell's nightmare on its head.

It is not Big Brother who is watching every move of every citizen; rather, it is
every citizen doing his or her damnedest to watch Big Brother.

Understandably, this does not sit well with the authorities -- in particular, the
police, who now must wonder what was or was not captured on camera every time
they make a public bust.

If the police routinely acted by the letter of the law, then it wouldn't matter
what was captured with a cell camera, would it?

Unfortunately, as we all know too well, police aren't exactly embracing cameras in
the hands of anyone these days -- professional journalist or Joe Citizen with a
cellphone.

Province photographer Jason Payne was at a police incident Sunday afternoon
taking pictures. Police officers told him to stop. One officer told him he was
"obstructing justice." The cops allegedly assaulted our photographer, then
confiscated his camera. It was eventually returned.

Here are three simple facts:

- Jason was not obstructing justice.

- The police had no legal authority to tell Jason to stop shooting photographs
from a public place.

- They had no authority to take his camera.

These are not heady days for law enforcement in this country. The Braidwood
Inquiry isn't doing the RCMP any favours. Then there is that alleged incident of
drunk off-duty cops beating up a truck driver on Burrard Street. Last week, a VPD
officer fatally shot a man wrongly suspected of theft from a vehicle.

Moreover, according to the Canadian Press, a growing number of Canadian police
officers are facing charges of perjury -- the serious and usually rare crime of giving
false testimony.

If there isn't already massive erosion of public trust toward our police, there sure
as hell ought to be.

And wouldn't common sense suggest the police ought to be aware of public
perception these days and, as a result, ought to be mindfully on their best
behaviour.

Why then would anyone at the VPD put our photographer through the kind of crap
he endured Sunday?

Is it arrogance? Is it stupidity?

I suspect the police do this sort of stuff because they can. They don't have the
right to do it, but damn it all, they sure as hell have the might.

It seems more and more police officers these days can't think past "Obey me or risk
going to jail."

Might over right.

Now that's a dystopia.

-- Wayne Moriarty is Province Editor-in-chief; he can be reached at
wmoriarty@theprovince.com
___________________________

I'm again only going by what I read in the Vanc. Province Paper. I don't know why VPD's member thought he should confiscate the camera. I gather he found out quickly that it was a wrong move. According to the paper, he had his camera back in about a half hour. My guy used to work on traffic. He has seen more than his share of people killed in horrible accidents. He used to often comment on how many people would stand around snapping gruesome pictures with the cameras of the time. He hasn't been in that type of position for about 20 years so obviously it was the old time cameras. Yesterday I asked him how he would feel today at an accident scene with everyone holding up their cameras and cell phones. People do seem to love gore. He said he couldn't begin to imagine how much horror it would add to an already horrible situation. I know how much it upset him when people were snapping pictures of bodies then. I cannot imagine how bad it would be today. Probably pretty over whelming.