Where is the over reaction? If he maced her or gave her a wood shampoo with his nightstick I'd agree but he told her to knock it off.
Police Missing a Knob
- Thread starter Goober
- Start date
Where is the over reaction? If he maced her or gave her a wood shampoo with his nightstick I'd agree but he told her to knock it off.
I've just looked at a few other videos and it would seem that many police officers went on a power trip, and with Toronto being a major city, it would appear many passers-by had gotten swept up in the police power-trip. Fair enough, and perhaps a review needs to be done on that. That still does not change my opinion of the lady in the video in the OP. She was provocative, and while I'm sure the police had likely violated the law in arresting various others who had nothing to do with the protests or who were at least protesting n a more respectable manner, in the case of this particular girl, she was asking for it. We do have to look at it on a case by case basis, and the fact that the police abused their powers on many occasions during the G20 does not excuse the exceptions like her.
There was no situation till he intervened - Then he reads the riot act - The other officer seemed to be dealing with it - No need to intervene. Inless the defensise mode of the male comes into play protecting the female - Call it this, that or whatever - it is hardwired into males and can be difficult to control.
There was a situation until he intervened' the lady was showing disrespect to a police officer.
That said, yes, based on the limited information available in the video, it would appear that he overreacted. But to paint the girl as totally innocent in this is disingenuous at best. He may have unduly escalated the situation, but she still started it. Of course we could argue that as a professional police officer he could have asked her in a more polite manner to stop blowing bubbles at the female police officer. Granted. But it would seem many consider the lady totally innocent in all of this. TO just blow bubbles at a person like that is offensive to say the least.
It was a deliberate act of assault, done as theater for the media, so that it would provoke the exact reaction that it did.
Machjo
Never meant to imply that she was innocent - She was trying to instigate a situation - with as little action or what would appear to be minimal actions on her part in order to get a negative response from the Police -
She succeeded - That was her role - Did it quite well - The Officer had his role - he failed.
He failed by using excessive attitude shall we say - We both know well that you attempt to deescalate a situation - You do not escalate it -
He knew that this was being recorded or should have known - he knew that this was nothing that required the "Reading of the Rio ct" warning of the Criminal Code - He knew all that and he disregarded written and verbal orders along with training -
You know that as well as I that this was noting - This is not a case of where he was right legally - This is a case of how he handled a low level and I mean low confrontation between 1 Officer - not him originally - and a protester -
Remember that soldier at OKA in 1990 - Would you want this Officer on the Line - I would not - If he reacted to a few bloody bubbles how would he react to in your face - right at ya kinda of situation - I would suspect poorly -
And an OKA Situation is one of many that I base my judgement on.
Red Deer Advocate - 20 years on, Oka remains unsettled
Says who?
Says who? He told her she was breaking the law, in a stern and authoritative manner. Where's the error in that?
No I don't. I know this is very much a criminal act.
It's assault whether you agree with it or not. I might suggest you right your MP and have the criminal code changed to exempt bubbles. Until then, it's a criminal act.
Again, a matter of perspective. I actually surprised you see it this way though. And I'm not trying to be negative.
Actually, I think the opposite. I thought Cloutier acted as he was ordered and didn't react. But he wasn't being confronted at that moment, with a crime.
Fair enough.
She stood directly in front of the officers and was antagonizing them. He did not freak out, he was firm and told her to knock it off. There is a break in the clip so that tells me she probably continued blowing bubbles right in their face. He arrested her. I do not see how he failed. He attempted to de-escalate the situation but telling her to stop and she kept it up.
They simply arrested her.
What amazes me is the shock the protesters have when they get arrested for civil disobedience, blocking intersections, getting in cops faces and blowing bubbles. You can't do it.
Agreed
By telling her to knock it off and then arresting her? No I think he passed.
Bear
We are trained to attempt when and if possible to deescalate a situation - that is the standard training model we receive as the Officer did -
We are also trained that when it escalates to target and bring down the ringleaders - the lemmings then leave - It is done fast - quick and with as few injuries as possible to the demonstrators - Use of force is authorized - but only to a certain extent under the Law
Are there times where you cannot lower the tensions - Yes - Was this one where it was in my opinion nothing to get all worked up about - Yes
Was the Officer - 1st one - handling the situation - Yes
Is it a CC offense - Yes - Yet we both know that it would be laughed out of the Prosecutors office - Can you see the Headlines - Officer assaulted by Bubbles - Canadian Prosecutor states this was an assault and Will be treated as such and the protester will be subject to the severest penalties according to the Law.
Right - Ain't gonna happen.
We are trained to attempt when and if possible to deescalate a situation - that is the standard training model we receive as the Officer did -
We are also trained that when it escalates to target and bring down the ringleaders - the lemmings then leave - It is done fast - quick and with as few injuries as possible to the demonstrators - Use of force is authorized - but only to a certain extent under the Law
Are there times where you cannot lower the tensions - Yes - Was this one where it was in my opinion nothing to get all worked up about - Yes
Was the Officer - 1st one - handling the situation - Yes
Is it a CC offense - Yes - Yet we both know that it would be laughed out of the Prosecutors office - Can you see the Headlines - Officer assaulted by Bubbles - Canadian Prosecutor states this was an assault and Will be treated as such and the protester will be subject to the severest penalties according to the Law.
Right - Ain't gonna happen.
Agreed. But we are also trained to use an authoritative tone, and manner, to ensure that we are taken seriously.
Agreed, but if "lemmings" break laws, they suffer the same fate.
And we come to a stalemate. From my perspective, I don't see any wrong doing by the Officer in question.
Maybe, without knowing what she was thinking, I can not comment.
So you would think. But I know of at least one protester that's rethinking spitting on people in the future. Asault is assault.
She succeeded, he failed?
How do you define success here? She showed herself on TV no less to have little to no respect for other persons, and to be violating the law, by blowing bubbles at them. And that's success? She made a fool of herself there, and by being so rude to the police, she also lost any sympathy she otherwise could have had.
Now as for the police officer, we could argue that he failed too in the attitude department, but seeing that she started it, was technically breaking the law, and that in spite of his rudeness he was still within the law at least, if we're going to look at it in terms of degrees of failure, then I'd have to say that she failed completely both on the attitudinal and legal fronts while he failed only on the attitudinal front but was right on the legal front at least.
If she had stopped and walked away it would have been over. Yes, police are trained to deescalate situations but if the situation ends up in an arrest because someone wants to continue to be a jerk it does not mean the cop has failed.
So Canadian Prosecutors will laugh at this case? They encourage disrespect of law enforcement?
So Canadian Prosecutors will laugh at this case? They encourage disrespect of law enforcement?
Agreed. But the protesters didn't need to volunteer for the animal roles.
Now from what I've read, a few Toronto residents did get swept up by the police, some of whom did go too far in their police duties, and that should certainly be investigated. But protesters certainly weren't helping matters by antagonizing the police at every level, from bubbles to burned police cars to smashed shop windows.
While the government holds much responsibility for its extremely poor judgement and frigging common sense in this, not to mention the price tag, and while the police also must take some responsibility for having gone too far in interrupting the daily lives of many local residents just going about their business, the idea that the protesters were somehow angelic beings with halos glowing from their heads is repulsive.
There is such a backlog before the Courts that Court Officers see a lot of Law Enforcement pettiness as disrespectful too.
Agreed. I'm just saying though that the girl is also partly to blame for this. That's all I'm saying here. Unfortunately, the activist community seems to treat her like a hero for disrespecting another human being's private space by intentionally blowing bubbles into it.
Perhaps had I been a passer-by, I could have procured myself of such a bottle myself and started blowing bubbles at her too to see how she felt about it.