Police Chief Tom Lewis should be collecting unemployment, or sitting in jail on charges of reckless endangerment. No matter what happened, he allowed a real gun to be used in "citizen police academy" exercises.
Stupid, Dumb and Just Plain Ignorant Cop Thread
- Thread starter Cannuck
- Start date
Winnipeg woman says epileptic husband who died in custody was denied medication
Shane Gibson, The Canadian Press
First posted: Sunday, August 14, 2016 11:38 AM EDT | Updated: Sunday, August 14, 2016 11:54 AM EDT
WINNIPEG -- The wife of a man who died after suffering an epileptic seizure while in custody at the Winnipeg Remand Centre says facility staff denied her husband his epilepsy medication in the days leading up to his death.
Rochelle Pranteau was on the phone with her 26-year-old common-law husband Errol Greene from the institution when he began slipping into a seizure May 1.
"He said he could feel the numbing feeling in his hands, and his jaw started locking and grinding and then he could hardly talk," said Pranteau, 27, who has three children with Greene and is pregnant with a fourth. "Usually I can stop it when I'm face-to-face with him ... but because I wasn't there physically, I couldn't stop it.
"I heard him fall, and then the phone dropped and was just dangling there."
Pranteau said she listened helplessly for 20 minutes while guards and inmates responded.
"I could hear (the guards) throw him on his stomach and put cuffs on him b & You could tell he was struggling for his breath. He was on his stomach and it sounded like a guard was on him," said Pranteau. "They were trying to tell Errol to calm down, but how could he calm down? He's having his episode, let him have it."
Manitoba Justice said Greene was taken to hospital where he died. The department is investigating.
Greene was taken into custody the evening of April 29 for breaching a probation order not to consume alcohol. He had been out on bail awaiting trial for a mischief under $5,000 charge.
Pranteau said Greene told her remand centre staff denied him his epilepsy medicine -- which he took three times a day to ward off seizures -- from the time he arrived at the institution.
The president of the Manitoba Government and General Employees' Union, which represents remand centre staff, expressed sympathy to Greene's family and said the union will encourage its members to participate in the investigation.
"I think it's important for everyone to withhold judgment on what happened until all the facts are known," said Michelle Gawronsky in a statement.
A spokesperson for Manitoba Justice would not say whether Greene was refused his medication, citing privacy legislation, but said inmates sometimes need to see institutional doctors before medication is approved.
"If the offender is on medication and it can be verified, generally it is continued. If the medication cannot be verified through community health-care providers or if there are any potential issues, the offender is booked to see the institutional physician," the department said in a statement.
"A contract physician attends each business day. Offenders waiting to see the institutional physician may be monitored in a correctional centre medical unit if needed, based on their condition."
The department wouldn't say whether Greene, who was arrested on Friday and died Sunday, was waiting until the next business day to see an institutional doctor.
Pranteau is demanding an inquest to determine why her husband was not allowed to take his medicine and to find out exactly where and when he died. Inmates have told her paramedics pronounced Greene dead at the remand centre around 3 p.m., but officials told Pranteau he died several hours later in hospital.
"So what is the story? Did he die at the hospital or did he die at the remand centre? It's not matching up," she asked. "I want to know what happened to him, every damn detail."
Mark O'Rourke, director of the office of the chief medical examiner, said the investigation will determine whether an inquest will be held. An inquest is only mandatory when a person in custody dies "as a result of a violent act, undue means, or suddenly of unexpected cause," he said.
"We're still in the process of investigating," he said. "It'll take us several months. When the report's done, we'll review our file and we'll be in a position to make a decision."
Father of three Errol Greene is seen with his son Darien in this undated handout photo. Greene died in custody at the Winnipeg Remand Centre May 1 after suffering an epileptic seizure. His wife is calling for an inquest after she says he was denied his medication for the three days he was in custody before his death. (THE CANADIAN PRESS/ HO, Rochelle Pranteau)
Winnipeg woman says epileptic husband who died in custody was denied medication
Shane Gibson, The Canadian Press
First posted: Sunday, August 14, 2016 11:38 AM EDT | Updated: Sunday, August 14, 2016 11:54 AM EDT
WINNIPEG -- The wife of a man who died after suffering an epileptic seizure while in custody at the Winnipeg Remand Centre says facility staff denied her husband his epilepsy medication in the days leading up to his death.
Rochelle Pranteau was on the phone with her 26-year-old common-law husband Errol Greene from the institution when he began slipping into a seizure May 1.
"He said he could feel the numbing feeling in his hands, and his jaw started locking and grinding and then he could hardly talk," said Pranteau, 27, who has three children with Greene and is pregnant with a fourth. "Usually I can stop it when I'm face-to-face with him ... but because I wasn't there physically, I couldn't stop it.
"I heard him fall, and then the phone dropped and was just dangling there."
Pranteau said she listened helplessly for 20 minutes while guards and inmates responded.
"I could hear (the guards) throw him on his stomach and put cuffs on him b & You could tell he was struggling for his breath. He was on his stomach and it sounded like a guard was on him," said Pranteau. "They were trying to tell Errol to calm down, but how could he calm down? He's having his episode, let him have it."
Manitoba Justice said Greene was taken to hospital where he died. The department is investigating.
Greene was taken into custody the evening of April 29 for breaching a probation order not to consume alcohol. He had been out on bail awaiting trial for a mischief under $5,000 charge.
Pranteau said Greene told her remand centre staff denied him his epilepsy medicine -- which he took three times a day to ward off seizures -- from the time he arrived at the institution.
The president of the Manitoba Government and General Employees' Union, which represents remand centre staff, expressed sympathy to Greene's family and said the union will encourage its members to participate in the investigation.
"I think it's important for everyone to withhold judgment on what happened until all the facts are known," said Michelle Gawronsky in a statement.
A spokesperson for Manitoba Justice would not say whether Greene was refused his medication, citing privacy legislation, but said inmates sometimes need to see institutional doctors before medication is approved.
"If the offender is on medication and it can be verified, generally it is continued. If the medication cannot be verified through community health-care providers or if there are any potential issues, the offender is booked to see the institutional physician," the department said in a statement.
"A contract physician attends each business day. Offenders waiting to see the institutional physician may be monitored in a correctional centre medical unit if needed, based on their condition."
The department wouldn't say whether Greene, who was arrested on Friday and died Sunday, was waiting until the next business day to see an institutional doctor.
Pranteau is demanding an inquest to determine why her husband was not allowed to take his medicine and to find out exactly where and when he died. Inmates have told her paramedics pronounced Greene dead at the remand centre around 3 p.m., but officials told Pranteau he died several hours later in hospital.
"So what is the story? Did he die at the hospital or did he die at the remand centre? It's not matching up," she asked. "I want to know what happened to him, every damn detail."
Mark O'Rourke, director of the office of the chief medical examiner, said the investigation will determine whether an inquest will be held. An inquest is only mandatory when a person in custody dies "as a result of a violent act, undue means, or suddenly of unexpected cause," he said.
"We're still in the process of investigating," he said. "It'll take us several months. When the report's done, we'll review our file and we'll be in a position to make a decision."
Father of three Errol Greene is seen with his son Darien in this undated handout photo. Greene died in custody at the Winnipeg Remand Centre May 1 after suffering an epileptic seizure. His wife is calling for an inquest after she says he was denied his medication for the three days he was in custody before his death. (THE CANADIAN PRESS/ HO, Rochelle Pranteau)
Winnipeg woman says epileptic husband who died in custody was denied medication
Cop accused of incompetence eager to return to work after appeal court decision
Cop accused of incompetence eager to return to work after appeal court decision
Megan Gillis
First posted: Wednesday, August 17, 2016 03:31 PM EDT | Updated: Wednesday, August 17, 2016 04:39 PM EDT
An officer the Ottawa police asked to quit because of poor performance is now eager to get back to work after winning his appeal and $15,000 in legal costs at Ontario’s top court.
The court decision made in favour of Const. Emmanuel Diafwila is the latest in a long and complicated legal saga between Diafwila and the police force.
Diafwila was hired as a fourth-class constable in 2006 and, in total, received about 1,100 hours of training over several years — more than double the amount given to new recruits.
In 2009, he was informed that efforts would be made to improve his performance but after coaching by other officers and a stint in a desk job, Ottawa police “gave up” and he was placed on leave.
In March 2013, Diafwila, then 32, was ordered to resign or be fired for unsatisfactory work performance under the Police Services Act. The hearing officer in Diafwila’s case concluded that despite efforts at training and mentoring, the officer was “simply not suited to many if not most aspects of policing.”
Examples at the hearing included asking witnesses leading questions, placing a woman resisting arrest on her face in the back seat of a cruiser, being unable to work handcuffs and running stop signs.
Diafwila appealed to the Ontario Civilian Police Commission, which ordered in March 2014 that he be reinstated as a second-class constable.
The commission found that the original hearing officer erred in fact and law. It found the force didn’t comply with its own policies before trying to fire Diafwila — for example, not completing performance reviews, giving him a chance to respond to reports or resolving a complaint of workplace harassment.
The OCPC decision was appealed by Ottawa police to the Divisional Court.
In March 2015, the Divisional Court set aside the commission’s “perverse” decision, finding it was over-enforcing a regulation that set out what needed to be done by the police force before an officer could be fired for on-the-job performance.
And then on Tuesday, Diafwila’s legal battle with the force took another twist.
A Court of Appeal for Ontario panel allowed Diafwila’s appeal of the Divisional Court ruling.
Allowing the appeal has the effect of reinstating Diafwila, wrote Justice Bradley Miller. He noted the constable succeeded on “administrative law grounds” in the appeal heard in January.
A spokeswoman for Ottawa police said the force will not make any comment until it has a chance to review the ruling.
“I do not pronounce on the ultimate issue – his fitness to serve as a police officer,” Miller wrote. “That remains an ongoing matter within the purview of the (Ottawa Police Service), for the OPS to address according to the policies that it created but did not, in this instance, follow.”
However, the appeal court decision noted that “there were concerns about his technical policing skills and his ability to make sound, independent decisions in the patrol setting.”
Diafwila’s lawyer, Paul Champ, said the decision is a win not only for his client but for all police officers in Ontario.
“For my client, it means that he is fully reinstated and able to carry out his duties as a police officer,” Champ said. “If in the future performance of his duties, the Ottawa police has any concerns about his performance, they will need to raise them with him in accordance with their policies.
“The decision is also however important for all police officers across Ontario for the same reason.”
Diafwila, the first officer asked to quit over performance issues, “absolutely” wants to resume a policing career.
“He’s very committed to community service – that’s always really been his passion,” Champ said, adding that his client and those officers who testified on his behalf feel he’s a good officer.
“He’s anxious to get back to work and show what he can do.”
The police service’s final avenue of appeal would be to the Supreme Court of Canada
Const. Emmanuel Diafwila. CHLOÉ FEDIO / OTTAWA CITIZEN
Cop accused of incompetence eager to return to work after appeal court decision
Cop accused of incompetence eager to return to work after appeal court decision
Megan Gillis
First posted: Wednesday, August 17, 2016 03:31 PM EDT | Updated: Wednesday, August 17, 2016 04:39 PM EDT
An officer the Ottawa police asked to quit because of poor performance is now eager to get back to work after winning his appeal and $15,000 in legal costs at Ontario’s top court.
The court decision made in favour of Const. Emmanuel Diafwila is the latest in a long and complicated legal saga between Diafwila and the police force.
Diafwila was hired as a fourth-class constable in 2006 and, in total, received about 1,100 hours of training over several years — more than double the amount given to new recruits.
In 2009, he was informed that efforts would be made to improve his performance but after coaching by other officers and a stint in a desk job, Ottawa police “gave up” and he was placed on leave.
In March 2013, Diafwila, then 32, was ordered to resign or be fired for unsatisfactory work performance under the Police Services Act. The hearing officer in Diafwila’s case concluded that despite efforts at training and mentoring, the officer was “simply not suited to many if not most aspects of policing.”
Examples at the hearing included asking witnesses leading questions, placing a woman resisting arrest on her face in the back seat of a cruiser, being unable to work handcuffs and running stop signs.
Diafwila appealed to the Ontario Civilian Police Commission, which ordered in March 2014 that he be reinstated as a second-class constable.
The commission found that the original hearing officer erred in fact and law. It found the force didn’t comply with its own policies before trying to fire Diafwila — for example, not completing performance reviews, giving him a chance to respond to reports or resolving a complaint of workplace harassment.
The OCPC decision was appealed by Ottawa police to the Divisional Court.
In March 2015, the Divisional Court set aside the commission’s “perverse” decision, finding it was over-enforcing a regulation that set out what needed to be done by the police force before an officer could be fired for on-the-job performance.
And then on Tuesday, Diafwila’s legal battle with the force took another twist.
A Court of Appeal for Ontario panel allowed Diafwila’s appeal of the Divisional Court ruling.
Allowing the appeal has the effect of reinstating Diafwila, wrote Justice Bradley Miller. He noted the constable succeeded on “administrative law grounds” in the appeal heard in January.
A spokeswoman for Ottawa police said the force will not make any comment until it has a chance to review the ruling.
“I do not pronounce on the ultimate issue – his fitness to serve as a police officer,” Miller wrote. “That remains an ongoing matter within the purview of the (Ottawa Police Service), for the OPS to address according to the policies that it created but did not, in this instance, follow.”
However, the appeal court decision noted that “there were concerns about his technical policing skills and his ability to make sound, independent decisions in the patrol setting.”
Diafwila’s lawyer, Paul Champ, said the decision is a win not only for his client but for all police officers in Ontario.
“For my client, it means that he is fully reinstated and able to carry out his duties as a police officer,” Champ said. “If in the future performance of his duties, the Ottawa police has any concerns about his performance, they will need to raise them with him in accordance with their policies.
“The decision is also however important for all police officers across Ontario for the same reason.”
Diafwila, the first officer asked to quit over performance issues, “absolutely” wants to resume a policing career.
“He’s very committed to community service – that’s always really been his passion,” Champ said, adding that his client and those officers who testified on his behalf feel he’s a good officer.
“He’s anxious to get back to work and show what he can do.”
The police service’s final avenue of appeal would be to the Supreme Court of Canada
Const. Emmanuel Diafwila. CHLOÉ FEDIO / OTTAWA CITIZEN
Cop accused of incompetence eager to return to work after appeal court decision
Last week Donald Stouffer, prosecuting attorney for Saline County, Missouri, dropped several charges against Roettgen because the arresting officers lied.
Stouffer said the officers’ commander supported their false story so that the outcome of the criminal case would not be affected, raising further concerns about the department’s handling of the case. Furthermore, he said he will not file charges in any pending cases in which the officers, Tyler Newell and Josh O’Bryan, had a major role and that he’ll review other cases in which either officer was a key witness.
Police tried to arrest Roettgen for a parole violation in May 2015 in a Walmart parking lot in Marshall, Missouri. They stated that a passenger in Roettgen’s car jumped out as he was pulling away; that’s when one of the officers jumped into Roettgen’s car to try to stop it from moving. The officer alleged that Roettgen then pointed a gun at his face, and that he heard a ‘click.’ The other officer said that he had seen a gun in the car from the driver’s side of the vehicle.
Nothing but lies. Three counts of first-degree assault of a law enforcement officer, two counts of armed criminal action, and one count of unlawful possession of a firearm were all dismissed.
The lying officers have been placed on paid administrative leave pending an internal investigation. The officers’ commander at the time is the one who supported their lie, but he was not named by the prosecutor. So he has not been placed on leave.
Stouffer said the officers’ commander supported their false story so that the outcome of the criminal case would not be affected, raising further concerns about the department’s handling of the case. Furthermore, he said he will not file charges in any pending cases in which the officers, Tyler Newell and Josh O’Bryan, had a major role and that he’ll review other cases in which either officer was a key witness.
Police tried to arrest Roettgen for a parole violation in May 2015 in a Walmart parking lot in Marshall, Missouri. They stated that a passenger in Roettgen’s car jumped out as he was pulling away; that’s when one of the officers jumped into Roettgen’s car to try to stop it from moving. The officer alleged that Roettgen then pointed a gun at his face, and that he heard a ‘click.’ The other officer said that he had seen a gun in the car from the driver’s side of the vehicle.
Nothing but lies. Three counts of first-degree assault of a law enforcement officer, two counts of armed criminal action, and one count of unlawful possession of a firearm were all dismissed.
The lying officers have been placed on paid administrative leave pending an internal investigation. The officers’ commander at the time is the one who supported their lie, but he was not named by the prosecutor. So he has not been placed on leave.
I don't know why you're so upset about paid administrative leave. Don't you understand that it takes time to properly make up and age a batch of whitewash?
When Los Angeles Police Department Officer Richard Garcia pleaded no contest to a charge of assault under color of authority in May 2016, video of his October 2014 arrest of Clinton Alford, Jr. was okayed to be released to the public. Of course, the LAPD held on to it.
But the L.A. Times filed a court order for the three-minute video, which was finally released on Tuesday.
In the video, available here, Garcia is seen running up and kicking Alford in the head— even though he is already subdued by the two officers on the scene.
He then drops down on Alford with his knee in Alford’s back and begins to drop his elbow, professional wrestling-style, on top of Alford’s head at least three times. Garcia can also be seen rising up off of Alford and slamming his knee back down into Alford two times. Alford alleges he was also punched and slapped by Garcia. Garcia remains on Alford’s back for the rest of the video as other officers appear to look for something near the vehicle Alford ducked behind. At the end of the video, three officers lift up a limp Alford and take him away.
Although the district attorney’s office made the initial decision to charge Garcia with a felony, they changed their tune earlier this year
Los Angeles District Attorney Jackie Lacey has yet to “detail the reasons for the plea.”
But the L.A. Times filed a court order for the three-minute video, which was finally released on Tuesday.
In the video, available here, Garcia is seen running up and kicking Alford in the head— even though he is already subdued by the two officers on the scene.
He then drops down on Alford with his knee in Alford’s back and begins to drop his elbow, professional wrestling-style, on top of Alford’s head at least three times. Garcia can also be seen rising up off of Alford and slamming his knee back down into Alford two times. Alford alleges he was also punched and slapped by Garcia. Garcia remains on Alford’s back for the rest of the video as other officers appear to look for something near the vehicle Alford ducked behind. At the end of the video, three officers lift up a limp Alford and take him away.
Although the district attorney’s office made the initial decision to charge Garcia with a felony, they changed their tune earlier this year
Los Angeles District Attorney Jackie Lacey has yet to “detail the reasons for the plea.”
Killed a deaf guy in North Carolina. The usual: traffic stop, guy gets out of his car using sign language, snivelling coward sees anything he doesn't expect as a threat, shoots the guy.
Oh, and the guy was white, so everybody cue up the "all lives matter" BS instead of the "BLM are terrorist criminals" BS, mmm-kay?
Keeping us safe. Tough, dangerous job. Support the police. Blue lives matter. Other lives don't.
Oh, and the guy was white, so everybody cue up the "all lives matter" BS instead of the "BLM are terrorist criminals" BS, mmm-kay?
Keeping us safe. Tough, dangerous job. Support the police. Blue lives matter. Other lives don't.
And the guy had never been arrested before and didn't have a record that the cop shop could find before the cop even got out of the cruiser.....
Indian couple faked Everest climb: Nepal
THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
First posted: Tuesday, August 30, 2016 04:33 PM EDT | Updated: Tuesday, August 30, 2016 04:41 PM EDT
KATHMANDU, Nepal -- Nepal mountaineering authorities have determined that an Indian couple faked a Mount Everest ascent earlier this year by altering photographs to make it appear they were on the summit, officials said Tuesday.
Mountaineering Department official Gyanendra Shrestha said the government has cancelled the climbing certificates issued to Indian citizens Dinesh and Tarakeshwari Rathod and banned them from climbing any mountain in the Himalayan nation for 10 years.
They had claimed they scaled the 8,850-metre peak in May and the government issued them climbing certificates based on the photographs. Their declaration was disputed by fellow climbers and an investigation was launched.
Another Indian climber, Satyarup Sidhantha from Bangalore, said it was his photograph that the couple altered to make it appear they were on the summit.
The couple, who are both police officers from Pune in the Indian state of Maharastra, also claimed they were the first Indian couple to scale Everest.
They were not available for comment Tuesday.
This year, 454 people scaled Everest during the busy March-May climbing season, following two years of disasters on the mountain.
Last year's season was scrapped after 19 climbers were killed and 61 injured by an avalanche at the base camp triggered by a massive earthquake. In 2014, an avalanche at the Khumbu Icefall killed 16 Sherpa guides.
In this July 4, 2016 file photo, Indian climber, Satyarup Sidhantha holds on his right hand a photograph that shows him on Mount Everest, along with what he says is an altered version of the same used by an Indian couple to make it appear they were on the summit, as he displays them for the Associated Press in Kolkata, India. Nepal mountaineering authorities have determined that an Indian couple faked a Mount Everest ascent earlier this year by altering photographs to show they were on the summit. (AP Photo/ Bikas Das, File)
Indian couple faked Everest climb: Nepal | Weird | News | Toronto Sun
THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
First posted: Tuesday, August 30, 2016 04:33 PM EDT | Updated: Tuesday, August 30, 2016 04:41 PM EDT
KATHMANDU, Nepal -- Nepal mountaineering authorities have determined that an Indian couple faked a Mount Everest ascent earlier this year by altering photographs to make it appear they were on the summit, officials said Tuesday.
Mountaineering Department official Gyanendra Shrestha said the government has cancelled the climbing certificates issued to Indian citizens Dinesh and Tarakeshwari Rathod and banned them from climbing any mountain in the Himalayan nation for 10 years.
They had claimed they scaled the 8,850-metre peak in May and the government issued them climbing certificates based on the photographs. Their declaration was disputed by fellow climbers and an investigation was launched.
Another Indian climber, Satyarup Sidhantha from Bangalore, said it was his photograph that the couple altered to make it appear they were on the summit.
The couple, who are both police officers from Pune in the Indian state of Maharastra, also claimed they were the first Indian couple to scale Everest.
They were not available for comment Tuesday.
This year, 454 people scaled Everest during the busy March-May climbing season, following two years of disasters on the mountain.
Last year's season was scrapped after 19 climbers were killed and 61 injured by an avalanche at the base camp triggered by a massive earthquake. In 2014, an avalanche at the Khumbu Icefall killed 16 Sherpa guides.
In this July 4, 2016 file photo, Indian climber, Satyarup Sidhantha holds on his right hand a photograph that shows him on Mount Everest, along with what he says is an altered version of the same used by an Indian couple to make it appear they were on the summit, as he displays them for the Associated Press in Kolkata, India. Nepal mountaineering authorities have determined that an Indian couple faked a Mount Everest ascent earlier this year by altering photographs to show they were on the summit. (AP Photo/ Bikas Das, File)
Indian couple faked Everest climb: Nepal | Weird | News | Toronto Sun
Don't pick on individual cops
Pick on the organization
And the enablers of disturbed cops
Go to the top
But I provide this direction
With hesitation as I think you will be very disappointed if you believe your beliefs to be true,that Justice prevails
Pick on the organization
And the enablers of disturbed cops
Go to the top
But I provide this direction
With hesitation as I think you will be very disappointed if you believe your beliefs to be true,that Justice prevails
Philadelphia mayor: Cop’s pro-Nazi tattoo ’incredibly offensive’
Errin Haines Whack, THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
First posted: Friday, September 02, 2016 12:55 PM EDT | Updated: Friday, September 02, 2016 01:00 PM EDT
PHILADELPHIA — The Philadelphia Police Department on Thursday announced an internal review after a photograph surfaced online of an officer with a tattoo that the mayor called “incredibly offensive,” especially to veterans and victims of the Nazis.
A tattoo on the uniformed officer’s forearm shows a spread-winged eagle under the word “Fatherland.”
Police don’t have a tattoo policy but said in a statement they don’t condone “anything that can be interpreted as offensive, hateful or discriminatory in any form.” They said they will review the matter quickly to see if a policy is needed.
“We must ensure that all constitutional rights are adhered to while at the same time ensuring public safety and public trust aren’t negatively impacted,” the statement read.
Mayor Jim Kenney, however, condemned the image he saw of the tattoo.
“I find it incredibly offensive, and I know many others do as well,” he said in a statement. “This image is particularly offensive to our WWII veterans who fought valiantly to free Europe from Nazi Germany, as well as all victims of Nazi atrocities. In this environment — in which open, honest dialogue between citizens and police is paramount — we need to be building trust, not offering messages or displaying images that destroy trust.”
The officer’s last name is visible on his uniform, but police wouldn’t confirm his full name. A call to a man believed to be the officer was not answered.
The Anti-Defamation League said the images have been associated with some neo-Nazi and white supremacist groups but cautioned they do not necessarily mean the officer shares such ideologies. It said it couldn’t reach any conclusion about the officer after its own initial review of the tattoos and other information available online about the officer.
The photograph first surfaced on social media Thursday in a Facebook post by Evan Matthews. The Philadelphia resident said he took the picture on July 26 while participating in a protest by the Philly Coalition for REAL Justice held during the Democratic National Convention.
Matthews said his initial reaction was “visceral” and that he questioned the officer about the tattoos, but that the officer did not respond.
The coalition frequently protests against the police department, accusing it of discriminatory practices. Organizer Erica Mines said Friday the organization is calling for the officer to be fired, for an inquiry into his cases, and an investigation into whether the department fosters an environment condoning white supremacy.
The president of the local Fraternal Order of Police lodge, John McNesby, told The Philadelphia Inquirer that the tattoo was “not a big deal.”
“I see people with panthers on their arm. Doesn’t mean they are black panthers. People with crosses on arms doesn’t mean they dislike any other religion,” he told the newspaper.
Nancy Baron-Baer, regional director of the Anti-Defamation League, said that “it’s not definitive, as an eagle ... alone means he is or is not something.”
“One would hope that an individual in that position would understand the significance of what these symbols can mean, even if that’s not what they meant to him,” she said. “Those symbols, to many individuals within our community ... can have a very scary connotation and we don’t want our community members being afraid of police based on something they have inscribed on them.”
Baron-Baer said more education is needed among police and the community about the meaning of such symbols.
The photo, taken on July 26, 2016 at a protest held in solidarity with the Black Lives Matter movement, shows a police officer with a tattoo on his left forearm of a German eagle above the word "Fatherland" spelled in gothic script. (Evan Parish Matthews/Facebook)
Philadelphia mayor: Cop’s pro-Nazi tattoo ’incredibly offensive’ | World | News
Errin Haines Whack, THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
First posted: Friday, September 02, 2016 12:55 PM EDT | Updated: Friday, September 02, 2016 01:00 PM EDT
PHILADELPHIA — The Philadelphia Police Department on Thursday announced an internal review after a photograph surfaced online of an officer with a tattoo that the mayor called “incredibly offensive,” especially to veterans and victims of the Nazis.
A tattoo on the uniformed officer’s forearm shows a spread-winged eagle under the word “Fatherland.”
Police don’t have a tattoo policy but said in a statement they don’t condone “anything that can be interpreted as offensive, hateful or discriminatory in any form.” They said they will review the matter quickly to see if a policy is needed.
“We must ensure that all constitutional rights are adhered to while at the same time ensuring public safety and public trust aren’t negatively impacted,” the statement read.
Mayor Jim Kenney, however, condemned the image he saw of the tattoo.
“I find it incredibly offensive, and I know many others do as well,” he said in a statement. “This image is particularly offensive to our WWII veterans who fought valiantly to free Europe from Nazi Germany, as well as all victims of Nazi atrocities. In this environment — in which open, honest dialogue between citizens and police is paramount — we need to be building trust, not offering messages or displaying images that destroy trust.”
The officer’s last name is visible on his uniform, but police wouldn’t confirm his full name. A call to a man believed to be the officer was not answered.
The Anti-Defamation League said the images have been associated with some neo-Nazi and white supremacist groups but cautioned they do not necessarily mean the officer shares such ideologies. It said it couldn’t reach any conclusion about the officer after its own initial review of the tattoos and other information available online about the officer.
The photograph first surfaced on social media Thursday in a Facebook post by Evan Matthews. The Philadelphia resident said he took the picture on July 26 while participating in a protest by the Philly Coalition for REAL Justice held during the Democratic National Convention.
Matthews said his initial reaction was “visceral” and that he questioned the officer about the tattoos, but that the officer did not respond.
The coalition frequently protests against the police department, accusing it of discriminatory practices. Organizer Erica Mines said Friday the organization is calling for the officer to be fired, for an inquiry into his cases, and an investigation into whether the department fosters an environment condoning white supremacy.
The president of the local Fraternal Order of Police lodge, John McNesby, told The Philadelphia Inquirer that the tattoo was “not a big deal.”
“I see people with panthers on their arm. Doesn’t mean they are black panthers. People with crosses on arms doesn’t mean they dislike any other religion,” he told the newspaper.
Nancy Baron-Baer, regional director of the Anti-Defamation League, said that “it’s not definitive, as an eagle ... alone means he is or is not something.”
“One would hope that an individual in that position would understand the significance of what these symbols can mean, even if that’s not what they meant to him,” she said. “Those symbols, to many individuals within our community ... can have a very scary connotation and we don’t want our community members being afraid of police based on something they have inscribed on them.”
Baron-Baer said more education is needed among police and the community about the meaning of such symbols.
The photo, taken on July 26, 2016 at a protest held in solidarity with the Black Lives Matter movement, shows a police officer with a tattoo on his left forearm of a German eagle above the word "Fatherland" spelled in gothic script. (Evan Parish Matthews/Facebook)
Philadelphia mayor: Cop’s pro-Nazi tattoo ’incredibly offensive’ | World | News
This is the most lawyer like comment you have uttered in two years
Now I am totally convinced you are a lawyer,I am so convinced and impressed!
By stopping when you think you are even? or adding a little more for good measure?
I won't share my story since it's a CBSA and not a cop story. But the biggest problem does seem to be the idea that a CBSA officer needs only present an uncorroborated officer statement and expects it to be accepted as Bible truth.
I think the main difference there though is police usually have to prove guilt ased on the presumption of innocence (guilty beyond a reasonable doubt) at least for criminal charges. CBSA only needs to prove on the balance of probabilities for an immigration violation. So it's quite humiliating when the CBSA fails to prove guilt even on that low level of proof. Balance of probabilities just means that the officer's version of events is more probable than the accused's. Not a big hump to climb there.
Ha. I had not the same experience, but a vindictive one with a CBSA officer. She appealed the ruling against her even though she knew she couldn't win it. Ya know, just to harass us. Even if we won, at least she'd given us the run around and lawyer fees. What more victory can you ask for than that eh.
same for members of my ex-family though.
My ex-brother-in-law kept getting pulled over by the same police officer for questionning but never got arrested. One day he asked the cop for his id and never saw the cop again.
My uncle-in-law never had a problem with the cops unless he was driving while wearing a baseball cap. Then he'd get pulled over regularly.
Common denominator? They were both black.
Another brother-in-law never had a problem with the police until he'd decided one day to start growing dreadlocks. Before they'd even reached an inch in length, he was already attracting cops like flies to shyte, so he gave up on the dreads about just as fast as he'd started growing them.
Cop accused of incompetence eager to return to work after appeal court decision
Cop accused of incompetence eager to return to work after appeal court decision
Megan Gillis
First posted: Wednesday, August 17, 2016 03:31 PM EDT | Updated: Wednesday, August 17, 2016 04:39 PM EDT
An officer the Ottawa police asked to quit because of poor performance is now eager to get back to work after winning his appeal and $15,000 in legal costs at Ontario’s top court.
The court decision made in favour of Const. Emmanuel Diafwila is the latest in a long and complicated legal saga between Diafwila and the police force.
Diafwila was hired as a fourth-class constable in 2006 and, in total, received about 1,100 hours of training over several years — more than double the amount given to new recruits.
In 2009, he was informed that efforts would be made to improve his performance but after coaching by other officers and a stint in a desk job, Ottawa police “gave up” and he was placed on leave.
In March 2013, Diafwila, then 32, was ordered to resign or be fired for unsatisfactory work performance under the Police Services Act. The hearing officer in Diafwila’s case concluded that despite efforts at training and mentoring, the officer was “simply not suited to many if not most aspects of policing.”
Examples at the hearing included asking witnesses leading questions, placing a woman resisting arrest on her face in the back seat of a cruiser, being unable to work handcuffs and running stop signs.
Diafwila appealed to the Ontario Civilian Police Commission, which ordered in March 2014 that he be reinstated as a second-class constable.
The commission found that the original hearing officer erred in fact and law. It found the force didn’t comply with its own policies before trying to fire Diafwila — for example, not completing performance reviews, giving him a chance to respond to reports or resolving a complaint of workplace harassment.
The OCPC decision was appealed by Ottawa police to the Divisional Court.
In March 2015, the Divisional Court set aside the commission’s “perverse” decision, finding it was over-enforcing a regulation that set out what needed to be done by the police force before an officer could be fired for on-the-job performance.
And then on Tuesday, Diafwila’s legal battle with the force took another twist.
A Court of Appeal for Ontario panel allowed Diafwila’s appeal of the Divisional Court ruling.
Allowing the appeal has the effect of reinstating Diafwila, wrote Justice Bradley Miller. He noted the constable succeeded on “administrative law grounds” in the appeal heard in January.
A spokeswoman for Ottawa police said the force will not make any comment until it has a chance to review the ruling.
“I do not pronounce on the ultimate issue – his fitness to serve as a police officer,” Miller wrote. “That remains an ongoing matter within the purview of the (Ottawa Police Service), for the OPS to address according to the policies that it created but did not, in this instance, follow.”
However, the appeal court decision noted that “there were concerns about his technical policing skills and his ability to make sound, independent decisions in the patrol setting.”
Diafwila’s lawyer, Paul Champ, said the decision is a win not only for his client but for all police officers in Ontario.
“For my client, it means that he is fully reinstated and able to carry out his duties as a police officer,” Champ said. “If in the future performance of his duties, the Ottawa police has any concerns about his performance, they will need to raise them with him in accordance with their policies.
“The decision is also however important for all police officers across Ontario for the same reason.”
Diafwila, the first officer asked to quit over performance issues, “absolutely” wants to resume a policing career.
“He’s very committed to community service – that’s always really been his passion,” Champ said, adding that his client and those officers who testified on his behalf feel he’s a good officer.
“He’s anxious to get back to work and show what he can do.”
The police service’s final avenue of appeal would be to the Supreme Court of Canada
Const. Emmanuel Diafwila. CHLOÉ FEDIO / OTTAWA CITIZEN
Cop accused of incompetence eager to return to work after appeal court decision
That one is a he-said-she-said. I guess we'll find out the truth in the end.
Are you sure it was a sign language and not some kung fu move?
What version would you like in how I perceive Justice to serve Canadians?
There are multiple choice versions,of my definition of Justice
,would you like my romantic Liberal version of working Justice?
How about sleep on it version?,hoping to articulate my experiences within information auditing,which left me with poor conclusions about the administration of Justice,tell it like it is and hoping to offend no one?
Maybe the conspiracy theory version,are u a conspirator lover?I could give you this version if needed,big business conspiracy theories is.
I have never thought about how I perceive working Justice,this question has me thinking,
How about the hot pen version,as I am demonstrating right now,
I guess I know more what Justice should not look like rather what it should look like in a positive manner,right from the bottom to the top
Individuals in a position to make a difference within the administration of Justice was a big disappointment,therefore I guess there is aflip side of positive thinking
Sleezy people are not allowed to operate with the administration of Justice,this is the flip side
Only nice,focussed,public serving,constitutional loving,none partisan,correct people need to serve Canadians
Geographically where one lives effects the administration of Justice
No more cartoon Justices under this positive thought program
I'm onto something
What version do you prefer?
As creation has it,there will be more versions
Shift change or mom calling you for supper?