Absolutely outrageous.
No doubt about it, massively excessive force.
And I'm usually willing to cut the cops some slack.
No doubt about it, massively excessive force.
And I'm usually willing to cut the cops some slack.
Victoria BC Police Brutality Video-Sickening
- Thread starter bill barilko
- Start date
That did it for me....
I actually screamed OW.....when he landed that kick on the guy who did exactly as he was told.
This cop needs some down time without pay.
I love that people can photo events now on the spot - to keep us real.
I actually screamed OW.....when he landed that kick on the guy who did exactly as he was told.
This cop needs some down time without pay.
I love that people can photo events now on the spot - to keep us real.
Looks to me like one cop was out of control. Is one cop indicative of the entire force?
Are all RCMP like Monty Robinson?
This video is about VICTORIA CITY POLICE. It has zero to do with the RCMP. RCMP do not wear black uniforms.
Cops out of control bring down their brothers and sisters doing a good job.
I don't know why that one lost it but it wasn't necessary - I hope he's going to get
some help or he'll be putting himself and others in danger if he keeps up that kind
of reaction.
I don't know why that one lost it but it wasn't necessary - I hope he's going to get
some help or he'll be putting himself and others in danger if he keeps up that kind
of reaction.
From where I sit it looked like one cop that was pissed off and out of control. He didn't need to kick the first guy with 3 other officers on him. He didn't need to kick the second guy, who was a bit of a moron from all appearances, but he wasn't combative and trying to comply in a fashion (when a cop tells you get on the ground, we've all seen enough TV to know that means facedown with hands where he can see them).
I'm kind of with Lineman here though, in wondering what led up to this. One guy was already cuffed to a lightpost, another guy was being subdued... was it a fight where Mr Angrycop got smacked in the middle of it? The last guy getting kicked was pointed out by the one witness/bystander as well, adding to that whole line of thought. Now that DOES NOT excuse Mr Angrycop: if he was in a physical altercation, he should have been removed from it by himself or by other officers, but it doesn't make sense for even the stupidest, most belligerant of cops to start kicking people with a crowd around like that.
I'm kind of with Lineman here though, in wondering what led up to this. One guy was already cuffed to a lightpost, another guy was being subdued... was it a fight where Mr Angrycop got smacked in the middle of it? The last guy getting kicked was pointed out by the one witness/bystander as well, adding to that whole line of thought. Now that DOES NOT excuse Mr Angrycop: if he was in a physical altercation, he should have been removed from it by himself or by other officers, but it doesn't make sense for even the stupidest, most belligerant of cops to start kicking people with a crowd around like that.
The CBC article mentions 3 officers on site. From what I saw in the video the female officer is talking to someone on the sidewalk (lime jacket?) then there's the one in the dark shirt and Mr. Angrycop (guess that name is about is as polite as we can get). If that accounts for the 3 officers then the other two assisting with the first arrest could be passer-bys or possibly bouncers? There were 6 arrests and we see 3 in the video, where are the other 3?
I expect Mr. Angrycop to receive some disciplinary action but I also hope he gets some sort of counseling to deal with whatever lead to his loss of control. If his record is clean he deserves all the support they can give him. If on the other hand this turns out to be a habit then by all means, charge him and fire him.
I expect Mr. Angrycop to receive some disciplinary action but I also hope he gets some sort of counseling to deal with whatever lead to his loss of control. If his record is clean he deserves all the support they can give him. If on the other hand this turns out to be a habit then by all means, charge him and fire him.
Really, does it matter what happened behind the scenes? Every time a cop hit someone in public, that hit is the only thing anyone sees.
We've all seen the same snippet of video. Edited or not...it's the same 57 seconds...
How does what we've seen fit into the Criminal Code of Canada? Bad night or not,
whatever happened previous to the video to elicit a police presence isn't happening
still when the video's 57 seconds is captured. How does what we've seen fit this?:
Self-Defence Against Unprovoked Assault
... / Extent of justification.
34. (1) Every one who is unlawfully assaulted without having provoked the assault is justified in repelling force by force if the force he uses is not intended to cause death or grievous bodily harm and is no more than is necessary to enable him to defend himself.
(2) Every one who is unlawfully assaulted and who causes death or grievous bodily harm in repelling the assault is justified if
(a) he causes it under reasonable apprehension of death or grievous bodily harm from the violence with which the assault was originally made or with which the assailant pursues his purposes; and
(b) he believes, on reasonable grounds, that he cannot otherwise preserve himself from death or grievous bodily harm. [R.S. c.C-34, s.34.]
Self-Defence In Case Of Aggression.
35. Every one who has without justification assaulted another but did not commence the assault with intent to cause death or grievous bodily harm, or has without justification provoked an assault on himself by another, may justify the use of force subsequent to the assault if
(a) he uses the force
(i) under reasonable apprehension of death or grievous bodily harm from the violence of the person whom he has assaulted or provoked, and
(ii) in the belief, on reasonable grounds, that it is necessary in order to preserve himself from death or grievous bodily harm;
(b) he did not, at any time before the necessity of preserving himself from death or grievous bodily harm arose, endeavour to cause death or grievous bodily harm; and
(c) he declined further conflict and quitted or retreated from it as far as it was feasible to do so before the necessity of preserving himself from death or grievous bodily harm arose. [R.S. c.C-34, s.35.]
Provocation.
36. Provocation
includes, for the purposes of sections 34 and 35, provocation by blows, words or gestures. [R.S. c.C-34, s.36.]
Preventing Assault
... / Extent of justification.
37. (1) Every one is justified in using force to defend himself or any one under his protection from assault, if he uses no more force than is necessary to prevent the assault or the repetition of it.
(2) Nothing in this section shall be deemed to justify the wilful infliction of any hurt or mischief that is excessive, having regard to the nature of the assault that the force used was intended to prevent. [R.S. c.C-34, s.37.]
:-?
How does what we've seen fit into the Criminal Code of Canada? Bad night or not,
whatever happened previous to the video to elicit a police presence isn't happening
still when the video's 57 seconds is captured. How does what we've seen fit this?:
Self-Defence Against Unprovoked Assault
... / Extent of justification.
34. (1) Every one who is unlawfully assaulted without having provoked the assault is justified in repelling force by force if the force he uses is not intended to cause death or grievous bodily harm and is no more than is necessary to enable him to defend himself.
(2) Every one who is unlawfully assaulted and who causes death or grievous bodily harm in repelling the assault is justified if
(a) he causes it under reasonable apprehension of death or grievous bodily harm from the violence with which the assault was originally made or with which the assailant pursues his purposes; and
(b) he believes, on reasonable grounds, that he cannot otherwise preserve himself from death or grievous bodily harm. [R.S. c.C-34, s.34.]
Self-Defence In Case Of Aggression.
35. Every one who has without justification assaulted another but did not commence the assault with intent to cause death or grievous bodily harm, or has without justification provoked an assault on himself by another, may justify the use of force subsequent to the assault if
(a) he uses the force
(i) under reasonable apprehension of death or grievous bodily harm from the violence of the person whom he has assaulted or provoked, and
(ii) in the belief, on reasonable grounds, that it is necessary in order to preserve himself from death or grievous bodily harm;
(b) he did not, at any time before the necessity of preserving himself from death or grievous bodily harm arose, endeavour to cause death or grievous bodily harm; and
(c) he declined further conflict and quitted or retreated from it as far as it was feasible to do so before the necessity of preserving himself from death or grievous bodily harm arose. [R.S. c.C-34, s.35.]
Provocation.
36. Provocation
includes, for the purposes of sections 34 and 35, provocation by blows, words or gestures. [R.S. c.C-34, s.36.]
Preventing Assault
... / Extent of justification.
37. (1) Every one is justified in using force to defend himself or any one under his protection from assault, if he uses no more force than is necessary to prevent the assault or the repetition of it.
(2) Nothing in this section shall be deemed to justify the wilful infliction of any hurt or mischief that is excessive, having regard to the nature of the assault that the force used was intended to prevent. [R.S. c.C-34, s.37.]
:-?
And I predict things are going to continue spiraling downward as long as the miscreants are placed on "desk duty" at full pay and benefits. :-
-(
I do not agree with what happened - But how many of you have been down on the dirty side of town - where the police respond to call after call - involving violence etc - It would take its toll on anyone that is reasonable sane - People can snap for a moment - do we define that moment as the only part of the Officers career?
Try going downtown Edmonton is many areas and then come back and tell me what you think -
SJP - you can try Toronto - The Finch area after 10 pm is absolutely delightful - from gun fights to stabbings -
Winnipeg - well it sucks anyways -
Vancouver - Try a number of areas for an evening stroll, well dressed of course.
I do not condone the Officers actions but I can surely relate.
No one wants their job - why - Because they deal day in and day out with the scum that you want off your streets. How many of you after dealing with violence pertrated against children, the elderly, wives - strangers just being in the wrong place -day in day out - courts do little - A good portion of their time is spent thinking how will 9 SCOC Justices review their work after it is done in peace and quiet or paperwork up the yingyang - Never having to make split second decisions - Or Crown prosecutors that cut deals because the system is so overloaded with cases
Most of you would not last a week. Most not all.
One day, I went to see my doctor. I asked him a simple question regarding some things that were bothing me and wondered it they might be an allergic reaction. He screamed at me "This is not an allergy". Literally yelled at me. I was in shock. Absolutely stunned. A simple no would have been acceptable. I sat there for a moment and I could feel my eyes begin to well up in tears so I just said "I think I should go now". I never went back to that doctor ever again. Like the police are trying to cover their butts, he also covered his. He left out his outburst from my file when it was transferred and he told a lie about me. I think he is scum. I heard later in the day that the doctor had been having a bad day because he had a junkie that was in the hospital close to dying. What did that have to do with my appt.? He should have been able to separate himself from the one situation to the other. He wasn't coming from one stressful situation to another. Just to another patient with a simple question. The police go from bad to bad all day and night as you suggest. However, it's their job to be able to have a little more control than what was displayed. I can see where a guy might hand out a few more tickets than normal when he's had a bad day but beat someone? The guy did exactly as he was told to do at the moment he was told. I maintain they should have done nothing more than cuff him and take him to the cells. I also maintain they should have been fired on the spot.
On second thought, that comment was a spur of the moment thing. Most of my dealings with the police have been positive. It is irrational to blame all police for the actions of a select few.
Still, there is a frightening amount of police brutality occurring in Canada, a country which is supposed to be peace-loving and friendly.
Still, there is a frightening amount of police brutality occurring in Canada, a country which is supposed to be peace-loving and friendly.
Cops Need To Be Accountable
This is only one of several incidents that I am aware of where ridiculous force is used by the cops. they think they are above the law and can torture people just because they are big, have been drinking or the cop is having a bad day. I hope they fire his ass but I doubt they will because it will be covered up by an internal review process that is as pathetic as this cop's public service skills.
This is only one of several incidents that I am aware of where ridiculous force is used by the cops. they think they are above the law and can torture people just because they are big, have been drinking or the cop is having a bad day. I hope they fire his ass but I doubt they will because it will be covered up by an internal review process that is as pathetic as this cop's public service skills.
It certainly is not acceptable for cops to snap for even a moment, they are in a huge position of trust and have ready means for lethal force. If they are unstable, they should not be cops.