View Single Post
Old 10-02-2011, 04:40 PM   #21
wouldu like some tinfoil?
bmdbley'sBro's Avatar
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: in your attic!
Posts: 4,674
on another forum - someone found some additional info on the RCMP beating a teenage girl
Not only did they beat the crap out of her while she was handcuffed, in the back seat of the squad car, they kept her overnight without giving her medical treatment

Haller was released by police the day after the alleged incident, without charge and without having received any medical attention, the B.C. Civil Liberties Association said
This is why they say she should be charged with assualting officers , and why they beat the crap out of her....

Haller admits she became angry and started kicking the cruiser's window.
Kicking the window of a squad car is NOT assualt on an officer and it's certainly not reason to beat anyone.

Full story here....

According to what the mother says the cop planned what he did to her, which brings it to a whole other level....

Once in the car, her daughter began kicking on the windows and yelling "Mom," Jeff said. "I heard one [officer] say, 'Keep kicking and you'll see what happens.'?"

Read more:

Here's the mother's statement....

If her side of the story is true then this cop should be definately be kicked of the force and he should be spending time behind bars.

and from OTTAWA

Man still waiting for day in court after suffering from 'reckless and dangerous' tactics of police

By GARY DIMMOCK, The Ottawa Citizen October 1, 2011

Seven years after Jim Jansen was jumped from behind by Ottawa Police officers in a “reckless and dangerous” attack, the painting contractor is still waiting for his day in court.

In a 2005 ruling that has gone unreported until now, the late Justice Richard Lajoie condemned the tactics of three officers who “jumped the gun” only to ask questions later, after responding to a simple noise complaint.

“Tactics adopted by the police officers on July 4th, 2004, were akin to approaching a fortress or a hideout of bikers or dangerous people. What they came upon was a group of neighbours around a campfire,” Lajoie wrote. The judge passed away earlier this year at age 62.

The judge also ruled that the officers in question - Cst. Mark Lystiuk, Cst. Kevin Myers, and Cst. Candace Lohe - concealed themselves under the cover of darkness, never announced themselves and kept their flashlights off after parking their cruisers some distance away from the campfire in Constance Bay.

They never yelled ‘police’ and when they got to the campfire, where children roasted marshmallows, they mistakenly thought Jansen was assaulting his girlfriend because her lawnchair had collapsed. Jansen was in fact trying to help her up and out of the lawnchair..

The judge ruled that they jumped the gun by tackling Jansen only to ask questions later.

Jansen didn’t know who had attacked him but ended up allegedly beaten so bad that he needed elbow surgery.

The police charged him with assault and resisting arrest, and Judge Lajoie acquitted him on both counts. In fact, Lajoie used his court decision to mostly chastise the police.

Lajoie said he had never heard about a case where police responded to a simple noise complaint quite like this.

“Not only did they jump the gun, they were acting in a reckless and dangerous fashion in approaching the situation as they did. It is the first time that I hear that officers responding to, be it a noise call or a domestic assault, that they have to act in such a fashion, where they have to conceal themselves before approaching the scene,” said Lajoie, who also said the officers “clearly showed bad judgment.”

The surgery kept Jansen out of work for awhile and when he returned his trip through the criminal justice system fouled up his security clearance for federal building contracts, including Parliament Hill.

In 2006, Jansen filed a $500,000 lawsuit against the Ottawa Police and the three officers. The civil trial is scheduled for early 2012.


OTTAWA — A prosecutor asked a judge to dismiss drunk-driving charges against a ByWard Market bar owner Thursday following a punishing cross-examination that hammered the arresting officer’s credibility and left much of his evidence in tatters.

Lawyer Michael Edelson established that the officer and one-time breath technician who arrested John Doherty didn’t know the legal grounds for detaining suspected impaired drivers.

Those legal grounds — that the officer has a reasonable suspicion that a person had alcohol in their body in the past three hours — weren’t met by Ottawa police Const. Nicolas Benard, who never noted asking Doherty when he had last taken a drink.

Edelson also attacked gaping holes in Benard’s notes and played cellblock video that showed Doherty walking in a straight line, appearing steady on his feet, even slipping off his shoes with no difficulty.

There was not a “scintilla” of evidence that Doherty, 35, displayed any of the physical signs of being intoxicated that Benard testified he observed before arresting him.

“It would be impossible that all these vivid signs of impairment, that they would have disappeared in 10 to 12 minutes,” Edelson put to Benard, who acknowledged Doherty didn’t appear to be having any trouble on the video.

Edelson also accused Benard, who was once found guilty of discreditable conduct for calling in sick to court to save a friend and fellow officer who was vacationing in Cuba from testifying, of being an “abject liar” who doctored and backfilled his notes to meet the legal requirements needed to justify his arrest of Doherty.

Edelson argued the officer, who also admitted to having never read the Ottawa police policy on note-taking, was neither a reliable nor credible witness.

Doherty, the owner of Patty Boland’s pub, was arrested after Benard came across a minor traffic accident on Nicholas Street near Laurier Avenue at 7:20 a.m. on Oct. 4 of last year. Beard said he noticed Doherty had glassy eyes, was stumbling and unsteady on his feet and slurring his words. Doherty, who told Benard he had had four shots at the bar, failed a roadside screening test. He eventually blew breath readings of 182 and 185 milligrams of alcohol per 100 millilitres of blood. The legal limit to drive is 80.

Edelson was challenging the admissibility of those readings because he alleged the arrest was illegal.

Edelson had just finished his relentless cross-examination of Benard when Crown prosecutor Lisa Miles asked for an extended recess.

“Given the evidence heard by the court to this point, in the Crown’s assessment the basic elements of the charge have not been established such that there is no longer a reasonable prospect of conviction,” Miles said after the lunch break. “As we have no further evidence available to us on any of the failed grounds, we are electing to call no further evidence and invite your honour to dismiss both charges against the accused.”

Ontario Court Justice Patrick Sheppard said he had “little or no difficulty” understanding the Crown’s decision before acquitting Doherty of impaired driving and driving with a blood-alcohol level over the legal limit.

“I think that is the very responsible way for the Crown to proceed,” he said, before telling Doherty he was free to go

Read more:
quality shit, 3rd world quality!
bmdbley'sBro is offline   Reply With Quote