Topic: G8/G20 June 2010 Protest Watch

[zipperhead_cop]

1 - Show the charter is actually useless, since apparently any legal body in power can violate it at its discretion.

Winner, winner, chicken dinner.  And it isn't any legal body, it is the Provincial government.  Perhaps you need to familiarize yourself with the Notwithstanding clause. 

Best interests of greater society is a very vague term and is subject to a wide range of opinions.
The charter of rights doesn't work on opinions. It works on objective statements that ensure equality.
They are meant to be absolute.

I don't know if you actually tripled back on your own thought there. 
In any case, the two of the better known cases are vehicle stops and Quebec.  Stopping a motorist and demanding proof of ID would per se be deemed a violation of ones Charter rights as defined.  The Supreme Court of Canada decided that the violation was worth it in order to stem drunk/suspended drivers. 
The other is Quebec's language laws, which CLEARLY blow away the spirit of the Charter.  Too bad, so sad.  Quebec elects its provincial government and they get to make their own rules. 

The Charter is a failed social experiment foisted on Canada by Trudeau and his ilk.  It did not take into account a citizens responsibility to society to act credible and put the good of the country over the individual.  So now we have this self absorbed Gong Show that seems to be equal parts apathy and disdain for anyone who speaks up to try to do anything. 

To try to say that some people who got ID'ed/searched during a time of crisis is a horrific effrontery to the spirit of the Charter and the precursor to a jack booted police state is beyond idiotic.  As mentioned: People! Get over it!! 

[bdave]

Point(s) taken.

[57Chevy]

The Charter is a failed social experiment foisted on Canada by Trudeau and his ilk.  It did not take into account a citizens responsibility to society to act credible and put the good of the country over the individual.  So now we have this self absorbed Gong Show that seems to be equal parts apathy and disdain for anyone who speaks up to try to do anything. 

I would not go as far as giving it a failure. I'm thinking the Charter puts everybody in the same boat context with respect to rights. Meaning that from "go", every citizen is responsibe, and otherwise credible. Therefore everybody has already been given the benifit of the doubt. A cornerstone of sorts,
where most law abiding citizens would easily find themselves.
Anyone falling short of that, is in violation of the Charter.

[the 48th regulator]

The Charter is a failed social experiment foisted on Canada by Trudeau and his ilk.  It did not take into account a citizens responsibility to society to act credible and put the good of the country over the individual.  So now we have this self absorbed Gong Show that seems to be equal parts apathy and disdain for anyone who speaks up to try to do anything. 

Yes,

And Trudeau boiled right wing babies, and shared them at Liberal picnics. 

You ask about One's responsibility of country over individual?  Your whole statement is a cunundrum.  Trudeau, acting as Prime Minister, brought the Charter of Rights and Freedoms to Canadians, yet you as an individual rile against it.   He did it for us, as Canadians, and I see no wrong in the Charter of Rights.

The canadian charter of rights and freedoms are fundamental rules, that all individuals should enjoy, everywhere on this planet.  Tell me what you consider as a failure, from the charter.

dileas

tess

[mariomike]

Something called "The Miami Model":
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miami_model

The article includes Toronto G20:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miami_model#See_also

In 2003, at the Free Trade Area of the Americas summit, more than 270 people were arrested. None convicted.
Last year, the City of Miami finally settled out of court with Amnesty International.
By then, the story had long since faded from the headlines.

Amnesty International has taken an interest in Toronto G20 ( 3 pages worth ):
http://www.amnesty.ca/files/Letter%20to%20Govt%20calling%20for%20Summit%20Security%20Review%2030%20June%202010.pdf
This also could take years, in and out of court, to settle.

[Grimaldus]

The police arrested their first suspect since the investigation was launched. Ashran Ravindhraj, 25, of Toronto, surrendered at Toronto Police 52 Division Wednesday morning. He has been charged with arson and mischief over $5,000

lol, up yours Ashran Ravindhraj.

[recceguy]

Yes,

And Trudeau boiled right wing babies, and shared them at Liberal picnics. 

You ask about One's responsibility of country over individual?  Your whole statement is a cunundrum.  Trudeau, acting as Prime Minister, brought the Charter of Rights and Freedoms to Canadians, yet you as an individual rile against it.   He did it for us, as Canadians, and I see no wrong in the Charter of Rights.

The canadian charter of rights and freedoms are fundamental rules, that all individuals should enjoy, everywhere on this planet.  Tell me what you consider as a failure, from the charter.
dileas

tess

You have no right to protection of private property (property rights) and you have no right to compensation for confiscation. The government can take everything you own and there is nothing you can do about it.

As well, Section Eight provides everyone in Canada with protection against unreasonable search and seizure..................... unless you legally own a firearm. Then you are open to warrantless searches and confiscation on a whim.

There's just a couple of infringments (failures) on fundamental personal rights.

[Container]

The Charter often receives criticism from Police officers.

The issue being-we are no more free than we were prior to the Charter. However, the people that invoke the charter in a legal setting use it in an attempt to "loop-hole" their way out of responsibility. I as a free citizen of Canada have never used my "rights" in a fashion that I would not have been able to prior to 1982.

Neither have my friends and family. Nor the people I work with unless they did something against the rest of us.

Furthermore- the "rights" extend to everyone who find themselves in Canada. So the recent "refugee" with multiple violent offences can't be kicked out because he may be abused in his home country. So he abuses Canadians. Both born and naturalized.

The rights are beautiful- and your right. Everyone who is a law abiding citizen of Canada, like the people here, and 99% of Canada deserve everyone of them and not to be trampled on by the government.

As an aside- I dont want to hear that "innocent until proven guilty" stuff. Thats true for the purposes of court- court has to operate that way. I have observed crime. People doing terrible things to people who have been found not guilty due to some bizarre extinuating circumstance. They are most assuredly guilty of what they were accused of.

Even a judge will say in decisions that "unfortunately" they know "something" happened but can't quite make the determination of guilt. This has usually been in the case of a victim who cant bring themselves to testify- a child or otherwise. 

In an emotional example- a 7 year old child with an STD who can't testify against her uncle. He's "not guilty"? For court maybe but in the life of his victim he is guilty.

Or the individual charged with 30 or so offences on 5 or 6 files will be granted BAIL AGAIN because the Charter requires it. So sometimes it becomes easy to blame alot of justice system woes on it. Interrogations are often the subject of charter issues and without them there would be alot less convictions. Or less "guilty" people statistically.

People point out that in Britain the police officers are not allowed to do interrogations. But in Britain the police are allowed to offer inducements to get people to plead guilty and provide a statement. In Canada the supreme court, using the Charter, has said that the police shall NOT use inducements. So using the charter we have the very real possibility of being the first country that forbids interrogations and offering inducements. Now it may not come to this but Charter interpretation is a living breathing thing. The interpretation of it is more the problem I suppose.

It is always shifting further to protect the people from the evil government and playing into the hands of evil people who do not have any rules governing their conduct.

Canadians are on one hand demanding protection (the average Canadian) from evil doers (justice) and on the othert hand refuse to trust the people they have empowered to do it.  It cannot be both ways- but the Charter in a way suggests that it can.

Thats what Zipperhead is getting at I think- it fails to outline any social responsibilty.

But we're cops so our view of the entire thing is a little biased. We observe an endless parade of victimizers that wear the charter like the rest of us wear the Canadian flag.

I think the Charter is nice. I think that an endless parade of extremely detached, leftist social experimenting supreme court judges is more the problem. The interpretation is the issue.

As for property rights- what specifically are you looking for Recce? What warrantless search and confiscation are you talking about? I'm not familiar with a circumstance where we enter peoples homes without warrants just to seize firearms?? It may well be- I'm just not able to supply a situation for consideration.

Any time the police (the state) seize something- they are required to apply to a Judge for a disposition of the items. Im not sure what happens if the prime minister goes into your house but police are bound to report and judge makes a determination as to what happens.

As for your property- the concept of Color of Right is what covers that. Its yours- and Section 38/39 of the Criminal Code allows you to use as much necessary to keep possession of it. What types of items are people taking?

[Jim Seggie]

Amnesty International has taken an interest in Toronto G20 ( 3 pages worth ):
http://www.amnesty.ca/files/Letter%20to%20Govt%20calling%20for%20Summit%20Security%20Review%2030%20June%202010.pdf
This also could take years, in and out of court, to settle.

When they start critquing China like they do us, they will be relevant. Until then......

[mariomike]

When they start critquing China like they do us, they will be relevant. Until then......

They critiqued China too....:
http://www.amnesty.org/en/region/china

Jim, what is relevant to me is closer to home.
ie: "the threats of lawsuits against the City of Toronto":
http://www.thestar.com/opinion/editorials/article/836033--hepburn-why-is-harper-escaping-g20-aftermath-scot-free

What drives our property taxes up. What takes money away from city services.
The City Solicitor employs about 100 lawyers, just for the regular business and lawsuits. ( T-EMS was a favorite: "Never, NEVER admit the department has done anything wrong!"  ) Plus paralegal, secretarial and administrative staff.
G20 lawsuits could become very challenging for them, time consuming, and take years to settle.

This took a decade to settle:
Two weeks ago:
July 1, 2010:
Washington Post:
"D.C. agrees to $13.7 million settlement in 2000 mass arrest: A federal judge gave final approval Wednesday to a $13.7 million settlement between the District and people who were picked up in a mass arrest during a 2000 protest near the World Bank and International Monetary Fund buildings.":
http://current.com/1fpj84c

"Under the settlement, each person arrested and found eligible for compensation will be awarded $18,000,"

Another:
"Last year, the city agreed to pay $8.25 million to almost 400 protesters and bystanders to end a class-action lawsuit over mass arrests in Pershing Park during 2002 World Bank protests, according to the Partnership for Civil Justice Fund, which also represents those plaintiffs. That case is awaiting final approval."

"He said it sparked a 2004 D.C. law that set out policies for police to follow at demonstrations, including a prohibition against encircling protesters without probable cause to arrest them."

Canadian Civil Liberties Association:
July 15th, 2010
Press Release:
"CCLA Files Five G20 Policing Complaints with OIPRD":
http://ccla.org/2010/07/15/ccla-files-five-g20-policing-complaints-with-oiprd/

Jul 13 2010
"The G20: Doing Security the Wrong Way":
http://www.themarknews.com/authors/1071-paul-cavalluzzo
http://www.themarknews.com/articles/1849-the-g20-doing-security-the-wrong-way

15 July, 2010:
Sun:
"Tiny bubbles cause international stir: 'Officer Bubbles' video goes viral around the world":
 http://www.torontosun.com/news/torontoandgta/2010/07/15/14726401.html

FOX:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S9FKG1U5_BI

( Big surprise )
July 15, 2010
"Federal G20 inquiry not needed yet: Tory MP":
http://www.cbc.ca/politics/story/2010/07/15/g20-federal-inquiry546.html

"Ontario Premier Dalton McGuinty has ruled out a provincial inquiry, saying it was up to the federal government to call one.
But Dean Del Mastro, parliamentary secretary to the Minister of Canadian Heritage, said policing in Ontario falls under provincial jurisdiction."

Restaurants: "Our focus now is on ensuring that our members are fairly compensated for their business losses.":
http://www.torontonews24.com/latest-toronto-news/801-g20-losses-extend-beyond-downtown-core-for-toronto-restaurants

Sun:
Warmington: "Sources tell me security cost of the disastrous G-20 summit will reach at least $2-billion.":
http://www.torontosun.com/news/columnists/joe_warmington/2010/07/08/14651761.html

[the 48th regulator]

You have no right to protection of private property (property rights) and you have no right to compensation for confiscation. The government can take everything you own and there is nothing you can do about it.

As well, Section Eight provides everyone in Canada with protection against unreasonable search and seizure..................... unless you legally own a firearm. Then you are open to warrantless searches and confiscation on a whim.

There's just a couple of infringments (failures) on fundamental personal rights.

Uhuh......

Your statement is moot, as you display the part o the charter that protects your rights to protection of private property (property rights).  As to the compensation, apply the charter and you are warranted to compensation.

Recceguy,  answer me this.  According to your statement; is the Charter  a failed social experiment foisted on Canada,  a charter that can have additions made, or a charter that is good as is?

I take offense to this statement;

The Charter is a failed social experiment foisted on Canada by Trudeau and his ilk.  It did not take into account a citizens responsibility to society to act credible and put the good of the country over the individual.  So now we have this self absorbed Gong Show that seems to be equal parts apathy and disdain for anyone who speaks up to try to do anything. 

zipperhead_cop criticizes the Government for introducing a charter, that is foisted onto the people.  Then when the people use the charter, he sides with establishment, in stating that the individual does not bide with the Government.

zipperhead_cop,

I ask again, what is it that you are stating?  You are confusing me.

I am tired of the constant vilification o Trudeau, by people who hoist the Canadian flag.  He stood for what Canada is to be.  To this day, Canada is remembered everywhere for PET.

It is all plain fuddleduddle by a bunch o bleeding hearts!

dileas

tess

[57Chevy]

looks to be exactly like I had mentioned earlier
Officer Bubbles: "Police Brutality" yourtube superstar, the world over.
Power to officer bubbles.........He actually took the time to warn little miss bubble maker.
How brutal.
And this is exactly what I mean......Watch me provoke you while I exercise my rights.
Watch me turn you into a brute on yourtube for all to see. And just watch how much
support I will get from all the "MY RIGHTS !!!" activists.
And YOU......mr. policeman.......what rights do YOU have?

She is one flippin lucky little bubble maker........I would not have given ANY warning.
NO ONE touches MY uniform in ANY way.......especially little bubble blowing b&%$#$s.
(well that is to say....when I was in uniform)

Oh......forgot to mention.....I like the PET also.

[recceguy]

Uhuh......

Your statement is moot, as you display the part o the charter that protects your rights to protection of private property (property rights).  As to the compensation, apply the charter and you are warranted to compensation.

No it doesn't. There are no property rights enshrined in the Charter. It was actually a deal breaker for the Provinces to get their vote. However, take it as you will. You asked for an example, I gave it. Don't shoot the messenger or try drag me into your crusade.

[the 48th regulator]

No it doesn't. There are no property rights enshrined in the Charter. It was actually a deal breaker for the Provinces to get their vote. However, take it as you will. You asked for an example, I gave it. Don't shoot the messenger or try drag me into your crusade.

My Crusade....

Recceguy,  as noble as it is to support your friend, don't guide this towards a lock.

You stated one situation which was excluded, then you gave the section (Section Eight) which explains the right to protection of private property (property rights).  Compensation can be achieved by use of Section Eight.

Your example, I say again, is moot.  I you want to enter the debate, fair enough, however based on what I asked you before; is the Charter  a failed social experiment foisted on Canada,  a charter that can have additions made, or a charter that is good as is?

Returning with  back handed comment about "My Crusade" dds absolutely nothing.  You were the one that decided to jump in with your statement of property seizure, firearms and what not, then proceed to give us the charter that protects you, and offers avenue of compensation.

Let's focus on a good debate, and not get into razor edged comments.

dileas

tess

[zipperhead_cop]

Thats what Zipperhead is getting at I think- it fails to outline any social responsibilty.

You are bang on, brother.  Your articulation is flawless.  I'd love to read one of your assault PC/Resist Arrest reports 

I think the Charter is nice. I think that an endless parade of extremely detached, leftist social experimenting supreme court judges is more the problem. The interpretation is the issue.

Very much agree with that too.  I think everyone deserves the right to be treated equally and without bias.  However, the way the courts interpret the Charter, criminals enjoy far more consideration and protection than people who matter.  You'd almost think they were some sort of over-class, who don't have to be responsible for anything. 

I take offense to this statement;

How very Liberal of you  I hope you don't write a letter. 
Funny how you deftly ignored everything that Container said. 

zipperhead_cop criticizes the Government for introducing a charter, that is foisted onto the people.  Then when the people use the charter, he sides with establishment, in stating that the individual does not bide with the Government.

Okay, Trudeau was NOT MY government and never was.  People have short memories.  How that assclown is loved now that he is dead.  I guess the whole "Trudeau Salute" is part of the past? 
And pedantic wordsmithing doesn't become you.  Where have I suggested that anyone "bide with the Government"?  Holy hell, I hope that doesn't happen.  But being responsible to SOCIETY goes beyond the government.  It is a moral fibre that makes life worth living here.  The Charter allows people to tell greater society to go frig itself and they can do whatever they want with no real genuine fear of repercussions. 

I ask again, what is it that you are stating?  You are confusing me.

I guess I'm saying that bananas are a great source of potassium. 

I am tired of the constant vilification o Trudeau, by people who hoist the Canadian flag.  He stood for what Canada is to be.  To this day, Canada is remembered everywhere for PET.

Feh.  Uganda is remembered everywhere for Idi Amin.  Doesn't make him a good leader. 

Simple question:  Was Canada a better place before all of his left leaning policies entrenched the liberal bureaucracy of our government or if we could have a do-over, knowing what we know now, would going a more traditional path have gotten us to a better today?  (potential thread split fodder)

[Technoviking]

Isn't that Idi Amin Dada, VC? 

[zipperhead_cop]

Isn't that Idi Amin Dada, VC? 

My bad 

[Container]

Oh Zipperhead-

My reports are the same as every cops. Every time things go slightly sideways the amount of notebook paper used increases exponentially. You can almost guess what level of force was required by the sheer volume of notebook consumed by the higher levels.

I guess for me 48th- the Charter is a nice document that could use some additions. Its here now- to get rid of it would look a little strange.

For myself the Charter is all about probabilities. I believe that I have a higher likelihood of being victimized by some.....undesirable rather than the Canadian government. (bizarre firearms laws aside- for the moment thats a strange minefield indeed) So I'd rather have an empowered legal system to deal with it. Of course thats a very cop like view.

Having worked in the federal government long enough now that I have realized the lack of direction in the public service keeps me safe from even the most zealous federal employees and I've turned my attention elsewhere. Inefficient Canadian bureaucracy keeps me safer than the Charter. I think that the promise not to interfere with my life too much is nice- but there are some people that need some interference.

Another example of just plain good application of the charter-

A school contacted the police because of a drug problem. Drug dogs walk through the school and sniff out a backpack that has drugs in it. Now, feelings on drug dogs in schools aside, the supreme court of Canada said that a dog smelling the air, finding trace particles of a controlled substance and following the cone to the backpack amounted to searching inside the backpack.

They insist that the use of a dog amounts to an officer physically looking into the backpack.

I hope everyone here realizes how foolish it is to associate that when a backpack emanates an odor it does so by a shedding particles that our or the dogs olfactory senses register. We are sensing an actual "something" that has been shed. The dog follows the scent cone to the backpack. In essence the owner of the backpack has left things behind that we can physically detect.

As an extreme hypothetical- say the backpack had a head in it. There was blood down the hallway where the individual had walked leading to the backpack. Had that blood come from inside the backpack, where it was placed with an expectation of privacy, do those blood trails also have an expectation of privacy since I am now looking at the contents of the backpack?

If a canine officer is on his way to a call and while walking by someone the dog "hits" and indicates that there is drugs on an individual, who just happens to be in the wrong place at the wrong time, that in spirit of this decision amounts to the officer as having searched that man.

Now remove the dog. I've got a backpack full of dope and a cop wanders by me. The cop can smell the overpowering stench of stupidity and marihuana. By the same process as "using a dog" I've now been searched contrary to the Charter (according to this decision). Of course the supreme court hasn't said so yet but it is a foolish road to have started to go down that suggests that the small amounts of things you leave behind, if you expected it to be private, has an expectation of remaining so even when you’ve left them hanging in the open.

I can search someone garbage- good to go. They've thrown it away. I can seize "cast-off DNA samples"- check. But the chemicals emanating from their property (which are left behind in public spaces) have an expectation of privacy?

That is the Charter (or the interpretation thereof) at work. An operational reality in the hands of opining justices becomes this bizarre and utterly unscientific mosh of however they felt that day.

I have respect for the supreme court- they make many good calls, and there is always a dissenting opinion that is usually close to how I feel. But it seems that the ambiguous nature, and ever evolving interpretation, of the charter makes for some bizarre calls every once and a while.

As for police dogs in schools. Im not sure how I feel about it. Its not a pleasant image for school relations- but at the same time drug dealers in schools are complete scum. Its more about implementation than the search itself I have issues with I suppose.   

[recceguy]

My Crusade....

Recceguy,  as noble as it is to support your friend, don't guide this towards a lock.

You stated one situation which was excluded, then you gave the section (Section Eight) which explains the right to protection of private property (property rights).  Compensation can be achieved by use of Section Eight.

Your example, I say again, is moot.  I you want to enter the debate, fair enough, however based on what I asked you before; is the Charter  a failed social experiment foisted on Canada,  a charter that can have additions made, or a charter that is good as is?

Returning with  back handed comment about "My Crusade" dds absolutely nothing.  You were the one that decided to jump in with your statement of property seizure, firearms and what not, then proceed to give us the charter that protects you, and offers avenue of compensation.

Let's focus on a good debate, and not get into razor edged comments.

dileas

tess

Sorry Tess. It's useless trying to debate this with you. Our minds are made up. To each his own I guess.

[57Chevy]

2 more G20 arrests made in Toronto

TORONTO — Toronto police have arrested two more people on their "Most Wanted" list in connection with the massive G20 protests that wreaked havoc on parts of the city in June.

Two Toronto men — Cody Caplette, 21, and Philip Lee, 28 — were arrested Thursday.

Both men are accused of damaging a police vehicle during the melee on June 26, resulting in a charge of mischief over $5,000, while Lee is also suspected of stealing police equipment and assaulting another individual at the site.

Lee faces numerous theft charges and is accused of possession of property obtained by criminal activity, including one charge of possession over $5,000. He also is charged with threatening damage and assault.

Read more: Link
                 (Reproduced under the Fair Dealings provisions of the Copyright Act)

[milnews.ca]

Toronto Police Service releases

http://www.torontopolice.on.ca/newsreleases/pdfs/19290.pdf

http://www.torontopolice.on.ca/newsreleases/pdfs/19288.pdf

http://www.torontopolice.on.ca/newsreleases/pdfs/19273.pdf

and YouTube video of suspects
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H5sk6baBIjw

[mariomike]

16 July, 2010.
Globe and Mail: Editorial:
"Review G8/G20 spending and site selection":
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/opinions/editorials/review-g8g20-spending-and-site-selection/article1641666/

The G20 prior to Toronto was held in Pittsburgh last September. 110 people were arrested:
May 19, 2010:
Pittsburgh Post-Gazette:
"ACLU plans to sue city over arrests during G-20 summit:
The American Civil Liberties Union announced Tuesday that it is preparing a suit against the city on behalf of some of those arrested during the "Oakland sweeps," ( an area in Pittsburgh-mm ) the night following the close of the G-20 summit in which riot police descended on hundreds of students, protesters and passers-by who had assembled in Schenley Plaza.":
http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/10139/1059137-84.stm

17 July, 2010:
Globe and Mail:
"G20 protest starts with a ‘bubble-in’: Internet video, ‘Officer Bubbles’, inspires demonstrators":
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/toronto/g20-protest-starts-with-a-bubble-in/article1643632/

[milnews.ca]

Police arrested five more people suspected of G20 vandalism today, bringing the total number of post-G20 arrests to 10.

The suspected vandals are mostly Toronto men in their teens and twenties. One suspect’s name cannot be released under the Youth Criminal Justice Act, and another is listed as having no fixed address.

On Monday, police picked up Michael Corbett, 29, Bryan O’Handley, 19, Jeffrey Delaney, 23, Robert Kainola, 24, and the young offender.

On Sunday, police charged two others: 22-year-old Roarco and 23-year-old Andrew Loughrin.

All seven are being charged with mischief. Mr. Roarco is also charged with breaking probation and arson in connection with torching a police cruiser, and Mr. Delaney received an additional charge for attempted theft ....

http://news.nationalpost.com/2010/07/19/g20-police-make-more-arrests-related-to-protests/

[George Wallace]

I haven't noticed any women on these lists yet, and looking at the Black Bloc vandalism, close to 50% of those black clad people were obviously women.

[57Chevy]

I haven't noticed any women on these lists yet, and looking at the Black Bloc vandalism, close to 50% of those black clad people were obviously women.

Yeah........They shouldn't have too much trouble tracking down that fat one trying to hide
               herself clad in black