Thursday, October 24, 2013
Police misconduct
I believe in stiffer penalties because police should use no force at all unless it is to defend themselves from the accused getting violent to escape or to get the accused in control- for example, in handcuffs. It is easy and likely for them to abuse their power so disciplinary action should be installed.
Tuesday, October 22, 2013
Lethal force: Recent shootings raise questions over effectiveness of police use-of-force training
http://news.nationalpost.com/2013/08/02/lethal-force-recent-shootings-raise-questions-over-effectiveness-of-police-use-of-force-training/
This articles discusses, and provides a general brief overview of many use of force situations, mostly lethal, that Canadian police officers have faced in the past, and will likely continue to face.The author uses many examples of said events, including the well publicized recent deaths of Sammy Yatim, the 18 year old shot to death on a Toronto streetcar in September 2013, and the 2007 shooting death of Paul Boyd, a bipolar man shot 8 times on a downtown Vancouver street. Exploring all the angles of police tactics, such as verbal deescalation vs use of force, it becomes evident that there is no clear cut answer to solving the issue of individuals dying at the hands of the police officers often forced to shoot them.
In recent years, evidence such as eyewitness testimony and especially video or other graphical recordings have come to paint a disturbing picture of lethal force in Canada, often apparently unjustified. From a taser death at Vancouver International to the shooting of a schizophrenic on a Toronto bus in 1997, one could come to the conclusion that rampant and abusive use of firearms, physical force, and compliance devices appears to be on the rise in Canada. Some striking facts mentioned include the moderate sized city of Hamilton having had 4 fatal police shootings in the past 7 years, with Canada on average dealing with a dozen uses of lethal force by law enforcement per year. At first glance, many people could easily decry the firing of 8 shots into a single individual as excessive, just as any amount of shooting at an unarmed or lesser armed individual as brutality. Robert Dziekanski, a Polish immigrant to Canada was tasered 5 times by different officers while unarmed, in a secure area. But unless law enforcement agencies across Canada happen to host large amounts of psychopathic or sadistic individuals, far more than the average per given population, the cause and subsequent fix to police use of force may not be as simple as finger-pointing at deliberate malicious acts by rogue officers.
More likely than malice, factors that play roles in unnecessarily high usage of force often turn out to be things such as inexperience, poor judgement, stress, and poor training. Fight-or-flight reflexes, time dilation, and high levels of adrenaline all impair rational and cool-headed judgement even in the most highly trained police officers Although police forces may make mistakes that can cost lives, criminal law in Canada distinguishes between acts caused by ill-intent and mistake. While borderline negligent at times, the majority of police officers act in good faith, with the intention of saving lives. In a 2007 article written by criminology expert Professer Rick Parent, he states that it is absolutely conceivable that a police officer be forced to take the time to explore and evaluate every possible option available at any given situation. Instead, an officer is often forced to act with limited knowledge and good faith that acting quickly may help protect individuals.
While independent civilian watchdogs are necessary to objectively evaluate use of force situations and invoke some accountability, no outside evaluation of past events is ever perfect. It's due to these impossibilities in judging every police shooting perfectly, that society (and police investigative forces) often awards a great leeway to police officers involved in lethal action, sometimes to the point of public outrage when a perceived injustice such as excessive use force is not prosecuted. Even if in many cases disciplinary actions may be in order, as Clifton Purvis of the Alberta Serious Incident Response Team stated in regards to the average police officer, "I am almost certain the last thing they planned to do when they went of to work that day was engage in lethal violence." At the end of the day, topics to do with police use of lethal force comprises a wide spectrum of events, policies, training procedures, and deaths. While taking steps towards police transparency and objective investigating of incidents may serve to bring a greater sense of justice and accountability, the issue of police use of lethal force is a complicated one that will likely require much inquiry in the future.
This articles discusses, and provides a general brief overview of many use of force situations, mostly lethal, that Canadian police officers have faced in the past, and will likely continue to face.The author uses many examples of said events, including the well publicized recent deaths of Sammy Yatim, the 18 year old shot to death on a Toronto streetcar in September 2013, and the 2007 shooting death of Paul Boyd, a bipolar man shot 8 times on a downtown Vancouver street. Exploring all the angles of police tactics, such as verbal deescalation vs use of force, it becomes evident that there is no clear cut answer to solving the issue of individuals dying at the hands of the police officers often forced to shoot them.
In recent years, evidence such as eyewitness testimony and especially video or other graphical recordings have come to paint a disturbing picture of lethal force in Canada, often apparently unjustified. From a taser death at Vancouver International to the shooting of a schizophrenic on a Toronto bus in 1997, one could come to the conclusion that rampant and abusive use of firearms, physical force, and compliance devices appears to be on the rise in Canada. Some striking facts mentioned include the moderate sized city of Hamilton having had 4 fatal police shootings in the past 7 years, with Canada on average dealing with a dozen uses of lethal force by law enforcement per year. At first glance, many people could easily decry the firing of 8 shots into a single individual as excessive, just as any amount of shooting at an unarmed or lesser armed individual as brutality. Robert Dziekanski, a Polish immigrant to Canada was tasered 5 times by different officers while unarmed, in a secure area. But unless law enforcement agencies across Canada happen to host large amounts of psychopathic or sadistic individuals, far more than the average per given population, the cause and subsequent fix to police use of force may not be as simple as finger-pointing at deliberate malicious acts by rogue officers.
More likely than malice, factors that play roles in unnecessarily high usage of force often turn out to be things such as inexperience, poor judgement, stress, and poor training. Fight-or-flight reflexes, time dilation, and high levels of adrenaline all impair rational and cool-headed judgement even in the most highly trained police officers Although police forces may make mistakes that can cost lives, criminal law in Canada distinguishes between acts caused by ill-intent and mistake. While borderline negligent at times, the majority of police officers act in good faith, with the intention of saving lives. In a 2007 article written by criminology expert Professer Rick Parent, he states that it is absolutely conceivable that a police officer be forced to take the time to explore and evaluate every possible option available at any given situation. Instead, an officer is often forced to act with limited knowledge and good faith that acting quickly may help protect individuals.
While independent civilian watchdogs are necessary to objectively evaluate use of force situations and invoke some accountability, no outside evaluation of past events is ever perfect. It's due to these impossibilities in judging every police shooting perfectly, that society (and police investigative forces) often awards a great leeway to police officers involved in lethal action, sometimes to the point of public outrage when a perceived injustice such as excessive use force is not prosecuted. Even if in many cases disciplinary actions may be in order, as Clifton Purvis of the Alberta Serious Incident Response Team stated in regards to the average police officer, "I am almost certain the last thing they planned to do when they went of to work that day was engage in lethal violence." At the end of the day, topics to do with police use of lethal force comprises a wide spectrum of events, policies, training procedures, and deaths. While taking steps towards police transparency and objective investigating of incidents may serve to bring a greater sense of justice and accountability, the issue of police use of lethal force is a complicated one that will likely require much inquiry in the future.
Police Misconduct
Link to article:
This article documents a controversy surrounding a recent event related to police misconduct in the arrest of the Red Devils' Motorcycle Gang, an organized crime group. To arrest the gang, the police officers went to great lengths, even as far as to faking a search warrant and having an undercover police "detained".There was a strong public outcry at the polices'misconduct but the Court of Appeals has unanimously voted to continue on with the trial of the Red Devils.
The police had been involved in the investigation of the Nelson's Red Devils' Motorcycle Gang for an extended period of time, and even placed an undercover police in the gang as a member. The undercover police is known to the gang as Michael Wiremu Wilson. When Wilson was in danger of having his true identity exposed to the gang, the police allegedly forged the illegible signature of a court deputy registrar on the search warrant, and arrested him. Wilson appeared on several occasions before the judges, who all believed that they were dealing with a genuine case. Soon after the investigation of the Red Devils ended, the police sought to have Wilson's charges erased. However, a judge in the High Court stated that the degree of police misconduct was so high that the trial for the Red Devils should be stopped but the Court of Appeals overturned that decision.
On one hand, the police officers were able to collect evidence to charge the Red Devils' Motorcycle Gang. Even though they had engaged in police misconduct, they were able to protect the rest of the society from more damage caused by the gang. Thus, doesn't the capture of the gang members compensate for the sacrifice of proper conduct?
However, others disagree. Should police officers,
the very embodiment of order and justice, be allowed to violate the law in such a
way? Even if they were able to capture the gang members, they violated something greater, more important in the process. By belittling police conduct, they are setting a faulty precedent for future generation of policemen.
In my opinion, the police in this article are criminals in their own right by not abiding by polices’ conduct.They are breaching the very vows they had taken when they first began their careers as "protectors of society". As representatives of law, police officers should take great care to model what is "righteous" behavior for the rest of society. By resorting to illegal means to seize criminals, the police officers in this case are throwing away their contracts to law and thus posing as bad examples for the citizens.
In my opinion, the police in this article are criminals in their own right by not abiding by polices’ conduct.They are breaching the very vows they had taken when they first began their careers as "protectors of society". As representatives of law, police officers should take great care to model what is "righteous" behavior for the rest of society. By resorting to illegal means to seize criminals, the police officers in this case are throwing away their contracts to law and thus posing as bad examples for the citizens.
Another Case of Police Brutality, or Just an Accident?
Article: "Cop Throws Woman Into Concrete Bench, Shattering Her Face"
http://www.heavy.com/news/2013/10/chicago-police-brutality-video-cassandra-feuerstein/
http://www.heavy.com/news/2013/10/chicago-police-brutality-video-cassandra-feuerstein/
The case involving Cassandra Feuerstein was very simple in the beginning. She was arrested under the charges of drunk driving, not possessing a valid insurance, parking improperly, and resisting an arrest. The controversy and complication did not arise with this issue itself, but rather when a police officer by the name of Michael Hart pushed Cassandra with such force that shattered her face on the pavement. The devastating result seemed to favour Cassandra entirely, but the issue was not as simple and one-sided as that.
Officer Hart is a well recognized and respected police officer within his community due to his participation in the Honour Guard program. Members of this program devote a significant amount of time to train and perfect their abilities. A man of such devotion towards his work is not likely to exert an unnecessary amount force against a completely complying citizen. This point is further strengthened by the included video. A moment before the push that injured Cassandra, it is clear to see that she is holding onto the sides of the door, trying her best to avoid being put into the cell. Officer Hart could have simply tried to push her into the cell with absolutely no malicious intent, but due to Cassandra's sudden release of strength (presumably because she was still under alcoholic influences), she was flung across the cell, falling face first.
Cassandra's lawyer, Torri Hamilton completely disagrees. She suggests that her client was completely compliant during the whole process, and only wished to be able to speak to her children and family in order to resolve their concerns. Any act that resembled a resistance towards the officer could have just been out of her care and concern for her family. Her client has eventually pleaded guilty for the charge of driving under influence, but the resisting the arrest charge was dropped.
Unlike most cases involving police brutality, this one presents many factors in which the incident could easily be interpreted as an unfortunate accident. Officer Hart has not displayed any action that can be decisively confirmed to have malicious intent. Given his background, it also seems unlikely that he would willingly commit such act of violence to a compliant citizen. The ambiguity of this case that prevents us to prove the mens rea of Officer Hart ultimately renders us unable to conclude his action to be criminal. Although Cassandra's concern for her family is respectable, her actions shown in the video can be seen as a resistance against an officer. Collectively, it seems that this complication that sprung from what seemed to be another case of police brutality, can be concluded to be more of an accident than as a police misconduct.
Officer Hart is a well recognized and respected police officer within his community due to his participation in the Honour Guard program. Members of this program devote a significant amount of time to train and perfect their abilities. A man of such devotion towards his work is not likely to exert an unnecessary amount force against a completely complying citizen. This point is further strengthened by the included video. A moment before the push that injured Cassandra, it is clear to see that she is holding onto the sides of the door, trying her best to avoid being put into the cell. Officer Hart could have simply tried to push her into the cell with absolutely no malicious intent, but due to Cassandra's sudden release of strength (presumably because she was still under alcoholic influences), she was flung across the cell, falling face first.
Cassandra's lawyer, Torri Hamilton completely disagrees. She suggests that her client was completely compliant during the whole process, and only wished to be able to speak to her children and family in order to resolve their concerns. Any act that resembled a resistance towards the officer could have just been out of her care and concern for her family. Her client has eventually pleaded guilty for the charge of driving under influence, but the resisting the arrest charge was dropped.
Unlike most cases involving police brutality, this one presents many factors in which the incident could easily be interpreted as an unfortunate accident. Officer Hart has not displayed any action that can be decisively confirmed to have malicious intent. Given his background, it also seems unlikely that he would willingly commit such act of violence to a compliant citizen. The ambiguity of this case that prevents us to prove the mens rea of Officer Hart ultimately renders us unable to conclude his action to be criminal. Although Cassandra's concern for her family is respectable, her actions shown in the video can be seen as a resistance against an officer. Collectively, it seems that this complication that sprung from what seemed to be another case of police brutality, can be concluded to be more of an accident than as a police misconduct.
Monday, October 21, 2013
Police Conduct Issues- Josh
"Canadian Cop Punches a Cyclist in The Face"[Internet]- Available
http://www.policebrutality.info/2013/04/canadian-cop-punches-a-cyclist-in-the-face.html
Video length: 2minutes 42seconds
The article tells us about a police conduct issue where a police officer punches a cyclist while arresting him, and the article goes like this:
Vancouver police department is investigating the story behind a video of one of their officers hitting a man in the face during the arrest. Andishae Akhavan was riding his bicycle without a helmet through downtown Yaletown when he got stopped by two plainclothes police officers. One of the bystanders started filming the arrest as the cops were trying to handcuff Akhavan. He asked “What is this for?” but didn’t get an answer, not knowing why he was getting arrested. As Akhavan moved his hand in a non threatening way without raising his voice or resisting, he got punched in the face. An officer with a British accent told him that he was punched for resisting arrest.
Vancouver’s police union president Tom Stamatakis stated that Akhavan drove his bike in a way that “put a lot of people in some risk, whether it’s accident or injury” and “allegedly confrontational with police”. Further investigation is to show whether the use of force was necessary.
My belief on this issue is that no matter how you are riding your bike, a police officer shouldn't be able to arrest a citizen unless there was a legal reason based on the law. Also, He shouldn't be arrested without getting to know the reason why he is being arrested. The police neglected the citizen's Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms section 8: freedom from unreasonable search and seizure. Then, he punched the cyclist in the face while putting a hand cuff on himm which violates the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms section 7: right to life, liberty, and security of the person. Therefore, as the police doesn't have any legal reason to arrest this cyclist, this is a misconduct of the police power as he used his power as a police to arrest the cyclist just because he can.
This issue ended up by the constable being charged with assault.
http://www.policebrutality.info/2013/04/canadian-cop-punches-a-cyclist-in-the-face.html
Video length: 2minutes 42seconds
The article tells us about a police conduct issue where a police officer punches a cyclist while arresting him, and the article goes like this:
Vancouver police department is investigating the story behind a video of one of their officers hitting a man in the face during the arrest. Andishae Akhavan was riding his bicycle without a helmet through downtown Yaletown when he got stopped by two plainclothes police officers. One of the bystanders started filming the arrest as the cops were trying to handcuff Akhavan. He asked “What is this for?” but didn’t get an answer, not knowing why he was getting arrested. As Akhavan moved his hand in a non threatening way without raising his voice or resisting, he got punched in the face. An officer with a British accent told him that he was punched for resisting arrest.
Vancouver’s police union president Tom Stamatakis stated that Akhavan drove his bike in a way that “put a lot of people in some risk, whether it’s accident or injury” and “allegedly confrontational with police”. Further investigation is to show whether the use of force was necessary.
My belief on this issue is that no matter how you are riding your bike, a police officer shouldn't be able to arrest a citizen unless there was a legal reason based on the law. Also, He shouldn't be arrested without getting to know the reason why he is being arrested. The police neglected the citizen's Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms section 8: freedom from unreasonable search and seizure. Then, he punched the cyclist in the face while putting a hand cuff on himm which violates the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms section 7: right to life, liberty, and security of the person. Therefore, as the police doesn't have any legal reason to arrest this cyclist, this is a misconduct of the police power as he used his power as a police to arrest the cyclist just because he can.
This issue ended up by the constable being charged with assault.
Sunday, October 20, 2013
Police Conduct Issues
http://news.nationalpost.com/2012/05/16/police-violated-civil-rights-acted-illegally-says-scathing-report-on-g20-summit/
Police violated civil rights, acted illegally, says scathing report on G20 summit
This article takes an in-depth look on the polices' actions at the 2010 G-20 Toronto summit protests. According to the article, the Toronto police had "violated civil rights, detained people illegally, and used excessive force." Evidently, the police officers wanted to stop the protests by any means necessary, even breaching the fundamental and constitutional rights. The police used their authority to search people without a proper reason or legal justification, and arrested "more than 1,100 people." Although the majority of the individuals that were arrested were released without charges, this reflects the police violating not only basic rights, but also the police conduct. Further, many of police officers used force to combat the protesters, giving the people notion that "violence would be met with violence." Those who were detained were treated terribly, with little food and water, unable to call a lawyer, and "had to use toilets in full view of others". More importantly, countless were detained illegally. The latter half of the article explains the lack of organization on the Toronto police and failing to properly disperse the mob.
This incident is a rather prime example of the police violating their own conduct in order to stop the protesting mob. Obviously, police officers know the human rights boundaries that they should not cross; however, it is clear that the police were not trained or educated accordingly when dealing with this situation. As mentioned earlier, human rights were severely violated during the summit protests, which is a direct infringement of the police conducts under the constitution and legislative (Text. 150). In addition, the fifth principle of the Principles of Canadian Police Services, which is "the importance of respecting victims of crime and understanding their needs" (Text. 151) was violated.
Despite the massive scale of the 2010 G-20 Toronto summit protest, it is no excuse for the police of Toronto to be unorganized and neglecting citizens' most basic rights. I believe that it was simply incorrect for the police to search without warrants, arrest without much reason, and provide a terrible temporary detainment center. I am convinced that the unorganized and unprepared Toronto Police Service was the reason for this massive violation of human rights. Thus, I think that better training and instruction on the police will greatly decrease the rate of police misconduct. For the reason that, the police will have various different ways to deal with a situation at his disposal.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)