Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1234
Results 73 to 95 of 95

Thread: York police starts publicly naming people charged with impaired driving

  1. #73
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    west gta
    Posts
    4,040
    Quote Originally Posted by spankingman View Post
    Pretty hard to think Marco Muzzo was "innocent" before proven guilty!!!!
    Actually THAT is exactly what is wrong with the news today

    He certainly WAS innocent until proven guilty

    Could have been a million reasons for accident that had nothing to do with alcohol

  2. #74
    Quote Originally Posted by kugel2 View Post
    So don't go on their site and look. Nobody is forced to.
    It's not a question of going to the site or not. It's a question of naming people who were charged but not convicted. I have no problem publishing names of convicted impaired drivers.

    Quote Originally Posted by kugel2 View Post
    Story in the news today....https://torontosun.com/news/local-ne...urder-his-baby

    Charged, not convicted. Name AND picture. So is that because the Sun is trying to shame soldiers? The investigation isn't looking for more of his kids to come forward.
    This is nothing new. If you follow the news, you would already know Police regularly publish the names of people charged with serious offences. The one you pointed out fits that criteria.

  3. #75
    Quote Originally Posted by TeeJay View Post
    Actually THAT is exactly what is wrong with the news today

    He certainly WAS innocent until proven guilty

    Could have been a million reasons for accident that had nothing to do with alcohol
    Police regularly publish the names of people charged with serious offences.

  4. #76
    Quote Originally Posted by GameBoy27 View Post
    Police regularly publish the names of people charged with serious offences.
    Exactly....are you suggesting that they only publish the names of people charged with certain, and not all, criminal offenses? Who makes the determination of what that list is? There are those that would suggest that charging an impaired driver is equivalent to charging someone who fired a gun down the street but hit no one. Both commit potentially lethal criminal acts, yet fortunately no one is hurt.

  5. #77
    Quote Originally Posted by kugel2 View Post
    Exactly....are you suggesting that they only publish the names of people charged with certain, and not all, criminal offenses?
    That's what they currently do. Report the identity of people charged with serious crimes. Typically ones that involve sexual assault, weapons and/or cause bodily harm.

    Quote Originally Posted by kugel2 View Post
    Who makes the determination of what that list is?
    The Police service.

    Quote Originally Posted by kugel2 View Post
    There are those that would suggest that charging an impaired driver is equivalent to charging someone who fired a gun down the street but hit no one. Both commit potentially lethal criminal acts, yet fortunately no one is hurt.
    If each one is guilty, then yes, both of those scenarios are equivalent.

    I would be all for publishing the names of those charged with impaired if it was a proven deterrent. But the evidence just isn't there to support that. Therefore it's nothing more than public shaming.

  6. #78
    Quote Originally Posted by GameBoy27 View Post
    That's what they currently do. Report the identity of people charged with serious crimes. Typically ones that involve sexual assault, weapons and/or cause bodily harm.



    The Police service.



    If each one is guilty, then yes, both of those scenarios are equivalent.

    I would be all for publishing the names of those charged with impaired if it was a proven deterrent. But the evidence just isn't there to support that. Therefore it's nothing more than public shaming.
    Is revealing the names of gang bangers, mass murderers (i.e MacArthur), gun runners or drug dealers a proven deterrent? If not, then ...shhhhhh......

  7. #79
    Quote Originally Posted by kugel2 View Post
    Is revealing the names of gang bangers, mass murderers (i.e MacArthur), gun runners or drug dealers a proven deterrent? If not, then ...shhhhhh......
    If deterrent effect is what we are going by, and if we're demanding 100%, then nothing we tried since before the Romans has been a proven deterrent and we might as well give up all our laws and enforcement.

    What progress?

  8. #80
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Oblivion
    Posts
    4,076
    York Region LE is not really known as a stellar group. They carelessly pick their prey which is currently naming those charged with impaired or naming those who responded to an underage sting. York Region LE used to name almost anyone that they charged with almost any crime not so long ago before bill C36. The current trends might have something to do with the change of government at Queens Park, but it will not likely be an effective deterrent this public shaming.
    dick at largedick at large

  9. #81
    A Peel and a York Region officer were charged with impaired driving over the weekend in separate incidents. Their names have not been released. Two set of rules, as usual.

  10. #82
    Quote Originally Posted by GameBoy27 View Post
    A Peel and a York Region officer were charged with impaired driving over the weekend in separate incidents. Their names have not been released. Two set of rules, as usual
    Just be happy they were at least charged.
    I've heard of numerous stories where cops will let other cops go when caught for DUI

  11. #83
    Quote Originally Posted by GameBoy27 View Post
    A Peel and a York Region officer were charged with impaired driving over the weekend in separate incidents. Their names have not been released. Two set of rules, as usual.
    both names have been release on twitter by the opp. saw it on city news this evening.

  12. #84
    Quote Originally Posted by apoptygma View Post
    both names have been release on twitter by the opp. saw it on city news this evening.
    So they did!

    I wonder if Adrian Woolley is any relation to Cam Woolley, former police Sergeant with the OPP.

    The president of the Peel Regional Police Association is among two GTA officers charged with alcohol-related driving offences over the weekend.

    CTV News Toronto confirmed that 44-year-old Adrian Woolley, who is currently the head of the Peel Regional Police Association, was charged with having a blood alcohol level in excess of 80 milligrams.

    In a tweet, OPP Sgt. Kerry Schmidt said Woolley, who is from Burlington, has also been charged with stunt driving.

    He was stopped on Saturday night on the Queen Elizabeth Way in Burlington.

    The second officer to be charged, in a separate incident, is Const. Tina Teeter, a 42-year-old officer with York Regional Police.

    In a news release issued Monday, York Regional Police confirmed that, Teeter, who is from Barrie, was arrested by Ontario Provincial Police in connection with an “impaired-related criminal offence” when she was off duty on Sunday.

    Teeter, police say, has been a member of the police service since 2003 and works as a uniform patrol officer in 4 District. She previously worked in community services and at the collision reporting centre.

    She has been placed on administrative duty.

    “This is very troubling considering the work that York Regional Police is doing to combat impaired driving. We are confirming the information the OPP has released, including the officer’s identity. As this is not a YRP incident, further queries regarding this investigation should be directed to the OPP,” York Regional Police Chief Eric Jolliffe said in a written statement.

    “We are committed to the fight against impaired driving and we hold our members to the same, if not higher, standard than members of our community. We continue to remind our members of their responsibility to live the values of our organization, both on and off duty.”

    https://www.cp24.com/news/two-gta-of...kend-1.4291932

  13. #85
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    west gta
    Posts
    4,040
    Quote Originally Posted by GameBoy27 View Post
    A Peel and a York Region officer were charged with impaired driving over the weekend in separate incidents. Their names have not been released. Two set of rules, as usual.
    Just wow....

    Um I think It SHOULD be obvious WHY the "different set of rules" as you call them

    York Region has a policy (which this thread is about)

    York region has no jurisdiction over a highway (where OPP policy would be applicable)

    Just the fact you mention 1 was from Peel then fail to grasp this blows my mind

  14. #86
    Quote Originally Posted by TeeJay View Post
    Just wow....

    Um I think It SHOULD be obvious WHY the "different set of rules" as you call them

    York Region has a policy (which this thread is about)

    York region has no jurisdiction over a highway (where OPP policy would be applicable)

    Just the fact you mention 1 was from Peel then fail to grasp this blows my mind
    It's all good. Police released their names. You can go back to holding up people in the passing lane.

  15. #87
    Quote Originally Posted by GameBoy27 View Post
    Police released their names.
    Yes, both names released. A face pic of one shown on TV (not sure about the source), not sure if a face pic of other one was made public.

    The sh-t will hit the fan if many or most of the names are Asian or some other minority group.

  16. #88
    Quote Originally Posted by Darts View Post
    Yes, both names released. A face pic of one shown on TV (not sure about the source), not sure if a face pic of other one was made public.

    The sh-t will hit the fan if many or most of the names are Asian or some other minority group.
    How so? Please explain... Adrian Woolley, president of the Peel Regional Police Association certainly isn't Asian, and I don't believe Tina Teeter is either.

    https://torontosun.com/news/local-ne...-drunk-driving

  17. #89
    These guys are idiots. There will be a lawsuit as soon as someone is found innocent and the tax payer will be on the hook for this clownish behavior.

  18. #90
    Quote Originally Posted by nottyboi View Post
    These guys are idiots. There will be a lawsuit as soon as someone is found innocent and the tax payer will be on the hook for this clownish behavior.
    If you're charged with impaired, over 80 and stunt driving and you beat the charges, you don't get to sue the Police.

  19. #91
    Quote Originally Posted by GameBoy27 View Post
    If you're charged with impaired, over 80 and stunt driving and you beat the charges, you don't get to sue the Police.
    For that you don't but for defamamation with malice you do

  20. #92
    Quote Originally Posted by nottyboi View Post
    For that you don't but for defamamation with malice you do
    Which I imagine would be difficult to prove in this case. These are simple drunk driving and drunk/stunt driving charges.

  21. #93
    Quote Originally Posted by GameBoy27 View Post
    How so? Please explain... Adrian Woolley, president of the Peel Regional Police Association certainly isn't Asian, and I don't believe Tina Teeter is either.
    I should have used 2 separate posts to avoid confusion. The second part of my post refers to the general population, not the 2 police officers. You know how people, especially on this board, say Asians (brown and yellow) are lousy drivers. So, what happens if many or most of the names are of Asians, especially since York Region has a huge Asian population.

  22. #94
    Quote Originally Posted by Darts View Post
    I should have used 2 separate posts to avoid confusion. The second part of my post refers to the general population, not the 2 police officers. You know how people, especially on this board, say Asians (brown and yellow) are lousy drivers. So, what happens if many or most of the names are of Asians, especially since York Region has a huge Asian population.
    Then that means a lot of Asians in an area with a largely Asian demographic are getting nabbed for drinking and driving. No surprise there...

  23. #95
    Quote Originally Posted by GameBoy27 View Post
    Which I imagine would be difficult to prove in this case. These are simple drunk driving and drunk/stunt driving charges.
    DUI is a criminal charge. Nothing simple about it. If the person faces loss of reputation and experiences financial loss as a result, they can and will sue. Especially since the intent of publication is to shame and humiliate those charged.

Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1234

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •