Police union wants G20 officers who removed name tags to get promotions

[TGirl Nikki]

I have great respect for your opinion and you started off in a good place. However it strikes me that comparing a police officer who removed his ID to a teacher who is a child molester is a little histrionic.

The chap who has been charged is not yet punished because he has not yet been convicted. Punishment after conviction, what a crazy idea.

And the book you link to does not accurately reflect the law in Canada. But feel free to not pick up the phone and dial if you think it is a waste of your time.

I accept that the comparison with the child molester was a bit too far; I chose the example for maximum emotional effect, but it's inappropriate in hindsight. I'll withdraw that example and replace it with a securities broker, previously convicted of fraud; we might forgive his past crimes, but never again will he be licensed by the CSI (I think that's who handles it?). Or a lawyer, convicted of a crime, won't be allowed to practice law after the end of his sentence. I also suggest a government worker who ignores, forgets, or otherwise violates security requirements; in a way, that's exactly what these cops did. The example was excessive, but the point remains - for some things, one violation is too many.

Plenty of workers are suspended without pay during investigations where they are suspected of grievous misconduct, such as the TTC driver from a couple of days ago. Given the pictures of this cop flat-out assaulting unarmed civilians with a baton, I'd say that's worthy of suspension. Give him his due justice, to be sure, at the criminal level, and presumption of innocence is one of those tenets. But I don't think he deserves to keep his job because he hasn't been convicted yet. We'll see what happens at the trial, but having this guy currently on the police payroll doesn't fill me with confidence.

The police are an extremely valuable resource, and in many cases, the best response is to call them immediately... but not always. The book does cover Canada, as well as a number of other jurisdictions (though I agree it mostly focuses on the USA), and simply provides an alternative and somewhat sensationalistic perspective. Hey, if something happens, I'll probably call the cops, and I've advocated that approach to others on several occasions... but that doesn't mean they'll always be the first people I'll call, and I certainly won't rely exclusively on their protection. Best to have lots of options available during a crisis. ;-)

Thank you, I appreciate your criticism and respect your opinion as well. You've pointed out some things I should have considered more deeply, and I sometimes let my emotions bleed into my writing. Since I'm also trying to tear myself away from the computer, and get my long weekend started, I'll withdraw from further discussion. Have a great long weekend everyone!

 

[rld]

I accept that the comparison with the child molester was a bit too far; I chose the example for maximum emotional effect, but it's inappropriate in hindsight. I'll withdraw that example and replace it with a securities broker, previously convicted of fraud; we might forgive his past crimes, but never again will he be licensed by the CSI (I think that's who handles it?). Or a lawyer, convicted of a crime, won't be allowed to practice law after the end of his sentence. I also suggest a government worker who ignores, forgets, or otherwise violates security requirements; in a way, that's exactly what these cops did. The example was excessive, but the point remains - for some things, one violation is too many.

Plenty of workers are suspended without pay during investigations where they are suspected of grievous misconduct, such as the TTC driver from a couple of days ago. Given the pictures of this cop flat-out assaulting unarmed civilians with a baton, I'd say that's worthy of suspension. Give him his due justice, to be sure, at the criminal level, and presumption of innocence is one of those tenets. But I don't think he deserves to keep his job because he hasn't been convicted yet. We'll see what happens at the trial, but having this guy currently on the police payroll doesn't fill me with confidence.

The police are an extremely valuable resource, and in many cases, the best response is to call them immediately... but not always. The book does cover Canada, as well as a number of other jurisdictions (though I agree it mostly focuses on the USA), and simply provides an alternative and somewhat sensationalistic perspective. Hey, if something happens, I'll probably call the cops, and I've advocated that approach to others on several occasions... but that doesn't mean they'll always be the first people I'll call, and I certainly won't rely exclusively on their protection. Best to have lots of options available during a crisis. ;-)

Thank you, I appreciate your criticism and respect your opinion as well. You've pointed out some things I should have considered more deeply, and I sometimes let my emotions bleed into my writing. Since I'm also trying to tear myself away from the computer, and get my long weekend started, I'll withdraw from further discussion. Have a great long weekend everyone!

Always appreciate a civil discussion. Especially when I agree with 80% of what you say. ;-)

I can assure you that the book you posted does not accurately reflect the law in Canada.

And for certain lawyers do not always loose their right to practice during criminal sentences or before. Our justice system may be slow, but it usually gets there, which is why I try not to dig my heels in on cases before they are decided.

Have a great weekend.

 

[larry]

I wonder what the crime of taking of your badge means. is it the same as wearing a baseball cap? is it against police regulations? is it disrespectful to the chief? or what. If it's on the books anywhere, the punishment would be there too. if it says 1 day suspension is good enough, well, that's that. The chief of police bears the shame of his officers willfully breaking the law (if it is actually a law) or code of conduct. it's not the same as molestation. please. i would guess a note on their personal file for 2 or 3 or whatever years would be enough to stifle any chance of promotion. should be anyway.

 

[fuji]

larry, it's not criminal, but it is police regulation that they wear their name tag. Refusing to wear it means they are being insubordinate and disobeying an order, basically. It should be a firing offense, in my opinion, but it is not criminal.

 

[rld]

larry, it's not criminal, but it is police regulation that they wear their name tag. Refusing to wear it means they are being insubordinate and disobeying an order, basically. It should be a firing offense, in my opinion, but it is not criminal.

Yes but you have made your feelings about the police clear from time to time.

What precedents are there for it being a firing offense?

 

[oldjones]

I wonder what the crime of taking of your badge means. is it the same as wearing a baseball cap? is it against police regulations? is it disrespectful to the chief? or what. If it's on the books anywhere, the punishment would be there too. if it says 1 day suspension is good enough, well, that's that. The chief of police bears the shame of his officers willfully breaking the law (if it is actually a law) or code of conduct. it's not the same as molestation. please. i would guess a note on their personal file for 2 or 3 or whatever years would be enough to stifle any chance of promotion. should be anyway.

What they removed were their name tags and PC numbers, which they are required to wear at all times. The only credible explanation for taking them off is to avoid being identified and having to answer for their conduct.

That amounts to pre-meditation of avoiding responsibility, and that's hugely serious from people who are permitted considerable discretion to use force—deadly force if needs be—supposedly to maintain order. Something any responsible officer would and should be proud to be identified doing.

The point in this case, larry, is that for these nine, the offence didn't "…stifle any chance of promotion"; they'er being recommended for promotion by the Chief. Nothing in the media accounts suggests there's any evidence the officers have actually seen the error of their ways, which would be the first question needing to be answered.

 

[fmahovalich]

Who cares...I got no time for these loser PROTESTERS!!!


A days pay for a POlice Officer is what... maybe $400.

In any court...that seems to be the rate (WE all complain of low sentences)...so who really gives a crap!

Even Criminal cannot be tried twice on the same evidence.

CASE CLOSED!!

 

[nottyboi]

Yes but you have made your feelings about the police clear from time to time.

What precedents are there for it being a firing offense?

It brings the Police Force into disrepute, it shows a lack of respect to the force, it shows a lack of respect to the public, it shows a lack of respect for accountability for ones action and can even be construed by the public as an act of intimidation. In fact it was used by many officers to escape accountability when they committed criminal acts during the G20. It is even possible some of these officers were responsible. By not wearing the badges they were unable to put themselves above suspicion and they put themselves in this position by deliberately violating the explicit orders of the Chief. WTF does it take to get one fired? I don't think an officer should be fired for forgetting to wear his badge on a routine day of duty. But these were politically charged and unusual circumstances. The chief made it clear badges were to be worn to ensure officers were held in check and accountable.

 

[babemagnet]

I saw a documentary on the Toronto Police Force a few years ago and the union leader was a disbarred cop,if my memory serves me well. He was a bloated smirking thug of a guy who appeared to be your average low iq bully.It was implied that he was blackmailing the chief with some kind of threatened exposure.
What happened to the bronze/silver/gold star windshield decal which could be purchased for $25/$50/$100 to show your support for Toronto's finest, if you were pulled over?

 

[Hip]

Promote them? Those criminal mother fuckers should keep their foul mouths shut. They're lucky to have jobs in law enforcement after the level of idiocy they demonstrated. I for one would applaud someone concealing their identity and fucking each and every of those 90 derelicts up the ass with sharp rusty power tools. At the very least they should be arrested and 'inconvenienced' in a damp cell for a day with a plastic pail for a toilet and a soggy cheese sandwich for a bed. Then kicked to the street after midnight in the rain with no money, phone, or shoes. Then fired. Then sued.

 

[buttercup]

I wonder what the crime of taking of your badge means. is it the same as wearing a baseball cap? is it against police regulations? is it disrespectful to the chief? or what. If it's on the books anywhere, the punishment would be there too. if it says 1 day suspension is good enough, well, that's that.

Who would have thought such a law was necessary? Who would have thought policemen have to be told that being a policeman and being identifiable must go hand in hand in a free society?

And by the way: I nominate T G Nikki as the next toronto police chief.

 

[babemagnet]

Promote them? Those criminal mother fuckers should keep their foul mouths shut. They're lucky to have jobs in law enforcement after the level of idiocy they demonstrated. I for one would applaud someone concealing their identity and fucking each and every of those 90 derelicts up the ass with sharp rusty power tools. At the very least they should be arrested and 'inconvenienced' in a damp cell for a day with a plastic pail for a toilet and a soggy cheese sandwich for a bed. Then kicked to the street after midnight in the rain with no money, phone, or shoes. Then fired. Then sued.

Well said.

 

[fuji]

Yes but you have made your feelings about the police clear from time to time.

What precedents are there for it being a firing offense?

Multiple criminal investigations were made impossible by their conduct, their refusal to cooperate with the SIU, and it resulted in a major beach of public trust.

 

[blackrock13]

Promote them? Those criminal mother fuckers should keep their foul mouths shut. They're lucky to have jobs in law enforcement after the level of idiocy they demonstrated. I for one would applaud someone concealing their identity and fucking each and every of those 90 derelicts up the ass with sharp rusty power tools. At the very least they should be arrested and 'inconvenienced' in a damp cell for a day with a plastic pail for a toilet and a soggy cheese sandwich for a bed. Then kicked to the street after midnight in the rain with no money, phone, or shoes. Then fired. Then sued.

.. and then you woke up.

 

[wigglee]

Obviously Chief Blair is a shill for the strong arm corruption status quo that we have seen for many years , and both Harper and McGuinty like it that way. Why do you think the union always insists that the chief be a former beat cop?.....Politicians give tacit approval to the brutal intimidation tactics employed against thousands of peaceful protesters who tried to exercise their democratic right to express political dissent. Slaps on the wrist to handful of officers is a charade. The message here is, "Stay at home, keep your mouth shut and let the Rulers rule!..Or else!!"

 

[69suds]

I saw a documentary on the Toronto Police Force a few years ago and the union leader was a disbarred cop,if my memory serves me well. He was a bloated smirking thug of a guy who appeared to be your average low iq bully.It was implied that he was blackmailing the chief with some kind of threatened exposure.
What happened to the bronze/silver/gold star windshield decal which could be purchased for $25/$50/$100 to show your support for Toronto's finest, if you were pulled over?

I think I remember seeing something about Mike McCormack (current union leader) and 4-5 other cops who were charged with robbing drug dealers of money. The complaints were brought up by the dealers as well as some Montreal cops (as these cops had done some time in Montreal on some joint policing). The investigating cops let the statute of limitation run out or something to that affect.

 

[blackrock13]

Obviously Chief Blair is a shill for the strong arm corruption status quo that we have seen for many years , and both Harper and McGuinty like it that way. Why do you think the union always insists that the chief be a former beat cop?.....Politicians give tacit approval to the brutal intimidation tactics employed against thousands of peaceful protesters who tried to exercise their democratic right to express political dissent. Slaps on the wrist to handful of officers is a charade. The message here is, "Stay at home, keep your mouth shut and let the Rulers rule!..Or else!!"

Just ask the RCMP what they think of the civilian Bill Elliot, who was just their commissioner. The Chief of Toronto Police has alway been an officer since the mid 1800's, long before the Police union was even in the picture in 1944. Nice try.

It kind of puts the rest of your insights in question.

 

[good to go]

When the city is looking to get rid of 500 to 1000 cops they have a good place to start. They can get rid of all of the cops who removed their badges, covered up for the guilty ones and the ones who are near or at retirement.

 

[blackrock13]

When the city is looking to get rid of 500 to 1000 cops they have a good place to start. They can get rid of all of the cops who removed their badges, covered up for the guilty ones and the ones who are near or at retirement.

Half those will go by normal attrition, retirement, leave for other jobs, and similar, then not hiring to refill.

 

[sleazure]

They were docked one day's pay for an act which demonstrated irresponsibility and disrespect for the law and the community they serve. In the long run, that offence shouldn't stand in the way of their advancement. But it should be up to them and those recommending their promotion to explicitly state how their conduct in the months since has demonstrated their reformed attitude. If such statements cannot be made, they should be fast-tracked for dismissal, not promotion.

No sign of that in any of the coverage.

I have to agree. Once they've been disciplined, you can't keep punishing them. That's too unfair. You keep an eye on them, keep them on track, and make sure they don't fuck up again. At promotion time, you look at their full history. If they haven't earned enough brownie points to to compensate for this particular fuckup, you tell them to work a little harder and try again once they've proven they're ready to move up.