Preliminary inquiry commits James Forcillio to stand trial for 2nd degree murder.

blackrock13

Banned
Jun 6, 2009
40,085
1
0
How much was the cost of the Forcillo case? Oh, you don't know. Then, it's a little premature to say that the cost is $2.5 million, don'tcha think?
Where exactly did I say the what the cost of the Forcillo case was, especially since the case hasn't finished? You may have a Magic 8 Ball, but I sure don't. Still haven't come up with the cost of a murder trial in Canada, have you? With no facts to the contrary, who knows, I could be right.
 

buttercup

Active member
Feb 28, 2005
2,569
4
38
So you have no faith in our legal system? Sure lets just waste $2.5 million dollar for a show.
Why is everyone pissing on blackrock13? He really isn't the complete wanker people take him for. A guess of $2.5M as the ballpark for a murder trial is perfectly reasonable.



They'll surface soon enough, queue Nuttyboi.
That would be "cue", not "queue". Maybe he is t.c.w.p.t.h.f, after all.
 

elise

A car, not a girl.
Sep 22, 2004
404
0
16
So you have no faith in our legal system? Sure lets just waste $2.5 million dollar for a show.

Just to put the flaming fun aside for the moment…

Yes, for a show. It is always politics. The money never concerns them that much , it is the public perception. Look at the gas plant scandal of the Liberals, a billion thrown away on a show for the public to save two political seats. Feds cancelling helicopter contracts and costing billions - just for perception. The list can go on and on.

In this case, the public outrage was unbearable for the police and their puppet masters. Why? The video of the event going viral. Everyone who has seen it shakes their head when they hear six shots followed by a pause then three more. Then more disbelief when they learn he, SY, only had a pocket knife and was alone on the streetcar.

It is the perception of the gross over-kill that had the public upset. The police, SIU, prosecutors, and politicians had no choice, they had to calm the masses with a show. Absolutely anything else would cause the public to loose faith in the legal system.

How will it end? We'll see. If he gets anything less than a guilty verdict , the perception will be he got away with it because he was a cop and they played nice with him.
 

blackrock13

Banned
Jun 6, 2009
40,085
1
0
Just to put the flaming fun aside for the moment…

Yes, for a show. It is always politics. The money never concerns them that much , it is the public perception. Look at the gas plant scandal of the Liberals, a billion thrown away on a show for the public to save two political seats. Feds cancelling helicopter contracts and costing billions - just for perception. The list can go on and on.

In this case, the public outrage was unbearable for the police and their puppet masters. Why? The video of the event going viral. Everyone who has seen it shakes their head when they hear six shots followed by a pause then three more. Then more disbelief when they learn he, SY, only had a pocket knife and was alone on the streetcar.

It is the perception of the gross over-kill that had the public upset. The police, SIU, prosecutors, and politicians had no choice, they had to calm the masses with a show. Absolutely anything else would cause the public to loose faith in the legal system.

How will it end? We'll see. If he gets anything less than a guilty verdict , the perception will be he got away with it because he was a cop and they played nice with him.
All fine a good, except that it will be a jury, members of the public, that decides his guilt or innocence, not the police.
 

buttercup

Active member
Feb 28, 2005
2,569
4
38
Of course the show needs to go on. If they really wanted to convict him, the judge would say the 2nd degree would not stand at this point and the crown would have been FORCED to change the charge to Criminal Negligence or Manslaughter. Those are 2 charges on which there is actually a risk of conviction. 2nd degree, zero risk of conviction. Guaranteed walk.
2nd degree murder is the correct charge.

Given the video, it is a complete slam-dunk that Furcillo intended to kill Yatim. In fact, whenever a policeman fires his gun at a human being, you would have to be up very early in the morning not to see that as a clear intent to kill.

Manslaughter only applies when the evidence shows that there was no intent to kill -- but here, it is indisputable that furcillo intended to kill him.
1st degree murder only applies when they can prove premeditation -- which is clearly absent in this case.
2nd degree is the correct charge.

The police do not have a "licence to kill". To get off a murder charge, a policeman-defendant has to prove he acted in self-defence.
The prosecution does not have to prove that Furcillo was doing more than defend himself. Instead, Furcillo has to prove that he was doing nothing but defend himself.
 

james t kirk

Well-known member
Aug 17, 2001
24,032
3,879
113
Just a related aside.....

Look at how the RCMP handled the recent situation in Moncton. Here you have a whack job - Justin Borque, who just killed 3 mounties and shot 2 others. He's armed to the teeth with what looked like machine guns in the photos. He's on the loose, the entire town is locked down and in panic. And yet the Mounties not only capture the guy, they take him alive without even firing a shot.

Now look at this kid Sammy Hatim. He's pulled out his cock in a street car, he's babbling on about nothing. The street car stops, everyone gets out without being hurt. The LOCK HIM IN THE STREET CAR. And Toronto's finest shoot him 9 times and kill him. He hasn't hurt anyone and he's locked inside a street car.

Now it begs the question. What the fuck are the cops in Toronto doing?

Should have brought in the Mounties from New Brunswick for crying out loud.
 

elise

A car, not a girl.
Sep 22, 2004
404
0
16
All fine a good, except that it will be a jury, members of the public, that decides his guilt or innocence, not the police.
Correct, and I never said the police decide his guilt. They just have to present evidence against one of their own (no potential bias there…). The jury must make their decision upon the evidence presented to them as they are not permitted to base their decisions on anything else (or so the story goes).

Last time I looked, the prosecutors and police work very close together, they are the ying and yang of the crown. On the other side, the accused and his defence lawyers. It is clear who the defence lawyers will support. Question for me is, how vigorously will the prosecution go after one of their own? They could aways intentionally poorly present their case leaving the jury little choice in how to decide (with endless appeals should the jury go against the grain). Is there really such a thing as zero bias in this situation? TANJ
 

blackrock13

Banned
Jun 6, 2009
40,085
1
0
Umm, backpedal much?
Turn around and you'll see that i's not a back pedal at all, just an attempt to dummy down so you'd understand, but I failed obviously.

Still no estimate from you, so it could be said that i'm closer at the amount than you.
 

bugsbunny

New member
Nov 17, 2001
149
0
0
67
Burlington/Hamilton
Correct, and I never said the police decide his guilt. They just have to present evidence against one of their own (no potential bias there…). The jury must make their decision upon the evidence presented to them as they are not permitted to base their decisions on anything else (or so the story goes).

Last time I looked, the prosecutors and police work very close together, they are the ying and yang of the crown. On the other side, the accused and his defence lawyers. It is clear who the defence lawyers will support. Question for me is, how vigorously will the prosecution go after one of their own? They could aways intentionally poorly present their case leaving the jury little choice in how to decide (with endless appeals should the jury go against the grain). Is there really such a thing as zero bias in this situation? TANJ
You seem to reflect many of my own thoughts. I don't trust the cops, crown attorneys, etc. whatsoever when it comes to them looking after the "brotherhood". When it comes to day to day stuff, whatever, they do a good job.
 

oldjones

CanBarelyRe Member
Aug 18, 2001
24,490
11
38
Where are all the people saying cops are above the law, judges and lawyers always side with them and no one will ever go to trial for anything?
I'm trying to decide whether such people's attitudes are stupider than your urge to taunt and provoke them.
 

blackrock13

Banned
Jun 6, 2009
40,085
1
0
Just to put the flaming fun aside for the moment…

Yes, for a show. It is always politics. The money never concerns them that much , it is the public perception. Look at the gas plant scandal of the Liberals, a billion thrown away on a show for the public to save two political seats. Feds cancelling helicopter contracts and costing billions - just for perception. The list can go on and on.

In this case, the public outrage was unbearable for the police and their puppet masters. Why? The video of the event going viral. Everyone who has seen it shakes their head when they hear six shots followed by a pause then three more. Then more disbelief when they learn he, SY, only had a pocket knife and was alone on the streetcar.

It is the perception of the gross over-kill that had the public upset. The police, SIU, prosecutors, and politicians had no choice, they had to calm the masses with a show. Absolutely anything else would cause the public to loose faith in the legal system.

How will it end? We'll see. If he gets anything less than a guilty verdict , the perception will be he got away with it because he was a cop and they played nice with him.
Correct, and I never said the police decide his guilt. They just have to present evidence against one of their own (no potential bias there…). The jury must make their decision upon the evidence presented to them as they are not permitted to base their decisions on anything else (or so the story goes).

Last time I looked, the prosecutors and police work very close together, they are the ying and yang of the crown. On the other side, the accused and his defence lawyers. It is clear who the defence lawyers will support. Question for me is, how vigorously will the prosecution go after one of their own? They could aways intentionally poorly present their case leaving the jury little choice in how to decide (with endless appeals should the jury go against the grain). Is there really such a thing as zero bias in this situation? TANJ
So who are 'they' exactly who 'played nice'? As for the ying and yang and the intentional tanking by the crown bits, I'll let the real police and real lawyers on TERB clarify that one.
 

blackrock13

Banned
Jun 6, 2009
40,085
1
0
Sure, first you pull a number out of your ass, then you deny giving such number, and finally you admit to giving that number, saying all along it was an "estimate". Classic backpedal.
I told you where the number came from and it certainly wasn't out of my ass, but the discussions were before your time on TERB. Then I even offered a second source. Remember the mention of the recent Waterloo Regional murder case. Where exactly did I deny giving the number? You must be able to quote it as it only happened today.
 

elise

A car, not a girl.
Sep 22, 2004
404
0
16
Sure, first you pull a number out of your ass, then you deny giving such number, and finally you admit to giving that number, saying all along it was an "estimate". Classic backpedal.

Sorry Mr. blackrock13, I have to agree with Mr. Doobious… That's why I said I'll bite, and ask you who told you it would cost $2.5 million. TOO precise of a figure number - would have been better, more defensible, if you have just said something like costing $millions.

Of course unless it was your intent just to taunt or just appear to have a magic 8 ball (not really sure what that is).
 

rafterman

A sadder and a wiser man
Feb 15, 2004
3,484
80
48
On the Bourque case he had dumped his weapons before they caught him. He ain't stoopid!
 
Ashley Madison
Toronto Escorts