![www.thestar.com](https://bloximages.chicago2.vip.townnews.com/thestar.com/content/tncms/assets/v3/editorial/f/6a/f6a20490-d83f-5609-ba37-07d7ca579af6/63da8b0cc0da6.image.jpg?crop=1200%2C630%2C0%2C84&resize=1200%2C630&order=crop%2Cresize)
Team of Toronto cops conspired to lie in court under oath, judge finds
Judge finds Toronto guns and gangs officers lied in court to cover up the fact they did not have lawful grounds to detain a man.
To be honest, we should hold the officers of the court to a bit higher standard.I'm sure criminals have NEVER EVER lied under oath
but we both know that wont happen they get a severe punishment of suspension with FULL PAY sometime for yearsTo be honest, we should hold the officers of the court to a bit higher standard.
Oh, sure it's a huge problem in Canada. But, ultimately, we as the people are responsible for the problem because we allowed all the layers of protection for the crooked cops to be put in place.but we both know that wont happen they get a severe punishment of suspension with FULL PAY sometime for years
So why is an individual arriving at a location with known dealers carrying a bag not arouse enough suspicion to search such bag? The logic escapes me...I can't believe those cops didn't realize that there would be a hallway surveillance cam. Dumb-o!
They then lied about the ground to detain the perp and search his bag and find the gun. And got busted by the judge.
Standard cop procedure and fuck me! if I don't sympathize with them. They nailed a colleague of the dealers they were arresting walking around with a firearm and he should have gone down for plenty. They were just bending the rules a little to get the job done. But guys! Next time be smarter about it!
(And I'm sure that's what Her Honour said over sherry in the judge's lunch room to the other judges as well.)
Probably falls a little short of reasonable suspicion. If they waited until he entered the unit, they might have had a better shot. And lying to the judge was not a smart move.So why is an individual arriving at a location with known dealers carrying a bag not arouse enough suspicion to search such bag? The logic escapes me...