TPS officer killed

[Robert Mugabe]

But that's murder??

But that's Mexico!!

 

[Phil C. McNasty]

Please. She was praying he got looked up.

She can collect her husbands insurance money

The Northrop family can raise money themselves.
He lost way more than 200k. The cost of the lawyers, the loss of his salary from his accounting job. Not to mention the emotional damage

Fair points

 

[SchlongConery]

The Northrop family can raise money themselves.
He lost way more than 200k. The cost of the lawyers, the loss of his salary from his accounting job. Not to mention the emotional damage.

And if he and/or his wife get good advice, they will set aside a lot of that money for physcological counselling... for many years. Being falsely accused, being the cause of someone elses death and so much more can haunt people for their entire lives. Ask any train or subway driver who has run over a suicider. Or cops that have had to justifiably kill someone in the line of duty.

And the kids will need to be helped along as they grow up and learn their family's history.

 

[onomatopoeia]

But that's murder??

They aren't told in writing, and the message is passed down through levels. As Willie Cicci noted, 'the family had a lot of buffers'.

 

[Phil C. McNasty]

Somebody on my Facebook group said cops often charge people so they can make extra overtime money when they have to show up for court everyday.

I didn't really believe him until I saw this TikTok video: https://vm.tiktok.com/ZMMbcpuJ1/

Now I think he might be right.
This sergeant is making more money than I am.
$400K is insane!!

 

[Tiger]

Somebody on my Facebook group said cops often charge people so they can make extra overtime money when they have to show up for court everyday.

I didn't really believe him until I saw this TikTok video: https://vm.tiktok.com/ZMMbcpuJ1/

Now I think he might be right.
This sergeant is making more money than I am.
$400K is insane!!

I'm not crazy about seeing how the TTC execs are on that list for $300K+ salaries, when the transit is in shambles, the Eglinton line is an embarrassment and I'm still bitter about the TTC buying brand-new but broken streetcars from Bombardier that were all delivered late

But I do like to see Dr. Eilleen DeVilla on the list, the Toronto doctor who was on the news every night during COVID

 

[mandrill]

They aren't told in writing, and the message is passed down through levels. As Willie Cicci noted, 'the family had a lot of buffers'.

I have a client from Mexico who says that there is no effective law enforcement anymore in Mexico and the cartels and crime families essentially control the cops.

 

[Anbarandy]

In Mexico, bus drivers are told by their employers that if they hit a pedestrian, they should run over them to make sure that they're dead, because the financial costs for a wrongful death are less than for a living victim who is seriously injured and would require long term medical assistance.

Speedy?

Gonzalez?

Is that you?

 

[onomatopoeia]

Somebody on my Facebook group said cops often charge people so they can make extra overtime money when they have to show up for court everyday.

I didn't really believe him until I saw this TikTok video: https://vm.tiktok.com/ZMMbcpuJ1/

Now I think he might be right.
This sergeant is making more money than I am.
$400K is insane!!

If a police officer's primary goal is to get the maximum number of overtime hours, arranging to have someone charged, whom they know isn't guilty, is the best way to do it, because it guarantees a court appearance for the arresting officer, unless the accused pleads guilty to something they didn't do. Gross numbers of arrests are also a positive factor in internal promotions. Because those at the top of the seniority list get first cracks at available overtime, for a 4th class constable, new to the job, court appearances are the only way they'll get overtime hours.

I can confirm that this is true, from personal experience.

First, there are certain cops who think that their job is to process requests for arrest, as if they were a dog catcher:

Someone calls 911, the call is directed to their car.

One of the first questions the cop asks the complainant is "Do you want to press charges?". If the complainant says "Yes", the cop 'takes his case', and begins to gather evidence against the accused.

The police swear an oath when they receive their badge. Among the things they promise to do are to act impartially and to give the benefit of the doubt to the accused. Some of them forget that as soon as they get their badge, or they're taught to forget that by their training officers.

In my personal experience, a former neighbour assaulted me, then called the police to say that I had assaulted him. The complainant sucker-slapped me while I was holding on to his shirt, breaking my glasses. His shirt was ripped when he tried to run away while I was still holding his shirt.

These are some of the procedural errors committed by 'the team':

There was about half an hour between when the incident occurred, and when the 911 call was made. The complainant, who is schizophrenic, took his medications during that interval. Rather than ask him why he had waited so long to call, two different officers falsified the time of the incident in typed paperwork, but the original time as reported by the complainant was in their hand written notes.

The 'witness' was not interviewed until the next day, and only after I had been arrested and charged.

While the complainant's statement was being taken, the witness was in an adjoining room, where he could hear all of the arresting officer's questions, and the complainant's answers. The next day, the arresting officer asked him all of the same questions, in the same sequence, and he gave identical answers. The complainant and witness were roommates.

In the evidence disclosure, there were photographs of a different shirt, which had not been ripped. A triangle of cloth had quite clearly been cut with scissors from the neck area.

When the arresting officer spoke with me, he omitted the portion of my story where I said that the complainant had struck me and broken my glasses. I was wearing the glasses when I spoke to him, and that information was in his partner's notes.

There was literally no evidence against me in the evidence disclosure, but on the trial date, (I had waived pretrial and entered a not guilty plea at arraignment), the Crown flipped his fingers through the disclosure, and said "Looks like we've got enough to convict", before offering me the option of entering a guilty plea. Half way through my cross examination of the first witness, (the witness, who saw none of the incident), the Crown offered to drop the charges, but I said no, as I wanted the acquittal.

Because the detective did not request jail time in the event of a conviction, I didn't qualify for court appointed counsel at trial, so I was obliged to defend myself. When I had phoned the Legal Aid number shortly after being charged, they told me "We're not taking any new cases right now".

As for the detective who charged me, I overheard him say at the court house that he had booked a vacation day for the trial date, so he effectively received eight hours pay at 2.5 times his hourly wage for showing up at court, (the paid day off, plus time and a half).

 

[SchlongConery]

Speedy?

Gonzalez?

Is that you?

Maybe Speedy Gonzales is fast in the feet, but Slowpoke Rodriguez is faster upstairs in the cabeza!

 

[SchlongConery]

I have a client from Mexico who says that there is no effective law enforcement anymore in Mexico and the cartels and crime families essentially control the cops.

Very true.

On every level.

I have friends who have had various experiences from civil litigation, to personal injury, to govt corruption to criminal law, kidnapping, street gang, cartel and especially LE extortion to even having squatters getting title to ex-pats condo's after breaking in during the off-season. One even lost their motel in Cozumel. Special property laws apply to "Cozumelinos" (persons natively born in Cozumel).

Yes, yes .. (directed to Mexican tourism enthusiasts) Mexico is beautiful and everything is good... until it isn't. Then there is effectively NO law to protect you if something goes wrong. And it doesn't matter if. you "keep your nose clean" stay out of bad areas, within the resort etc.... IF something bad happens, you cannot rely on law to protect you in Mexico.

 

[SchlongConery]

If a police officer's primary goal is to get the maximum number of overtime hours, arranging to have someone charged, whom they know isn't guilty, is the best way to do it, because it guarantees a court appearance for the arresting officer, unless the accused pleads guilty to something they didn't do. Gross numbers of arrests are also a positive factor in internal promotions. Because those at the top of the seniority list get first cracks at available overtime, for a 4th class constable, new to the job, court appearances are the only way they'll get overtime hours.

I can confirm that this is true, from personal experience.

First, there are certain cops who think that their job is to process requests for arrest, as if they were a dog catcher:

Someone calls 911, the call is directed to their car.

One of the first questions the cop asks the complainant is "Do you want to press charges?". If the complainant says "Yes", the cop 'takes his case', and begins to gather evidence against the accused.

The police swear an oath when they receive their badge. Among the things they promise to do are to act impartially and to give the benefit of the doubt to the accused. Some of them forget that as soon as they get their badge, or they're taught to forget that by their training officers.

In my personal experience, a former neighbour assaulted me, then called the police to say that I had assaulted him. The complainant sucker-slapped me while I was holding on to his shirt, breaking my glasses. His shirt was ripped when he tried to run away while I was still holding his shirt.

These are some of the procedural errors committed by 'the team':

There was about half an hour between when the incident occurred, and when the 911 call was made. The complainant, who is schizophrenic, took his medications during that interval. Rather than ask him why he had waited so long to call, two different officers falsified the time of the incident in typed paperwork, but the original time as reported by the complainant was in their hand written notes.

The 'witness' was not interviewed until the next day, and only after I had been arrested and charged.

While the complainant's statement was being taken, the witness was in an adjoining room, where he could hear all of the arresting officer's questions, and the complainant's answers. The next day, the arresting officer asked him all of the same questions, in the same sequence, and he gave identical answers. The complainant and witness were roommates.

In the evidence disclosure, there were photographs of a different shirt, which had not been ripped. A triangle of cloth had quite clearly been cut with scissors from the neck area.

When the arresting officer spoke with me, he omitted the portion of my story where I said that the complainant had struck me and broken my glasses. I was wearing the glasses when I spoke to him, and that information was in his partner's notes.

There was literally no evidence against me in the evidence disclosure, but on the trial date, (I had waived pretrial and entered a not guilty plea at arraignment), the Crown flipped his fingers through the disclosure, and said "Looks like we've got enough to convict", before offering me the option of entering a guilty plea. Half way through my cross examination of the first witness, (the witness, who saw none of the incident), the Crown offered to drop the charges, but I said no, as I wanted the acquittal.

Because the detective did not request jail time in the event of a conviction, I didn't qualify for court appointed counsel at trial, so I was obliged to defend myself. When I had phoned the Legal Aid number shortly after being charged, they told me "We're not taking any new cases right now".

As for the detective who charged me, I overheard him say at the court house that he had booked a vacation day for the trial date, so he effectively received eight hours pay at 2.5 times his hourly wage for showing up at court, (the paid day off, plus time and a half).

Similar things have happened to people I know. The Ontario Domestic Violence POLICY (not law) says that once a breth has been spoken "their job is to process requests for arrest, as if they were a dog catcher:" and let the Courts sort it out.

Fucking disgusting.

 

[mandrill]

Similar things have happened to people I know. The Ontario Domestic Violence POLICY (not law) says that once a breth has been spoken "their job is to process requests for arrest, as if they were a dog catcher:" and let the Courts sort it out.

Fucking disgusting.

It's a reaction to the old days when desperate women tried to get police intervention and were met with a shrug and "It's an internal family thing. Sort it out with your husband."

 

[Phil C. McNasty]

If a police officer's primary goal is to get the maximum number of overtime hours, arranging to have someone charged, whom they know isn't guilty, is the best way to do it, because it guarantees a court appearance for the arresting officer, unless the accused pleads guilty to something they didn't do. Gross numbers of arrests are also a positive factor in internal promotions. Because those at the top of the seniority list get first cracks at available overtime, for a 4th class constable, new to the job, court appearances are the only way they'll get overtime hours.

I can confirm that this is true, from personal experience.

First, there are certain cops who think that their job is to process requests for arrest, as if they were a dog catcher:

Someone calls 911, the call is directed to their car.

One of the first questions the cop asks the complainant is "Do you want to press charges?". If the complainant says "Yes", the cop 'takes his case', and begins to gather evidence against the accused.

The police swear an oath when they receive their badge. Among the things they promise to do are to act impartially and to give the benefit of the doubt to the accused. Some of them forget that as soon as they get their badge, or they're taught to forget that by their training officers.

In my personal experience, a former neighbour assaulted me, then called the police to say that I had assaulted him. The complainant sucker-slapped me while I was holding on to his shirt, breaking my glasses. His shirt was ripped when he tried to run away while I was still holding his shirt.

These are some of the procedural errors committed by 'the team':

There was about half an hour between when the incident occurred, and when the 911 call was made. The complainant, who is schizophrenic, took his medications during that interval. Rather than ask him why he had waited so long to call, two different officers falsified the time of the incident in typed paperwork, but the original time as reported by the complainant was in their hand written notes.

The 'witness' was not interviewed until the next day, and only after I had been arrested and charged.

While the complainant's statement was being taken, the witness was in an adjoining room, where he could hear all of the arresting officer's questions, and the complainant's answers. The next day, the arresting officer asked him all of the same questions, in the same sequence, and he gave identical answers. The complainant and witness were roommates.

In the evidence disclosure, there were photographs of a different shirt, which had not been ripped. A triangle of cloth had quite clearly been cut with scissors from the neck area.

When the arresting officer spoke with me, he omitted the portion of my story where I said that the complainant had struck me and broken my glasses. I was wearing the glasses when I spoke to him, and that information was in his partner's notes.

There was literally no evidence against me in the evidence disclosure, but on the trial date, (I had waived pretrial and entered a not guilty plea at arraignment), the Crown flipped his fingers through the disclosure, and said "Looks like we've got enough to convict", before offering me the option of entering a guilty plea. Half way through my cross examination of the first witness, (the witness, who saw none of the incident), the Crown offered to drop the charges, but I said no, as I wanted the acquittal.

Because the detective did not request jail time in the event of a conviction, I didn't qualify for court appointed counsel at trial, so I was obliged to defend myself. When I had phoned the Legal Aid number shortly after being charged, they told me "We're not taking any new cases right now".

As for the detective who charged me, I overheard him say at the court house that he had booked a vacation day for the trial date, so he effectively received eight hours pay at 2.5 times his hourly wage for showing up at court, (the paid day off, plus time and a half)

The trial went on for almost a whole month.
Not sure if Lisa Forbes attended the trial every day, but if she did you can do the math from there

 

[SchlongConery]

The trial went on for almost a whole month.
Not sure if Lisa Forbes attended the trial every day, but if she did you can do the math from there

Unless she was subpeoned as a witness for a specific time, she wouldn't be getting paid for just hangout out in the Dope Ring in the lobby.

 

[SchlongConery]

It's a reaction to the old days when desperate women tried to get police intervention and were met with a shrug and "It's an internal family thing. Sort it out with your husband."

Yes. It's my understanding that this "charge-first ask questions later" policy was in response to when the cops left, the guy would then beat or kill his wife for calling the cops.

I am of the opinion that Ontario's "policy" is ultra viries and unconsitutional.

 

[mandrill]

Yes. It's my understanding that this "charge-first ask questions later" policy was in response to when the cops left, the guy would then beat or kill his wife for calling the cops.

I am of the opinion that Ontario's "policy" is ultra viries and unconsitutional.

It's not.

 

[onomatopoeia]

See post #339. This:



is a police photograph from my case, altered slightly to obscure the file number and the identity of the photographer, (written on the ruler). It's obvious to anyone that this shirt was cut with scissors, not ripped with someone hands.

Unfortunately, I was unable to lambaste the officers involved on the witness stand, because I won acquittal without having to present a defense case.

 

[SchlongConery]

It's not.

If you say so.

It was just a lecture we bar-isters heard from a Professor at the Sea Lawyer Night School.

 

[SchlongConery]

This was a mock trail involving the Ontario Domestic Violence policy I was speaking about...