TPS officer killed
- Thread starter unassuming
- Start date
My popularity on TERB
Oh shit, I Didn't know you were famous, you got any merch? can I plug your Patreon ? I didn't know nothing about you but now with just 4 words I know everything about you I would ever need to know, much appreciated
So I'm starting to figure out why I was getting all turned around and confused about the various testimonies, videos, sequence of events and how many times the BMW moved and in what direction. Who showed a badge, who didnt' etc. And why there is not so much as a scratch on the front of the BMW after running over the 6'4" 300 lb police officer.
The cops are lying and can't keep their stories straight. Or the video is doctored or there was a good body shop mechanic right there to repair the lightweight aluminium hood of the BMW.
Despite meeting a month later at the crime scene to "refresh their memories..." and finally make their notebook entries of when a cop was murdered in front of their eye!?!?! Together?
Correa and Pais both wrote their notes on the incident on Aug. 4, 2021, court heard. Before that, the pair revisited the parking garage together to refresh their memories, each testified.
Both have said they did not discuss their evidence with anyone. Under cross-examination, Pais acknowledged he texted Correa during the preliminary hearing process even though he had been told not to contact the other officer. He said the text was only to get a referral for a plumber.
And from that eport from yesterday... "Const Pais previously testified he saw blood and flesh on the BMW's bumper and told Zameer they had just run over an officer."
The officer rejected the defence's suggestion he did so because he was angry, saying he resorted to force because Zameer had not complied with his order to get up.
“I saw flesh and blood on the BMW. I ordered Mr. Zameer to get up, he didn’t comply … then I struck him, yes,” he said.
From today's reporting: Zameer's lawyer suggests police testimony 'made up' in first-degree murder trial
A grainy security camera video is at the heart of some tense moments at the first-degree murder trial of the man accused of running down a Toronto police officer, as his defense lawyer said testimony from police officers didn’t match what it shows and suggested the officers were making their story up.
Lawyer Nader Hasan contrasted what the video shows with the story police witnesses have shared, which is that Const. Jeffrey Northrup was standing up, arms out, with a police badge in hand, when he was hit by Umar Zameer’s BMW head-on.
“His hands hit the hood. He goes up in the air. He bounces off the hood of the car. He lands forward on the floor,” testified Const. Tony Correa.
We see her. We don’t see Officer Northrup at all,” Nader said in a question to Correa.
“The video is choppy,” responded Correa.
“You don’t see any of those things, sir, because this is something you have made up,” Nader pressed.
“That is what I observed that night,” Correa said.
Hasan also showed a photo of the front of Zameer’s BMW, saying there's no damage consistent with hitting a 300-pound police officer.
The cops are lying and can't keep their stories straight. Or the video is doctored or there was a good body shop mechanic right there to repair the lightweight aluminium hood of the BMW.
Despite meeting a month later at the crime scene to "refresh their memories..." and finally make their notebook entries of when a cop was murdered in front of their eye!?!?! Together?
Correa and Pais both wrote their notes on the incident on Aug. 4, 2021, court heard. Before that, the pair revisited the parking garage together to refresh their memories, each testified.
Both have said they did not discuss their evidence with anyone. Under cross-examination, Pais acknowledged he texted Correa during the preliminary hearing process even though he had been told not to contact the other officer. He said the text was only to get a referral for a plumber.
And from that eport from yesterday... "Const Pais previously testified he saw blood and flesh on the BMW's bumper and told Zameer they had just run over an officer."
The officer rejected the defence's suggestion he did so because he was angry, saying he resorted to force because Zameer had not complied with his order to get up.
“I saw flesh and blood on the BMW. I ordered Mr. Zameer to get up, he didn’t comply … then I struck him, yes,” he said.
From today's reporting: Zameer's lawyer suggests police testimony 'made up' in first-degree murder trial
A grainy security camera video is at the heart of some tense moments at the first-degree murder trial of the man accused of running down a Toronto police officer, as his defense lawyer said testimony from police officers didn’t match what it shows and suggested the officers were making their story up.
Lawyer Nader Hasan contrasted what the video shows with the story police witnesses have shared, which is that Const. Jeffrey Northrup was standing up, arms out, with a police badge in hand, when he was hit by Umar Zameer’s BMW head-on.
“His hands hit the hood. He goes up in the air. He bounces off the hood of the car. He lands forward on the floor,” testified Const. Tony Correa.
We see her. We don’t see Officer Northrup at all,” Nader said in a question to Correa.
“The video is choppy,” responded Correa.
“You don’t see any of those things, sir, because this is something you have made up,” Nader pressed.
“That is what I observed that night,” Correa said.
Hasan also showed a photo of the front of Zameer’s BMW, saying there's no damage consistent with hitting a 300-pound police officer.
Last edited:
Haven't been back for a while on account of being dead for the last 5 years. lol.
So on the subject of police note taking. Let's refer to what the Supreme Court of Canada had to say on the matter. Granted this is in reference to officers under SIU investigation
but the practice of making contemporaneous, independent notes without conferring with other witnesses is a fundamental principle of why notes are taken.
Police officers have a duty to prepare accurate notes, says SCC
December 19, 2013
In Wood v. Schaeffer, the Supreme Court of Canada held that police officers have a duty to prepare accurate, detailed and comprehensive notes as soon as possible after an investigation or incident, and cannot confer with legal counsel before preparing their notes.
The Court also recognized – for the first time – that “police officers do have a duty to prepare accurate, detailed, and comprehensive notes as soon as practicable after an investigation.”
but the practice of making contemporaneous, independent notes without conferring with other witnesses is a fundamental principle of why notes are taken.
Police officers have a duty to prepare accurate notes, says SCC
December 19, 2013
In Wood v. Schaeffer, the Supreme Court of Canada held that police officers have a duty to prepare accurate, detailed and comprehensive notes as soon as possible after an investigation or incident, and cannot confer with legal counsel before preparing their notes.
The Court also recognized – for the first time – that “police officers do have a duty to prepare accurate, detailed, and comprehensive notes as soon as practicable after an investigation.”
LOL ....I'm very happy you feel that wayIf given the opportunity I wouldn't miss-manage your ass
64×64 png
3.7 kB
Nice to have you back, bud.My popularity on TERB
Oh shit, I Didn't know you were famous, you got any merch? can I plug your Patreon ? I didn't know nothing about you but now with just 4 words I know everything about you I would ever need to know, much appreciated
Did you finally get that GED you took several years away to try and get?
Bwahahaha I had to look up what a GED was,,, Oh the irony, looks like you got me dead to rights. Sadly I didn't get it. I opted for investment opportunities and now I am one of those wealthy types without an education. But I would give it all up to be famous.
Sounds like the Crown's case is wearing thin. Also, how is it the three officers who "witnessed the collision", testified that Northrup was standing in the middle of the garage laneway with his hands in the air when he was run over? I'll tell you, they colluded, they made it up, they lied. How else to explain three eye witnesses got it so wrong, all of them.
They're going to have a hard time proving intent on the part of Zameer. Time will tell, but I predict he'll walk. As he should, if justice is served correctly.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
The car that ran over a Toronto police officer nearly three years ago didn't have a dent in the hood or damage to the windshield as you would expect if a larger person was struck while standing and fell on the hood, a crash reconstructionist told jurors Monday.
Barry Raftery has been called to testify by the defence in the trial of Umar Zameer, who has pleaded not guilty to first-degree murder in the death of Det. Const. Jeffrey Northrup.
Northrup died on July 2, 2021, after he was run over by a vehicle in an underground parking garage at Toronto City Hall. Court has heard the officer was six feet and four inches tall and weighed more than 250 pounds.
On the stand Monday, Raftery said Zameer's BMW didn't show any of the damage he would expect to find if someone of Northrup's stature had fallen on the hood of the car.
“The officer was not struck while standing up,” he did not get hit by the front bumper and did not land on the hood, Raftery told the court.
Based on the physical evidence, the "only reasonable conclusion" is that Northrup was already on the ground when he was run over, the reconstructionist said.
He said a displacement of dust on fender supports a conclusion that the car made "glancing" contact with Northrup while reversing, knocking him down. There was no dent there either, which suggests the contact would not have made a sound, he said.
Crown prosecutors previously called a police crash reconstructionist, who told the court he concluded Northrup had been knocked to the ground by the car reversing before he was run over by it going forward.
However, the three officers who witnessed the incident testified Northrup was standing in the middle of the garage laneway with his hands up when he was run over.
Prosecutors allege Zameer caused Northrup’s death by making a series of manoeuvres with his car while officers were nearby, but the defence says it was an accident and neither Zameer nor his wife knew the pair – who were in plain clothes – were officers.
Court has heard Northrup and his partner were in the garage to investigate a stabbing.
Zameer, who was with his pregnant wife and their young son at the time, was not involved in the stabbing.
https://toronto.ctvnews.ca/man-accu...ed-to-testify-at-murder-trial-today-1.6837346
They're going to have a hard time proving intent on the part of Zameer. Time will tell, but I predict he'll walk. As he should, if justice is served correctly.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
The car that ran over a Toronto police officer nearly three years ago didn't have a dent in the hood or damage to the windshield as you would expect if a larger person was struck while standing and fell on the hood, a crash reconstructionist told jurors Monday.
Barry Raftery has been called to testify by the defence in the trial of Umar Zameer, who has pleaded not guilty to first-degree murder in the death of Det. Const. Jeffrey Northrup.
Northrup died on July 2, 2021, after he was run over by a vehicle in an underground parking garage at Toronto City Hall. Court has heard the officer was six feet and four inches tall and weighed more than 250 pounds.
On the stand Monday, Raftery said Zameer's BMW didn't show any of the damage he would expect to find if someone of Northrup's stature had fallen on the hood of the car.
“The officer was not struck while standing up,” he did not get hit by the front bumper and did not land on the hood, Raftery told the court.
Based on the physical evidence, the "only reasonable conclusion" is that Northrup was already on the ground when he was run over, the reconstructionist said.
He said a displacement of dust on fender supports a conclusion that the car made "glancing" contact with Northrup while reversing, knocking him down. There was no dent there either, which suggests the contact would not have made a sound, he said.
Crown prosecutors previously called a police crash reconstructionist, who told the court he concluded Northrup had been knocked to the ground by the car reversing before he was run over by it going forward.
However, the three officers who witnessed the incident testified Northrup was standing in the middle of the garage laneway with his hands up when he was run over.
Prosecutors allege Zameer caused Northrup’s death by making a series of manoeuvres with his car while officers were nearby, but the defence says it was an accident and neither Zameer nor his wife knew the pair – who were in plain clothes – were officers.
Court has heard Northrup and his partner were in the garage to investigate a stabbing.
Zameer, who was with his pregnant wife and their young son at the time, was not involved in the stabbing.
https://toronto.ctvnews.ca/man-accu...ed-to-testify-at-murder-trial-today-1.6837346
Intent to assault - and thus murder - is wearing thin because the dead cop was not visible when he was run over. Hence no deliberate intent to injure.
Dangerous driving or criminal negligence is the fallback for the Crown.
Should have persevered with that GED. You could have parlayed that into a shift supervisor job at Staples and taken home $40k a year, instead of living in your mom's basement and telling everyone that you're a multi millionaire.
Well the closing arguments were made today.
Crown still maintains that witness officer's with same story of officer standing directly in front of BMW was holding his arms out with his badge in his hand, and that the driver intentionally drove over the offier, back up over him and then drove over him again.
Three directly involved officers stories follaw the same story line but contradict each others details, both the Police and defence forensic accident experts, the physical evidence, the videos and the witness satements of others who drove through the parking barriers because they thought a car jacking was going down. Oh and all the police considered the driver a "witness" yet one punched the handcuffed man, prone on the concrete floor, in the face to get him to stand up. Simply to comply with a lawful order. While saying to the effect: 'Do you realize you just ran over a cop, that's my partner's blood and guts on your car?!?!?!
Uhhhhh.. yeah.
Defence says the preganant wife and husband feared the scruffy big fat slob (not pejorative, simply accurately describing what he looked like in the pictures) old clothes police officer and his encampment residend-esque looking female partner banging on their windows were going to rob, carjack, attack or even kill these brown, hijab wearing family similar to one ran over a month earlier in a hate crime. And they simply tried to escape. In the process, the big officer fell down beside the BMW, and was subsequently run over while the BMW driver tried to evade theunmarked minivan trying to block in the car. The car containing "witnesses".
Anyone wanna bet the accused is aquitted withing the first day of jury deliberations?
And that the three cops who seem to have conspired to tell their own story will not face any scrutiny and will continue to "serve and protect" us out on the streets of Toronto. Until the next time?
MOST cops are good people and fine law abiding peace officers. And they will risk their lives to protect us.. and even our dogs. Liek the hero below!
Notice even the dog''s own loving owner can;t take the heats and smoke. But the hero cop literally rescues Hank from a burning car!
What a good and decent human being and heroic peace officer!
Crown still maintains that witness officer's with same story of officer standing directly in front of BMW was holding his arms out with his badge in his hand, and that the driver intentionally drove over the offier, back up over him and then drove over him again.
Three directly involved officers stories follaw the same story line but contradict each others details, both the Police and defence forensic accident experts, the physical evidence, the videos and the witness satements of others who drove through the parking barriers because they thought a car jacking was going down. Oh and all the police considered the driver a "witness" yet one punched the handcuffed man, prone on the concrete floor, in the face to get him to stand up. Simply to comply with a lawful order. While saying to the effect: 'Do you realize you just ran over a cop, that's my partner's blood and guts on your car?!?!?!
Uhhhhh.. yeah.
Defence says the preganant wife and husband feared the scruffy big fat slob (not pejorative, simply accurately describing what he looked like in the pictures) old clothes police officer and his encampment residend-esque looking female partner banging on their windows were going to rob, carjack, attack or even kill these brown, hijab wearing family similar to one ran over a month earlier in a hate crime. And they simply tried to escape. In the process, the big officer fell down beside the BMW, and was subsequently run over while the BMW driver tried to evade theunmarked minivan trying to block in the car. The car containing "witnesses".
Anyone wanna bet the accused is aquitted withing the first day of jury deliberations?
And that the three cops who seem to have conspired to tell their own story will not face any scrutiny and will continue to "serve and protect" us out on the streets of Toronto. Until the next time?
MOST cops are good people and fine law abiding peace officers. And they will risk their lives to protect us.. and even our dogs. Liek the hero below!
Notice even the dog''s own loving owner can;t take the heats and smoke. But the hero cop literally rescues Hank from a burning car!
What a good and decent human being and heroic peace officer!
Now that they jury has begun deliberations, we learn what they weren't told .
When you read this article it should make your blood boil that Mr. Zameer was even charged. And that the Crowns still continued despite putting these three lying cops on the stand... and continuing to prosecute the case. And the Judge had "heated exchanges" with the Prosecutors over all of this.
Now I know why I was so confused by the testimony of the three officers and how it simply couldn't makes sense with the physical evidence. Never mind why would this slight, mild mannered acoountant out with his pregnant wife and little boy deliberately repeatedly run over an identifiable police officer... nor why he would flee police in the first place. He had done nothing wrong until they rushed his car and started pounding on his windows!
Please read the entire article... I only snipped a few bits out of it below for those who are too lazy to read it all before spouting off about how the police are always right etc...
AND THE LEAD CROWN PROSECUTOR OVERSEES ONE OF THE FOUR TORONTO CROWN ATTORNEY'S OFFICES!!!!!!
All of you Law and Order right wing types who think the police can do no werong. this proves you don't ahve to do anything wrong to find yourself facing a couple undercover vagrant looking cops banging on your car door at midnight in an underground parking garage... and ending up being railroaded into spending hundreds of thousands of dollars in oegal costs. Thats if you can affor it and don't end up spendin ght enext 25 years in prison as a cop killer.
Seriously... think that through. Imagine finding yourself in that position. Our Toronto Police and Crown Attorney's office have proven it can happen to anyone just out enjoying Canada Day with their family...
What the jury didn’t hear at the murder trial of Umar Zameer
As Umar Zameer’s jury retired to begin its deliberations on Thursday, it did so without knowledge of several heated courtroom exchanges between the judge and prosecution.
www.thestar.com
...What the judge found perplexing was that surveillance video and two experts had undermined the testimony of three police witnesses who claimed Zameer drove directly at Northrup as he stood in a laneway with his arms raised. Relying on the officers’ evidence to convict Zameer of murder was “problematic,” “inconsistent” and based on “speculation,”
When a police officer is killed in the line of duty, it is treated as first-degree murder under the Criminal Code, but to convict Zameer, the Crown still had to show he knew Northrup was a police officer wearing plainclothes, and that he acted with the intent to cause bodily harm that could cause death or was reckless as to whether death ensued.
But what about the “elephant in the room,” Molloy asked prosecutors a few weeks into the trial, with the jury absent. “What motive would this person have to deliberately run down a police officer in front of three other police officers when he has done nothing wrong?”
That gave the Crown few avenues to argue Zameer ran Northrup over deliberately, flummoxing the judge.
“Three officers swore to that … is the Crown going to stick to that position,” she challenged the prosecution. “All the experts say he can’t be seen … there’s just no evidence at all.”
that two experts — one a Toronto police employee called by the prosecution — contradicted the eyewitness accounts of Northrup’s colleagues, who testified Zameer ran over Northrup as he stood in front of his BMW with his arms raised.
The traffic collision reconstructionists both agreed Zameer was reversing when he knocked Northrup to the ground and that the tall, 300-pound officer remained there when Zameer drove forward over him, unable to see the ground in front of his BMW. (During her final instructions Thursday, Molloy told the jury it was “rare” for two experts to agree.)
Both experts told the jury that what the officers said had happened wasn’t possible based on video surveillance footage showing Northrup was neither standing up bracing for impact nor in the laneway where the officers said he was hit.
She even appeared to mock the prosecution for its inability to pinpoint how the 55-year-old officer’s body ended up where it did. “Was he levitated somehow?” the judge sarcastically asked Cantlon as Simone sat nearby with her face buried in her hands.
“How can you suggest to the jury that they should find Zameer guilty, when their theory is contradicted and has no support in the evidence?”
Earlier this week, as Molloy and the lawyers held final discussions on those instructions without the jury present, the judge revisited her “problem” with the Crown’s case for first-degree murder.
The theory relies on three officers testifying Northrup was standing in front of the vehicle with his arms raised and saying “Stop, police!” before a man with no criminal background made a choice to deliberately run him down.
“Didn’t happen,” the judge said.
“Can’t imagine the jury finding that that happened,” she continued. “That’s the problem with the murder charge.”
“I understand, your honour,” Simone responded. “That’s the evidence.”
“The evidence is what the evidence is,” the judge said as the lawyers prepared to pack up. “The unfortunate thing is that we’ve spent all this time talking about murder.”
When you read this article it should make your blood boil that Mr. Zameer was even charged. And that the Crowns still continued despite putting these three lying cops on the stand... and continuing to prosecute the case. And the Judge had "heated exchanges" with the Prosecutors over all of this.
Now I know why I was so confused by the testimony of the three officers and how it simply couldn't makes sense with the physical evidence. Never mind why would this slight, mild mannered acoountant out with his pregnant wife and little boy deliberately repeatedly run over an identifiable police officer... nor why he would flee police in the first place. He had done nothing wrong until they rushed his car and started pounding on his windows!
Please read the entire article... I only snipped a few bits out of it below for those who are too lazy to read it all before spouting off about how the police are always right etc...
AND THE LEAD CROWN PROSECUTOR OVERSEES ONE OF THE FOUR TORONTO CROWN ATTORNEY'S OFFICES!!!!!!
All of you Law and Order right wing types who think the police can do no werong. this proves you don't ahve to do anything wrong to find yourself facing a couple undercover vagrant looking cops banging on your car door at midnight in an underground parking garage... and ending up being railroaded into spending hundreds of thousands of dollars in oegal costs. Thats if you can affor it and don't end up spendin ght enext 25 years in prison as a cop killer.
Seriously... think that through. Imagine finding yourself in that position. Our Toronto Police and Crown Attorney's office have proven it can happen to anyone just out enjoying Canada Day with their family...
What the jury didn’t hear at the murder trial of Umar Zameer
As Umar Zameer’s jury retired to begin its deliberations on Thursday, it did so without knowledge of several heated courtroom exchanges between the judge and prosecution.
‘What motive would this person have?’ What the jury didn’t hear at the murder trial of Umar Zameer
As Umar Zameer’s jury retired to begin its deliberations on Thursday, it did so without knowledge of several heated courtroom exchanges between the judge and prosecution.
...What the judge found perplexing was that surveillance video and two experts had undermined the testimony of three police witnesses who claimed Zameer drove directly at Northrup as he stood in a laneway with his arms raised. Relying on the officers’ evidence to convict Zameer of murder was “problematic,” “inconsistent” and based on “speculation,”
When a police officer is killed in the line of duty, it is treated as first-degree murder under the Criminal Code, but to convict Zameer, the Crown still had to show he knew Northrup was a police officer wearing plainclothes, and that he acted with the intent to cause bodily harm that could cause death or was reckless as to whether death ensued.
But what about the “elephant in the room,” Molloy asked prosecutors a few weeks into the trial, with the jury absent. “What motive would this person have to deliberately run down a police officer in front of three other police officers when he has done nothing wrong?”
That gave the Crown few avenues to argue Zameer ran Northrup over deliberately, flummoxing the judge.
“Three officers swore to that … is the Crown going to stick to that position,” she challenged the prosecution. “All the experts say he can’t be seen … there’s just no evidence at all.”
that two experts — one a Toronto police employee called by the prosecution — contradicted the eyewitness accounts of Northrup’s colleagues, who testified Zameer ran over Northrup as he stood in front of his BMW with his arms raised.
The traffic collision reconstructionists both agreed Zameer was reversing when he knocked Northrup to the ground and that the tall, 300-pound officer remained there when Zameer drove forward over him, unable to see the ground in front of his BMW. (During her final instructions Thursday, Molloy told the jury it was “rare” for two experts to agree.)
Both experts told the jury that what the officers said had happened wasn’t possible based on video surveillance footage showing Northrup was neither standing up bracing for impact nor in the laneway where the officers said he was hit.
She even appeared to mock the prosecution for its inability to pinpoint how the 55-year-old officer’s body ended up where it did. “Was he levitated somehow?” the judge sarcastically asked Cantlon as Simone sat nearby with her face buried in her hands.
“How can you suggest to the jury that they should find Zameer guilty, when their theory is contradicted and has no support in the evidence?”
Earlier this week, as Molloy and the lawyers held final discussions on those instructions without the jury present, the judge revisited her “problem” with the Crown’s case for first-degree murder.
The theory relies on three officers testifying Northrup was standing in front of the vehicle with his arms raised and saying “Stop, police!” before a man with no criminal background made a choice to deliberately run him down.
“Didn’t happen,” the judge said.
“Can’t imagine the jury finding that that happened,” she continued. “That’s the problem with the murder charge.”
“I understand, your honour,” Simone responded. “That’s the evidence.”
“The evidence is what the evidence is,” the judge said as the lawyers prepared to pack up. “The unfortunate thing is that we’ve spent all this time talking about murder.”
Your, and other's insitincts were right.
And the Toronto Police Chief knew this when he lied to the citizens of Toronto. And the Crown knew it when he decided to prosecute the case despite the evidence and knowing he was going to rely on, if not outright suborning perjury to try to convict a man of FIRST DEGREE MURDER that was simply fearing and fleeing for his life and that of his family.
Shameful.
Last edited:
Fallback? What bothers me, my friend, is that. you continue to stick to your premise that the accused acted wrongfully simply because police officer lost his life. The evidence is much more supportive of the presumption that the police officers acted wrongfully, and as a result, one of them lost their lives.
Same hero bias applies to pilots.
Almost all airplane crashes are a direct result of the pilot making a series of poor decisions in pursuit of completing the flight. Not even so much pilot 'error' as such. It's not that they flipped the wrong switch or didn't deftly use the stick and rudder skilfully. They put themselves into bad situations and positions that escalated out of control by making bad, off the books decisions and actions.
Yet, the first thing the media and public mentions is the probability of mechanical failure.
It is my considered opinion that these cops were hot to find the brown man with a beard and were frantically running around looking fora suspect. When they saw Zameer, they rushed his car. And not wanting to tip off the suspect perhaps causing his to get a head start on fleeing, did not immediately (if ever) identify themselves as police officers and started banging on the BMW windows and yelling with the typical cop "GET OUT OF THE CAR, GET OUT OF THE CAR.. NOW!!! GET OUT OF THE CAR!!!!"
That aggressive overwhelming storming raid approach and the subsequent lizard brain instinctive (fight or) flight response is what got Officer Northrup killed. IMO.
Hopefully, other policemen learn this lesson rather than thinking their brother was run over deliberately.
Hopefully its jury nullification, and if there is enough evidence of the cops lying a lawsuit to recover court costs.
If anyone hears of a fundraiser let me know. I think $100 bucks is warranted to this family.
If anyone hears of a fundraiser let me know. I think $100 bucks is warranted to this family.
Clearly the cops are lying which doesn't reflect well on the TPS as a whole
