Let's Talk about the Calgary Police Service

[Oling_Roachinen]

Assault is laughable. But a cop being a dick because he's a dick is the exact #### that the CPS needs to fix. There was no need to do anything, so going out of his way to be a dick is childish and is nothing but "respect my authority!!"

[Kjesse]

Originally Posted by WhiteTiger

... At any rate, most folks, like me, who don't understand statistics, tend to find fault in the poll size...

Consider this.

[jayswin]

Originally Posted by MrMastodonFarm

Good on the officer at the end who asked questions respectfully and dealt with it like a trained professional.

I respect that he was decent and asked politely, but he was definitely looking to figure out who he was and what his motives are, not that that takes away from his professionalism. But I kind of laughed as you could hear the officer's voice go up a few octaves when he heard crackmacs.

He was saying "OH WOW, yeah I've seen your stuff, love it" but behind that you could sense "Oh ****, guy with the biggest social media presence in Calgary with regards to crime and police just got my fellow officer being a needless prick to a citizen during a public approval crisis".

[MrMastodonFarm]

Originally Posted by Flames_Gimp

you're complaining about shining a flashlight for 30 seconds? really?

Yeah, hope that isn't a problem for you?

It's petty and unbecoming of an officer. The 2nd officer dealt with it 100% better. Like jayswin said they probably bought thought the same about the camera operator but one went about it as an adult while one acted like a tired hungry baby.

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally Posted by Flames_Gimp

you're complaining about shining a flashlight for 30 seconds? really?
and someone asked if that could be assault? lmao

Why was he doing it?

I mean sure, it's not a big deal, and certainly not an assault, but if you have an explanation for his actions other than "being a dick", I'd be interested in hearing that.

[calgaryblood]

Cops flashlights are no joke, they're very bright. They can temporarily blind you if shined right into your eyes.

I wonder what would happen if the guy had a flashlight and put it into the cops eyes. Guarantee you it would have ended up in an arrest.

[GordonBlue]

Originally Posted by calgaryblood

I wonder what would happen if the guy had a flashlight and put it into the cops eyes. Guarantee you it would have ended up in an arrest.

and rightfully so. shine a light in a cops eyes during a situation and you're impeding him from doing his job and potentially harming public safety.

[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by RougeUnderoos

Why was he doing it?

I mean sure, it's not a big deal, and certainly not an assault, but if you have an explanation for his actions other than "being a dick", I'd be interested in hearing that.

Perhaps the cop didn't like the idea of one citizen filming another citizen in less than an ideal situation. Perhaps, the cop felt that the individual being arrested was losing enough of his dignity and filming would only compound/increase that loss of dignity.

I don't know and don't have a dog in this fight, but I wonder if that is a possible reason.

[Oling_Roachinen]

Originally Posted by undercoverbrother

Perhaps the cop didn't like the idea of one citizen filming another citizen in less than an ideal situation. Perhaps, the cop felt that the individual being arrested was losing enough of his dignity and filming would only compound/increase that loss of dignity.

I don't know and don't have a dog in this fight, but I wonder if that is a possible reason.

Maybe the cop just wanted to get a couple extra blows on the perp while he was down?

It doesn't really matter, the individual has a legal right to film. Especially as he wasn't at all intrusive, escalating the situation or impeding anything. The cop should have shut up and done his job and not mess with a law abiding citizen...but unfortunately that's too much to ask for from the CPS today.

[MBates]

This behavior sadly is good evidence of why CPS is years away from having body-worn cameras in spite of spending millions of Calgarians' money on such equipment that was supposed to be operational on every single CPS officer for months now:

http://www.calgarysun.com/2016/10/18...e-in-the-field

Body worm cameras are in massive routine use throughout the world of policing but somehow it is an impossible technological mystery that CPS just cannot crack?

The petulant child with the flashlight and way too many of his union buddies are ensuring video footage of their conduct is as limited as possible. There is no reason why a good police officer would ever want that.

And speaking of evidence, this officer was very deliberately preventing a witness from seeing what was happening and from having an objective record of a police use of force incident. That is not an assault as was asked in a previous post, but far worse in my view it could amount to obstruction of justice:

http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/a...ction-139.html

[Reaper]

I kind of wish Crack Macs would go full Ray Mac on us and film in glorious HD. Ray Mac's channel is like a car crash.

Every video a stunning masterpiece.

[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by Oling_Roachinen

Maybe the cop just wanted to get a couple extra blows on the perp while he was down?

It doesn't really matter, the individual has a legal right to film. Especially as he wasn't at all intrusive, escalating the situation or impeding anything. The cop should have shut up and done his job and not mess with a law abiding citizen...but unfortunately that's too much to ask for from the CPS today.

He asked for an alternative, and I gave one.

[MBates]

Is it really too much for us to expect CPS to, you know, follow the law? And get with the program of modern day policing?

I mean, here is a Calgary judge, former Chief Crown Prosecutor, almost 15 years ago telling the CPS it is legal for a citizen to not only watch them but attempt to get them not to use excessive force on another citizen:

https://www.canlii.org/en/ab/abpc/do...?resultIndex=1

The accused was entitled to stand on a public sidewalk and observe. He was entitled to be concerned with what he perceived as police brutality. He was also entitled to attempt to curb the excessive force he believed Constable McKenzie was exerting on Mr. Meroda. In my view, if the accused’s actions are interfering with Constable Kraushaar’s providing cover and distracting her attention, then anybody on the sidewalk doing anything could be said to be interfering if it caused her to divert her attention. I do not find these actions amount to an obstruction.

The attempt to curb excessive force in this case was the bystander trying to convince the police they were being recorded. (And yes, 'the accused' was doing that, because getting charged with a crime and being prosecuted is what you can expect in Calgary for daring to be a witness to police beating the hell out of someone).

So here's an idea, when this case hits its actual 15th anniversary, THEN can the CPS start following the law and stop trying to prevent people from lawfully scrutinizing their conduct?!?

Why are people even pretending like there was any possible legitimate basis for the officer to try to blind the citizen observer and prevent evidence from being secured?

Ask yourself this question...if this officer is prepared to behave like this when there was actually nothing happening illegal that needed to be covered up, then what is he prepared to do to prevent you from catching him and his partner(s) actually illegally beating a suspect?

Not to mention, it is every officer's statutory duty under the Police Act to not do what he did:

38(1) Every police officer is a peace officer and has the authority, responsibility and duty
(a) to perform all duties that are necessary
(i) to carry out the police officer’s functions as a peace officer,
(ii) to encourage and assist the community in preventing crime,
(iii) to encourage and foster a co‑operative relationship between the police service and the members of the community

[Locke]

We really dont want to be slipping into the territory of American policing which seems to be the direction they're heading, once you lose that trust with the Citizens its really hard to get back.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by undercoverbrother

Perhaps the cop didn't like the idea of one citizen filming another citizen in less than an ideal situation. Perhaps, the cop felt that the individual being arrested was losing enough of his dignity and filming would only compound/increase that loss of dignity.

Glad I'm not the only one questioning the decency of bystanders filming drunks flailing around on the ground. I mean, would everyone here be defending the guy doing the filming if there were no cops there, and he was just filming an extremely inebriated person struggling to stand up? Maybe put it up on Youtube later for the yuks?

[Oling_Roachinen]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

Glad I'm not the only one questioning the decency of bystanders filming drunks flailing around on the ground. I mean, would everyone here be defending the guy doing the filming if there were no cops there, and he was just filming an extremely inebriated person struggling to stand up? Maybe put it up on Youtube later for the yuks?

Who gives a #### what type of person doing the filming is? He's legally entitled to do so. Being impeded by a person whose sole job is to enforce the law is an extreme problem. We're not talking about the recorder, but the police. And why would you assume he would be filming if not for the police presence? If you haven't noticed, the CPS has been in trouble for a couple issues regarding rough handling in situations like this. The guy could just as easily be filming for the rights of the man on the ground as opposed to getting his jollies off..

And he was going to get harassed by the officer at the end for, again, doing something he was legally entitled to do, except the officer happened to recognize him. How could you see anything different as huge failure of the officers in that video. I bet one of them was Joe. I kid

[MrMastodonFarm]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

Glad I'm not the only one questioning the decency of bystanders filming drunks flailing around on the ground.

Well that's not what happened. He was filming a Police arrest. If you watch the video he gives it context as well, states what happened before he started filming. At no point is he just filming a drunk "flailing around on the ground." It's your assumption the guy is drunk. At no point in the video does he say he was drunk or that's why he was kicked off of the train. Maybe you should check your own decency?

More context is the cameraman is Crackmacs, downtown dweller that films and records plenty of random stuff in the core. Including accidents, ctrain incidents (like this) etc etc. He's not out there to make cops look bad so I question anyones issue with this. Cameras are out there, we're being filmed, Police all over the world have body cameras to protect citizens and themselves. An officer should have zero problem with this.

Crackmacs didn't interfere with anything, he didn't leap in front of the police trying to get a shot of the "drunks" face, he was standing back being respectful recording the incident, that's all.

Pretty sure if buddy had a knife or took a punch at any of the cops they'd be thankful for the video.

I mean, would everyone here be defending the guy doing the filming if there were no cops there, and he was just filming an extremely inebriated person struggling to stand up? Maybe put it up on Youtube later for the yuks?[

Well that's not what's happening either, so why don't we focus on the actual event and not one of your patented Straw men.

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

Glad I'm not the only one questioning the decency of bystanders filming drunks flailing around on the ground. I mean, would everyone here be defending the guy doing the filming if there were no cops there, and he was just filming an extremely inebriated person struggling to stand up? Maybe put it up on Youtube later for the yuks?

That's quite the hypothetical that has nothing to do what was actually happening. That's the beauty of video -- you can see what happened and don't have to make up another situation and compare it to that.

But to answer your question, nobody would be defending the guy if he was was just filming drunks for yuks.

[MillerTime GFG]

Plot twist: It was Joe shining that flashlight.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by MillerTime GFG

Plot twist: It was Joe shining that flashlight.

Seems like it would fit the bill.