Quote:
Originally Posted by underGRADFlame
No mention in the about the F.O.B connections directly linked with that citizen. Not saying the actions there were appropriate in that incident, but don't act like 1 incident from 5 years ago is indicative of a systemic problem with illegal searches.
|
?????
Paragraph 21. Seriously. Not only did I link to the case as published online but I literally quoted this paragraph:
Quote:
|
[21] Sgt. Ellement’s justification of the search because of who he was dealing with, rings hollow and is worrisome. Conducting an unlawful search (which this would clearly have been), is not made legal because of who the accused is. At best, the accused was simply the father of two men believed by Sgt. Ellement to be FOB gang members. The accused had only one conviction for driving over the legal limit. At worst, according to the accused, he was a person Sgt. Ellement had some degree of animosity towards because of past confrontations with him and someone whom Sgt. Ellement was actively engaged in harassing. An additional worry is that Sgt. Ellement was hoping or expecting to find incriminating evidence of some sort in the accused’s motor vehicle and manufactured an excuse to look.
|
Which is kind of the point here. You are not supposed to be subjected to illegal searches and harassment by police because you have a family member that is involved in criminal activity. And yet, there it is...
As for the issue of systemic problems, I do not have time to gather up all of the examples I can find right now, but the Calgary Police Service has some serious notoriety within the criminal justice system that the general public appears to be oblivious of. One of the seminal cases on excessive use of force by police in Canada is courtesy of the CPS:
http://www.canlii.org/en/ab/abca/doc...005abca81.html
Quote:
|
Darryl Crampton stood in his kitchen making a sandwich for lunch. As he retrieved a pickle from a jar with a plastic-handled steak knife, members of the Calgary Police Service tactical unit burst through his unlocked screen door. Constable Anthony Manning approached Mr. Crampton, pointing an M-16 assault rifle and wearing 30 pounds of body armour. He announced the police had a search warrant, and ordered Mr. Crampton to drop the steak knife and get to the floor. Stunned, Mr. Crampton hesitated for a short period before complying. He dropped the knife and, as he began to kneel on the ground, Cst. Manning assisted him in his descent. The impact with the floor was sufficient to knock the wind out of Mr. Crampton. Cst. Manning then pinned Mr. Crampton to the floor by kneeling on his back. Cst. Manning maintained physical control of Mr. Crampton for approximately 10 minutes while the police searched the residence for a marijuana grow operation. Neither drugs nor weapons were found. Mr. Crampton, who was lying face down on the kitchen floor with his hands handcuffed behind his back, was then asked to identify himself. He was not the individual named in the warrant as the occupant of the residence. The police had faulty intelligence and the wrong suspect. They departed, leaving Mr. Crampton with a partially-constructed pickle sandwich stuck to the front of his shirt, wet pants in which he had relieved himself, a bruised jaw, a rotator-cuff injury and five cracked ribs.
|