Streetcar shooting: Toronto police officer suspended

[Senator Clay Davis]

Yeah I'm pretty sure he was stopped when he got shot 3 times and the video clearly shows he's on the ground before the next 6 shots hit him. The first three are forgiveable(ish), the next 6 are pretty much impossible to defend. The point is to stop him, and once hes shot and on the ground, is he really a threat at the point? At best you can say this cop was horrificly trained in how to deal with these situations.

[FlamesAddiction]

Does anyone really think he was still a threat when he was laying lifeless on the ground? Heck, there was no reason that the police couldn't have backed off at that point period. Numerous similar situation have been resolved by simply giving the person space until they cool down.

No one is saying the police can't use deadly force, but there still needs to be a standard in place so that privilege isn't abused.

[jar_e]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

No one is saying the police can't use deadly force, but there still needs to be a standard in place so that privilege isn't abused.

There is a standard, its the criminal code, and I'd be shocked if this officer was found guilty of second degree murder or even manslaughter. I am sure there will be public outcry when the officer is found not guilty, but as stated previously in this thread, it is damn near impossible to prove intent in an officer involved shooting (thus negating the second degree murder charge).

[jar_e]

Originally Posted by Senator Clay Davis

Yeah I'm pretty sure he was stopped when he got shot 3 times and the video clearly shows he's on the ground before the next 6 shots hit him. The first three are forgiveable(ish), the next 6 are pretty much impossible to defend. The point is to stop him, and once hes shot and on the ground, is he really a threat at the point? At best you can say this cop was horrificly trained in how to deal with these situations.

Definitely not impossible and I'm sure the defense will attempt to articulate why. Three shots on someone who is adrenaline filled (and who knows what else) may not stop the threat. I watched the surveillance footage and it appears there was still movement after he was shot.

[polak]

Movement = 6 more rounds...

Science.

[jar_e]

Originally Posted by polak

Movement = 6 more rounds...

Science.

I'm not saying its right or wrong, but I'm saying there's a very strong chance he will be found not guilty (for reasons I posted above) and thus, if found not guilty, legally he was in the right.

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by jar_e

There is a standard, its the criminal code, and I'd be shocked if this officer was found guilty of second degree murder or even manslaughter. I am sure there will be public outcry when the officer is found not guilty, but as stated previously in this thread, it is damn near impossible to prove intent in an officer involved shooting (thus negating the second degree murder charge).

Originally Posted by jar_e

Definitely not impossible and I'm sure the defense will attempt to articulate why. Three shots on someone who is adrenaline filled (and who knows what else) may not stop the threat. I watched the surveillance footage and it appears there was still movement after he was shot.

Intent isn't impossible to prove. There is an eyewitness that said the officer threatened to kill him (not stop him, or simply shoot him, but kill him). There is a video in which you can apparently hear it, although it is somewhat muffled. You can still make out some of it. And it will also depend on whether or not anything from his past indicates that he was itchying to use his gun. For the SIU to use this charge, they must have something on him.

And I watched all the videos, and the only movement you see from Yatim after the 1st three shots is his body twitching after the next 6 shots. He certainly wasn't going get up at that point. The "21 foot" guideline is also tricky since it was the officer that was approaching. Are you saying that an officer can just approach someone and say "hey, I'm within 21', now I can shoot him dead"?

[calgarygeologist]

A verdict in the Forcillo trial has been reached and should be released very soon. I'm watching CBC right now and they just mentioned that the jury is being brought into the court room right now.

Edit: Not guilty of second degree and not guilty of manslaughter. Guilty of attempted murder.

[GGG]

That's probably the right verdict as once the officer entered the bus he was at risk.

The problem here is that the police unessessarily escalated the situation by entering the bus. I'm not sure how you fix that.

I would support the family winning a wrongful death suit and an inquiry into whether or not proper police procedures were followed and if they were does something need to be changed

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by GGG

That's probably the right verdict as once the officer entered the bus he was at risk.

The problem here is that the police unessessarily escalated the situation by entering the bus. I'm not sure how you fix that.

I would support the family winning a wrongful death suit and an inquiry into whether or not proper police procedures were followed and if they were does something need to be changed

Technically, the officer never entered the bus. He shot Yatim from outside the door. He did approach closer than he probably needed to though (and closer than other officers). Likely because Yatim has hurling insults at him directly.

Apparently this officer had a rep for being a bit of a bully and I think it is pretty telling that the other officers didn't seem that bothered (although obviously in a trial, they will stand by each other). There is no doubt in my mind that the officer's anger was the biggest contributor.

I can certainly see there being reasonable doubt, but just my own personal opinion is that it was 2nd degree murder.

[Red]

Originally Posted by GGG

That's probably the right verdict as once the officer entered the bus he was at risk.

The problem here is that the police unessessarily escalated the situation by entering the bus. I'm not sure how you fix that.

I would support the family winning a wrongful death suit and an inquiry into whether or not proper police procedures were followed and if they were does something need to be changed

My recollections are muddy right now, but I thought the cops never entered. The cop just blasted him from the street.

[Jimmy Stang]

I haven't been following this very closely, so please forgive this silly but honest question:

How can someone be found guilty of attempted murder when the person was actually killed, yet avoid the actual charge or murder? It seems that his "attempt" was successful.

[Johnny199r]

Originally Posted by Jimmy Stang

I haven't been following this very closely, so please forgive this silly but honest question:

How can someone be found guilty of attempted murder when the person was actually killed, yet avoid the actual charge or murder? It seems that his "attempt" was successful.

The attempt murder change relates to the 2nd volley of shots.

But as a criminal lawyer, I don't understand this verdict. If you attempt to kill someone and are successful, then doesn't it make it murder?

[White Out 403]

Enjoy prison, murderer. Good to know justice is for all sometimes.

[calgarygeologist]

Originally Posted by Resurrection

Enjoy prison, murderer. Good to know justice is for all sometimes.

It sounds like he won't be going to prison any time soon. In the post-verdict press conference from his lawyer it was stated that he will remain free on bail until March at which point the matter will resume and the defence team will be attempting to stay the trial and sentencing.

This will probably drag on for many more months and possibly years.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by Johnny199r

The attempt murder change relates to the 2nd volley of shots.

But as a criminal lawyer, I don't understand this verdict. If you attempt to kill someone and are successful, then doesn't it make it murder?

If the first shots killed him would the 2nd shots be an attempt to kill him???

[GGG]

Originally Posted by Red

My recollections are muddy right now, but I thought the cops never entered. The cop just blasted him from the street.

Yeah looked again he got close enough to put himself at risk. More borderline then I remember it being and no reason for him to be where he was but I understand where the verdict came from

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by GGG

If the first shots killed him would the 2nd shots be an attempt to kill him???

Which then would be impossible, becuase I don't think you can attempt to murder a corpse....It's all rather confusing.

[calgarygeologist]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

Which then would be impossible, becuase I don't think you can attempt to murder a corpse....It's all rather confusing.

CBC had a defence attorney providing commentary all morning and he did confirm that you can attempted murder can be applied if their is intent and the person/victim is deceased.

[afc wimbledon]

Originally Posted by Johnny199r

The attempt murder change relates to the 2nd volley of shots.

But as a criminal lawyer, I don't understand this verdict. If you attempt to kill someone and are successful, then doesn't it make it murder?

I think the idea is the first volley was justified, the kid had a knife etc.
He was shot and subsequently died from the wounds of the first volley. The second shots were not justified, he had fallen down and was no longer a threat but even though the cop was trying to kill him with the unjustified shots it was the first volley that killed him.

Stupid verdict, Should have found him guilty of manslaughter, would have made more sense.