Calgary Police Officer Killed During New Years Traffic Stop

[Captain Otto]

Let's also be honest, certain posters in this thread have made it abundantly clear what they think of cops - Sliver and Pepsi in particular.

If it wasn't a cop who died but some "innocent" father of 4, they'd be outraged.

So if you go at their replies with this in mind, it all makes sense.

Edit: So remorseful it took him a whole day to turn himself in and was actively trying to leave the city. So remorseful, he denied culpability until his trial. So remorseful he already had outstanding warrants. Ya, he was on the right path.

[Maritime Q-Scout]

Originally Posted by Spurs

What are you talking about, nobody said or even implied any of this.

Except right here:

Originally Posted by Spurs

But it isn't the actions of another. He chose to get in the car, chose to hang with that person, chose to not try to stop him. Like I said for me the best solution in to have never got in the car in the first place, why is that ignored as a option?

But yes once he chose to drive in a car with a person without a license and will run from the cops when the cop is holding onto the car there is no guarantee of how to stop that driver once he begins driving away.

[Maritime Q-Scout]

Originally Posted by Captain Otto

Let's also be honest, certain posters in this thread have made it abundantly clear what they think of cops - Sliver and Pepsi in particular.

If it wasn't a cop who died but some "innocent" father of 4, they'd be outraged.

So if you go at their replies with this in mind, it all makes sense.

Edit: So remorseful it took him a whole day to turn himself in and was actively trying to leave the city. So remorseful, he denied culpability until his trial. So remorseful he already had outstanding warrants. Ya, he was on the right path.

According to the post of MBates he turned himself in the same day.

I'd also be curious what time of warrant? Witness warrant? Endorced? Unendordced? Were they being held?

There is a range of seriousness of warrants just as there is with charges.

Level of involvement and culpability varies. Sentencing us an art not a science. No two cases are alike.

You have to take all factors into consideration, both aggravating and mitigating.

In the case at hand, a police officer was killed in the line of duty. That's an incredibly aggravating factor, getting in the car as a passenger is not.

The passenger was, according to the judge "he was "at no time the direct operator" of the SUV and his "movements were reactionary.""

That's not the threshold for murder.

[Captain Otto]

Originally Posted by Maritime Q-Scout

According to the post of MBates he turned himself in the same day.



I'd also be curious what time of warrant? Witness warrant? Endorced? Unendordced? Were they being held?



There is a range of seriousness of warrants just as there is with charges.



Level of involvement and culpability varies. Sentencing us an art not a science. No two cases are alike.



You have to take all factors into consideration, both aggravating and mitigating.



In the case at hand, a police officer was killed in the line of duty. That's an incredibly aggravating factor, getting in the car as a passenger is not.



The passenger was, according to the judge "he was "at no time the direct operator" of the SUV and his "movements were reactionary.""



That's not the threshold for murder.

He turned himself in because he had to. But he had no intention of doing so. His family was actively trying to hide him.

Warrants. There were 4 criminal warrants - 1 for assault and 3 fail to comply. Not witness or anything else. Whether it was endorsed or not makes zero difference as he likely doesn't know the difference. Either way, endorsed or unendorsed, you're getting arrested. Doesn't seem like a guy on the right track. The FTC's are pretty telling.

I mean I can't believe you are making excuses. He admitted he has been with the wrong crowd since 2017. Yet day after day, he made the same decision to both affiliate AND participate in whatever that wrong crowd was doing. On New Year's eve, there was a consequence to that (those) decisions. In fact, during the traffic stop:

"As two officers were at the passenger side door dealing with Abdulrahman, he allegedly began shouting for his younger friend to take off."

Seems like he was well on his way to be a productive member of society.

Sent from my Pixel 6 Pro using Tapatalk

[Sliver]

Originally Posted by Captain Otto

Let's also be honest, certain posters in this thread have made it abundantly clear what they think of cops - Sliver and Pepsi in particular.

If it wasn't a cop who died but some "innocent" father of 4, they'd be outraged.

So if you go at their replies with this in mind, it all makes sense.

Edit: So remorseful it took him a whole day to turn himself in and was actively trying to leave the city. So remorseful, he denied culpability until his trial. So remorseful he already had outstanding warrants. Ya, he was on the right path.

Grow a brain.

If this guy walked up behind the cop and shot him in the back of the head it would be much more cut and dry.

Here's a question for you: did the cop do anything wrong at this stop? Is it procedure to latch onto a fleeing vehicle? That's really what got the cop killed. Had he taken one step back and let the vehicle flee he'd be hanging out at South Centre mall today grabbing a Cinnzeo.

Are the young guys in the car partially responsible? Absolutely. Should they be punished? Yes, and they have.

Did the cop make a terrible split-decision choice that was against procedure and was it part of the reason he died? Yes.

Do other people in other jobs make poor decisions that lead to their deaths in workplace accidents? Yes, all the time. Does that mean I hate them? No, because that would be super stupid. I feel bad for them.

Do I hate cops? Of course not, why would you say such a thing?

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by Captain Otto

Let's also be honest, certain posters in this thread have made it abundantly clear what they think of cops - Sliver and Pepsi in particular.

If it wasn't a cop who died but some "innocent" father of 4, they'd be outraged.

So if you go at their replies with this in mind, it all makes sense.

Edit: So remorseful it took him a whole day to turn himself in and was actively trying to leave the city. So remorseful, he denied culpability until his trial. So remorseful he already had outstanding warrants. Ya, he was on the right path.

You know, because of those on this board who work in law enforcement or work adjacent to it, I’ve actually learned a lot and my perception has definitely changed from where it was even an couple of ago. I’ve done my best to listen and keep an open mind, especially in recognizing the vast difference between police in Calgary and in some areas of the US.

So, I really don’t get why you’re being an #######. I haven’t said anything disrespectful to the police in this conversation, nor have I defended the person who killed the police officer outside of defending the justice system itself, which I thought police officers were part of.

You’re siding with someone who wants the death penalty and a much crueler justice system than the US. I didn’t take you for the type who wanted to kill and abuse criminals, honestly. Had you wrong.

[MBates]

Originally Posted by Captain Otto

He turned himself in because he had to. But he had no intention of doing so. His family was actively trying to hide him.

Warrants. There were 4 criminal warrants - 1 for assault and 3 fail to comply. Not witness or anything else. Whether it was endorsed or not makes zero difference as he likely doesn't know the difference. Either way, endorsed or unendorsed, you're getting arrested. Doesn't seem like a guy on the right track. The FTC's are pretty telling.

I mean I can't believe you are making excuses. He admitted he has been with the wrong crowd since 2017. Yet day after day, he made the same decision to both affiliate AND participate in whatever that wrong crowd was doing. On New Year's eve, there was a consequence to that (those) decisions. In fact, during the traffic stop:

"As two officers were at the passenger side door dealing with Abdulrahman, he allegedly began shouting for his younger friend to take off."

Seems like he was well on his way to be a productive member of society.

Sent from my Pixel 6 Pro using Tapatalk

I mean, if he had a thousand warrants and was hanging out with the worst crowd in the world, but when the traffic stop was conducted he just sat there and said and did nothing he would be guilty of precisely nothing as it related to Sgt. Harnett.

He did, however, do something, including yell at the driver to drive. As a result, he was initially charged with murder, pleaded guilty to manslaughter (being a legal cause of the police officer's death without having intended to cause the police officer to die) and went to prison for it.

A very experienced and conscientious Crown prosecutor sought 8-9 years based on his view of the facts and law. A very experienced Defence lawyer sought 2 years followed by 2 years of probation. The judge ordered 5 years (saying 6 years would have been the sentence but knocking off a year for the guilty plea and other mitigating factors).

What exactly was the level of remorse and was it genuine? I don't know. Everything I am pointing out about this case comes from media reports.

Should his remorse after being partly to blame for the death of a police officer matter? I think it should matter. Our criminal law says it matters. I have heard other homicide victim's family members talk about how it matters to them. Not always of course.

Should him taking genuine steps toward rehabilitation and getting on the 'right track' matter if it took him going to prison after a person's life was taken before he got the message? Again, our law says it matters. I have heard other homicide victim's family members talk about how it matters to them. Not always of course.

I fully appreciate my perspective is shaped by my career experiences. I know your comment was directed at others but I am not sure it is 'making excuses' for people to advocate for a principled and restrained approach to punishment for crimes.

I also, take no issue with people advocating for a more harsh / longer sentences approach.

For those that do, however, I would prefer to see them also do two things:

1. Address the costs and how it assists society to pay for significantly extended incarceration of people at a cost of about $118,000 per year per person; and

https://www.publicsafety.gc.ca/cnt/r...dex-en.aspx#s1

2. Address why they are uncritical of the deplorable manner in which incarceration in Canada systemically ignores internationally recognized standards of care.

https://macleans.ca/news/canada/hous...tem-is-broken/

I raise the first issue because at our current punishment practices our jails and prisons are in disrepair, over crowded and understaffed. If you added 30% to every sentence starting tomorrow, well, let's just be honest...you couldn't. Because apparently nobody wants to pay taxes at a level to properly incarcerate people now, never mind more often and for longer.

I raise the second issue because well, after 20 years of watching us use methods of systemic abuse (including for example solitary confinement to a level recognized internationally as torture, and in Alberta completely ignoring the "Mandela Rules" a Canadian-signed UN treaty setting Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners), I can't help but wonder how we think behaving that way will help offenders learn to respect the law and society when they get out?

Maybe our manner of using incarceration is itself not on the 'right track'? It is at least worthy of debate.


Also, back more to the topic, it is noteworthy that the driver's proceedings have been continuing and after trial he was found guilty of manslaughter as well...but the ruling has been made that he will receive an adult sentence (and the Crown is seeking 11-13 years):

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calga...ence-1.6838455

[Maritime Q-Scout]

Originally Posted by Captain Otto

He turned himself in because he had to. But he had no intention of doing so. His family was actively trying to hide him.

Warrants. There were 4 criminal warrants - 1 for assault and 3 fail to comply. Not witness or anything else. Whether it was endorsed or not makes zero difference as he likely doesn't know the difference. Either way, endorsed or unendorsed, you're getting arrested. Doesn't seem like a guy on the right track. The FTC's are pretty telling.

I mean I can't believe you are making excuses. He admitted he has been with the wrong crowd since 2017. Yet day after day, he made the same decision to both affiliate AND participate in whatever that wrong crowd was doing. On New Year's eve, there was a consequence to that (those) decisions. In fact, during the traffic stop:

"As two officers were at the passenger side door dealing with Abdulrahman, he allegedly began shouting for his younger friend to take off."

Seems like he was well on his way to be a productive member of society.

Sent from my Pixel 6 Pro using Tapatalk

I'm 100% saying he didn't murder anyone in the first degree. Won't apologize for that.

Am I saying he was 100% innocent? Nope.

It's a spectrum. You can be innocent of first degree murder and still a criminal.

[Captain Otto]

Originally Posted by Maritime Q-Scout

I'm 100% saying he didn't murder anyone in the first degree. Won't apologize for that.

Am I saying he was 100% innocent? Nope.

It's a spectrum. You can be innocent of first degree murder and still a criminal.

Apologies. I was not agreeing with Spurs on 1st degree murder or the comment about the death penalty. In fact, at no time did I even respond to him.

More so responding to the mitigating circumstance argument for release. Those circumstances should go either way, no?

As for Silver, you're a piece of #### and you know it. Complete waste of air.

Save me the drama Pepsi, "I didn’t take you for the type who wanted to kill and abuse criminals, honestly. Had you wrong." Good grief.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by Captain Otto

Apologies. I was not agreeing with Spurs on 1st degree murder or the comment about the death penalty. In fact, at no time did I even respond to him.

More so responding to the mitigating circumstance argument for release. Those circumstances should go either way, no?

As for Silver, you're a piece of #### and you know it. Complete waste of air.

Save me the drama Pepsi, "I didn’t take you for the type who wanted to kill and abuse criminals, honestly. Had you wrong." Good grief.

Sorry, it’s “dramatic” to lump you in with someone expressing pretty extreme views on how criminals and the accused should be treated/punished when your only contribution is a drive-by criticism of the people responding to him… ?

What’s “If it wasn't a cop who died but some "innocent" father of 4, they'd be outraged” then? If it’s not dramatic, it’s just a ####ty comment to make in general. It hurt my feelings a bit to be totally honest, but I guess I just feel sad that you carry that stuff around.

There are a few people (MBates, Zulu off the top of my head) who really do an amazing job representing the justice side of things. I can’t say posts like yours help anyone’s reputation, so maybe consider that? There was really no need to make this thread personal and take it that direction.

[Captain Otto]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

Sorry, it’s “dramatic” to lump you in with someone expressing pretty extreme views on how criminals and the accused should be treated/punished when your only contribution is a drive-by criticism of the people responding to him… ?

What’s “If it wasn't a cop who died but some "innocent" father of 4, they'd be outraged” then? If it’s not dramatic, it’s just a ####ty comment to make in general. It hurt my feelings a bit to be totally honest, but I guess I just feel sad that you carry that stuff around.

There are a few people (MBates, Zulu off the top of my head) who really do an amazing job representing the justice side of things. I can’t say posts like yours help anyone’s reputation, so maybe consider that? There was really no need to make this thread personal and take it that direction.

Good. I'm glad it hurt your feelings. Sometimes the things you have said havehurt others but you always take this moral high ground to double down on it.

Not sure what reputation I am trying to uphold. Further, I made a a simple comment about other posters who have, in the past, said some really ####ty things about cops and that clearly colours their opinions on subjects such as this. THAT is the reality.

You seem to do a good job at calling people out on their opinions and belittling them but if someone calls you out? It's, how dare you!!!

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

There just seems to be a bright line in here between the posters who believe the criminal justice system should primarily be a punishment mechanism and those who think rehabilitation of offenders and their subsequent reincorporation into society as the primary goal of that system.

If you're in the former camp, how much jail time is enough punishment for a particular crime seems to be really subjective and is obviously uninformed in nearly all cases - is ten years enough for this crime? How do you know? How do you know what ten years in prison is like, as opposed to two, having never been incarcerated yourself? And why not nine, or eleven?

If you're in the latter camp, long sentences are actually counterproductive, particularly for someone who's 20 years old. If our ultimate goal is for the convicted kid to be able to live a productive life after he's released, it seems like leaving him in jail for too long will actually make that outcome far less likely, both in terms of his development and the likelihood for recidivism as a result of just the culture that would have become ingrained in him by spending age 20-25 (for example) behind bars.

I don't think that punishment and rehabilitation are incompatible, in fact I think some amount of punishment is crucial to rehabilitation as a deterrent. But it also seems like there is a point where it's not just diminishing returns but actively counterproductive.

[Spurs]

Originally Posted by Maritime Q-Scout

Except right here:

That post does none of the things you claim.

[Sliver]

Originally Posted by Captain Otto

Good. I'm glad it hurt your feelings. Sometimes the things you have said havehurt others but you always take this moral high ground to double down on it.

Not sure what reputation I am trying to uphold. Further, I made a a simple comment about other posters who have, in the past, said some really ####ty things about cops and that clearly colours their opinions on subjects such as this. THAT is the reality.

You seem to do a good job at calling people out on their opinions and belittling them but if someone calls you out? It's, how dare you!!!

Sometimes things hurt people's feelings when something untrue has been projected onto them. So, glad you're happy that you made somebody feel bad by misrepresenting their character. Good job, I guess?

Also, did I read that correctly that I'm a "piece of ####" and a "waste of air" because I had the audacity to ask if it was police procedure to physically latch onto a fleeing vehicle? I mean, I noticed you didn't answer the question. I have to assume that it is not, indeed, the correct thing for the officer to do.

So my position is the officer made a terrible mistake that tragically contributed to his workplace death.

The driver of the vehicle is a criminal and is in jail for his roll in the tragedy. Sounds like he'll be sentenced as an adult.

The passenger of the vehicle went to jail and is now in a half-way house.

And because I said those facts I'm a piece of #### and a waste of air (does that mean you think things would be better if I was dead or something? That's a little frightening to be threatened in such a way by a cop.).

I don't know, man. You sound like a terrible judge of situations and kind of a sketchy dude, tbh. And you have a gun and authority over us? Great. Don't agree with you and threats come out? Great.

Maybe read what I said again. And also, if you can find it within yourself to take a breath and answer the questions I asked it would add clarity to this. Who knows? Maybe the officer did the exact right thing by trying to stop a car by jumping in the open window and grabbing the wheel, but it really is out of my area of expertise here.

[Captain Otto]

Originally Posted by Sliver

Sometimes things hurt people's feelings when something untrue has been projected onto them. So, glad you're happy that you made somebody feel bad by misrepresenting their character. Good job, I guess?



Also, did I read that correctly that I'm a "piece of ####" and a "waste of air" because I had the audacity to ask if it was police procedure to physically latch onto a fleeing vehicle? I mean, I noticed you didn't answer the question. I have to assume that it is not, indeed, the correct thing for the officer to do.



So my position is the officer made a terrible mistake that tragically contributed to his workplace death.



The driver of the vehicle is a criminal and is in jail for his roll in the tragedy. Sounds like he'll be sentenced as an adult.



The passenger of the vehicle went to jail and is now in a half-way house.



And because I said those facts I'm a piece of #### and a waste of air (does that mean you think things would be better if I was dead or something? That's a little frightening to be threatened in such a way by a cop.).



I don't know, man. You sound like a terrible judge of situations and kind of a sketchy dude, tbh. And you have a gun and authority over us? Great. Don't agree with you and threats come out? Great.



Maybe read what I said again. And also, if you can find it within yourself to take a breath and answer the questions I asked it would add clarity to this. Who knows? Maybe the officer did the exact right thing by trying to stop a car by jumping in the open window and grabbing the wheel, but it really is out of my area of expertise here.

EDIT

Uggh. I'm editing my response after thinking about it because more venom doesn't really help.


I apologize to you and Pepsi as I let my past interactions and your last posts with you both colour my response.

I still stand where I stand, but you don't deserve those comments. Again, I'm sorry for that.

[Sliver]

Originally Posted by Captain Otto

EDIT

Uggh. I'm editing my response after thinking about it because more venom doesn't really help.


I apologize to you and Pepsi as I let my past interactions and your last posts with you both colour my response.

I still stand where I stand, but you don't deserve those comments. Again, I'm sorry for that.

100% okay, man. Don't even worry. We're good.

[Maritime Q-Scout]

Originally Posted by Captain Otto

More so responding to the mitigating circumstance argument for release. Those circumstances should go either way, no?

I've struggled on how to respond to this, mostly because it's splitting hairs on semantics.

Yes, all factors should be considered both the good and the bad.

Can mitigating factors be used against an accused? Techincally, no. Because if a factor is used against an accused it by definition isn't mitigating, it's aggrivating. But yes, 100% take both aggrivating and mitigatin factors into consideration. Also to be taken into consideration with regard to sentencing is denunication and deterance; as well as similiar sentences in similar situations.

Admittedly, parole isn't something I've overly familar with. But at that point the offender has already been sentenced. Then I would imagine, and MBates might be able to elaborate further, but I would imagine at that point consideration is given to rehabilitation. That said, parole revocation isn't overly difficult and seems to have a faster track to revocation than bail.

[jayswin]

Originally Posted by Captain Otto

EDIT

Uggh. I'm editing my response after thinking about it because more venom doesn't really help.


I apologize to you and Pepsi as I let my past interactions and your last posts with you both colour my response.

I still stand where I stand, but you don't deserve those comments. Again, I'm sorry for that.

I had some words to say to you based on your posts as a cop, but this response is excellent. No worries, honestly, as an officer losing his life is so horrible for a city and police force. It's incredibly emotional as it should be.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by Captain Otto

EDIT

Uggh. I'm editing my response after thinking about it because more venom doesn't really help.


I apologize to you and Pepsi as I let my past interactions and your last posts with you both colour my response.

I still stand where I stand, but you don't deserve those comments. Again, I'm sorry for that.

All good, man. I wasn’t hurt because of the venom (a good barb is always welcome), it just seemed totally unfair and I had previously thought we were cool despite some heated interactions over time. Apologies for my part if you’ve been carrying any of those exchanges with you all this time.

[Mr.Coffee]

One of my issues with the theory of rehabilitation is that it presumes that everyone can be rehabilitated, which I have my doubts. I’m not sure it’s as much about “punishment” as it is about segregating violent and dangerous people from society. For example, I’m not sure child sex offenders can actually be rehabilitated because their sexual preferences are something psychologically hard wired in, and it’s as much as what “normal” people find sexually desirable for themselves as it is something that can just be rehabilitated. Would I prefer a child molesting sex offender moving in next door or in a prison so my kids can go outside and play without me having to worry as much? I know my answer, and honestly? I don’t really care if that desire for certain safety in a neighborhood trumping some child molesting sex offenders’ hopeful chance that rehabilitation works properly for them, might make me look like some kind of bigoted mean or horrible person. Sorry, you broke the law and destroyed peoples lives man. We have lots of people, and we need safe societies.

There are other examples than just the one above, and I recognize the varied level of context and risk factors that go into each unique case and situation, and that certainly some people can be rehabilitated. But I also think it’s certainly fair to take a much more critical eye at how our justice system is performing when you have a criminal with a 50 page rap sheet being wrist slapped in the hopes of rehabilitation only to go on a massive bloody murder spree across central Saskatchewan.

Notwithstanding MBates expert level replies and pragmatic explanations, riddled with legal concepts and excellent theory or thoughts- his last reply on the subject was kind of just (paraphrasing) “hey experts who do this for a career analyzed this and applied their parole expertise and are way more qualified, knowledgeable and experienced to make all such decisions”. And while I do agree with such a stance, I also think it’s important we still be critical of such decisions. Expert level parole board folks and judges and the justice system writ large let a man go last fall who went and murdered several people in central Saskatchewan, did they get that one right? Are these people infallible?

I don’t think there’s a better system, but I do think there could be stricter measures and harsher enforcement via much longer prison terms. If the plan is to rehabilitate, are we sure we are resourcing things properly to do so? And if not, why are we letting people go early then? Can’t we just admit “well we don’t have the resources to properly rehabilitate, so it’s safer to keep these violent people segregated”?

I dunno, this topic just isn’t as black and white as everyone in here is insinuating.