Today Mon Tue
It is forcast to be Partly Cloudy at 11:00 PM EDT on April 20, 2014
Partly Cloudy
9°/6°
It is forcast to be Partly Cloudy at 11:00 PM EDT on April 21, 2014
Partly Cloudy
15°/8°
It is forcast to be Chance of Rain at 11:00 PM EDT on April 22, 2014
Chance of Rain
10°/1°

147 Comments

news

Duly Quoted: Mike McCormack

“We’re disappointed. It’s never good when we have one of our officers charged, especially with a charge like second-degree murder. But we’re a professional group of people and we’ll get through this.”

—McCormack, who is the president of the Toronto Police Association, said this to the Globe earlier today after a court appearance by James Forcillo, the police constable who yesterday was charged with second-degree murder in the shooting death of 18-year-old Sammy Yatim. You can practically hear McCormack’s mind racing while you read this quote. He has to show concern for his officer without belittling the Yatim family’s pain. Does he pull it off, or is there a still a sense that he’s trying to tell us who the real victim is?

Comments

  • Suicide Boi

    Are you suggesting that the streetcar hijacker is the victim?

    • HotDang

      No, that’s not the implication.

      • Jackson Andrew Lewis

        yes yes it is!

    • tyrannosaurus_rek

      More than a suggestion. He’s (until a judge/jury says otherwise) the victim of second degree murder. That’s why his killer was charged.

    • Jackson Andrew Lewis

      yup because remember in the modern woirld the police are the bad guys and the violent scum are victims and heroes! i hate this case the officer is innocent simply due to the circumstances let alone the other reasons!

      • vampchick21

        Please clarify for us all the circumstances and multiple other reasons that make this officer innocent in this case.

        • OgtheDim

          He’s innocent because if he wasn’t videod and recorded, he would have gotten away with it.

          Blame technology.

          • vampchick21

            Damn evil technology!

        • Jackson Andrew Lewis

          well heres the realisic one that people think is the magical solution to a guy with a knife and penis hanging out.

          ever one thinks a taser should have been used. but the reality is that Toronto police are not carrying a stun gun (which fires the prongs) they are carrying a taser that they must use at point blank! now you can say they should have tried but oh wait this very peaceful child had training in knife fighting! so in that case the officer is likely badly wounded if not dead!

          trying to tackle the kid in the confined space same problem….. more than likely leaves an officer hurt if not dead….

          well after 2 scenarios where an officer is more than likely wounded or dead what does that leave the officer left with?

          talking him down wont work as there is training lapse by cities to pay for such training for police. and when they tried to talk to him he just yelled obscenities back…. that leaves any officer with one choice to peal with violent and irrational people their sidearm……. no officer wants to use it but when you are given no choice by limitations thats whats there……. sorry but the cop is not the bad guy the one who pulled out his penis got kicked out of his parents house for drugs and one who pulled a weapon in public is!

          • raindogxx

            Sir, you are not a smart man.

          • vampchick21

            Ok, here’s my suggestion. Try typing that rant out again with proper spelling, grammar and punctuation, drop the sarcasm it’s dripping with. I have to go into a meeting, so you have an hour to clean it up and present your arguments in a constructive manner.

          • OgtheDim

            “talking him down wont work as there is training lapse by cities to pay for such training for police.”

            Umm…no. TPS cops get this training, and use it in this city all the time.

            “and when they tried to talk to him he just yelled obscenities back…. that leaves any officer with one choice to peal with violent and irrational people their sidearm.”

            Yelling obscenities at a cop means you get shot?!?!?!

            No.

            There were choices not used by this cop. You are choosing to ignore the options the cop had…just like he did.

          • the_lemur

            they are carrying a taser that they must use at point blank!
            The range depends on the air cartridge. I highly doubt that LE would be issued Tasers that work only at a range less than that available to civilian Taser owners, or that they are limited to using drive stun mode.

      • blearghhh

        For whatever reason, you and the SIU/Crown don’t have the same view of things. Crown prosecutors will not allow people to be charged unless they believe there’s a reasonable chance of a conviction.

        Generally, police sometimes have to use deadly force, and that’s a burden they bear. Sometimes though, they use it where they shouldn’t, and cops need to be held to a high standard as to how and when they use deadly force. That’s the bargain in our society: We let you have guns, and you promise to only use them when you have to. Because they are held to those high standards, every time a cop shoots anyone, their actions are reviewed by the SIU because cops are supposed to be able to make calm and rational decisions in stressful situations where they may be in danger, so they must be judged on whether the decision to shoot this guy was the right thing or not.

        Cops are not good or bad. They are people. People sometimes do things that are bad for whatever reason, and those reasons are rarely easily parsed out. Not by you, and not by anyone else.

        I’m not going to prejudge whether this guy was absolutely right in shooting Sammy or not, but like I said above, it’s enough on the not side that the Crown prosecutors let the charge be laid. We have long, complicated, expensive trials because it’s not an easy decision. If that process finds that wasn’t justified in shooting, then he should be disciplined. If it finds otherwise, then that’s what happens.

    • Matt Patterson

      I don’t see anyone else who had nine bullets emptied into their already motionless body.

      • OgtheDim

        Point of clarification.

        It was 6 bullets into his downed body….and a taser.

        • the_lemur

          Apparently it’s now 8 bullets to the body and the 9th missed.

  • dsmithhfx

    Professionals who witnessed a murder committed by one of their colleagues would have arrested him on the spot, instead of waiting for the SIU to do their job.

    • https://paul.kishimoto.name/ Paul Kishimoto

      Consider, you’re a professional, and a TPS employee. You’re standing with more than a dozen members of the Toronto Police Association, also TPS employees, and one of them has just escalated a situation through unwarranted, deadly violence.

      You might wonder which of your colleagues are also professionals, and which are more like the shooter. You also wonder if the shooter’s magazine is empty. Maybe the numbers don’t seem so good, so you decide discretion is the better part of valour, and you can do more by helping a SIU investigation than by getting yourself shot.

      • dsmithhfx

        So you’re envisioning a gun battle type of scenario? Ridiculous.

    • OgtheDim

      I don’t think legally they are allowed to arrest him. They can take into custody pending investigation and charges from the SIU.

      • dsmithhfx

        take into custody / arrest / whatever.

  • dsmithhfx

    McCormack is the pres. of the the police union. What would you expect him to say? What has his family got to do with it? Specifics, please.

    • vampchick21

      Someone name McCormack kicked his puppy?

      • OgtheDim

        Do a google search on the family. The most public police family in decades.

  • zamarax

    it’s all a media farce anyways and that poor cop has become the scapegoat for it, second degree murder will never hold up in court and he’ll be found not guilty and walk away hands free – which I actually think is the right thing.

    I bet you the trial will have a media ban placed on it and once is all said and done it will be out of sight / out of mind, but those that thought the cop was wrong and protested will stand a stout that he was ‘charged with murder’.

    • dsmithhfx

      Um… he is charged with murder.

      • zamarax

        exactly to quell the idiots who went out and protested – murder will never stand up in court as they have to prove that his intent was to kill him…while he was on duty…dealing with an armed individual – it’ll never happen. if they were actually serious about punishing the officer they would have gone with manslaughter or something just under (police brutality).

        • dsmithhfx

          “they have to prove that his intent was to kill him”

          Not much doubt there.

          • zamarax

            There is 100% doubt, this was a person on duty who confronted and armed individual, who refused to obey orders, and who already threatened people.

            were the 9 bullets justified? absolutely they were!

          • vampchick21

            Why, in your opinion, taking into account all the various means of taking a suspect into custody who present a variety of levels of danger to police and/or the general public, do you feel that this was the only way they could.

            Again, I present to you, he was isolated on the empty streetcar, no one who had been on it prior to evacuation was injured, he held only a small knife.

            Given that any number of suspects in far more dangerous situations who present far more of a threat to police and/or the general public, who have injured to one degree or another other persons, get subdued and taken into custody alive and well, please present what you believe were the justifications for this that you keep hinting at but refuse to provide.

            Hell, even the Boston Marathon Bomber was taken alive. Injured, but very much alive. But a skinny 18 year old kid with a little knife and a mental breakdown justified 9 bullets?

          • zamarax

            pfft – you are trying to draw an aspect of social responsibility into pure luck.

            the Boston bomber was hit time and time again including in the head and the throat – it was pure luck that he managed to live – by your logic DiMaggio should still be alive because they only shot twice at him…right?

          • vampchick21

            Again you avoid the actual question I ask. I will not repeat it. Clearly you do not know why you are holding the opinion that you do on this. My question stands.

          • zamarax

            uhh are you kidding me? it’s my opinion just as you have yours, and as I stated long ago I feel there was no alternative based on the circumstance.

          • the_lemur

            But you were asserting that your opinion was correct based on the legislation – the circumstances and the definition of the crime are a matter for the court, not the court of personal opinion.

          • zamarax

            not true – I was answering why vampchick21 was suggesting I was avoiding her question.

          • the_lemur

            It’s still murder if he shoots, knowing that he could kill, but does so without necessarily intending to kill. If the aim was to incapacitate or subdue Yatim, the intent may not have been to kill, but it may still constitute culpable homicide.

          • zamarax

            police brutality at best (and I don’t even agree with that), that’s why I said the charge was wrong – it’ll get dismissed, this is very obvious if you understand the criminal code.

          • the_lemur

            The whole point is that the charge meets the criminal code definition of second degree in that it does not meet that of first degree (nor that of manslaughter), assuming that it can be established that Forcillo caused Yatim’s death by whatever means.

          • zamarax

            I completely disagree.

          • the_lemur

            If the intent was not to kill, or there was not a deliberate or planned death, and Forcillo nonetheless killed Yatim whether he knew or it could be shown that he ought to have known that death might have been the result, that still leaves the door open to culpable homicide in the form of manslaughter. Minimum four years to life.

          • zamarax

            Look if he wasn’t an on duty officer at the time of the incident in question then I might agree that second degree murder is plausible for what happened however Forcillo would have likely preferred zero interaction with Yatim if it wasn’t for Yatim’s actions and the fact that Forcillo just happened to be on duty at the time. Same applies for manslaughter and the like.

          • the_lemur

            That makes no sense at all. The fact is that he caused a death whether he intended to or not. What is at issue is his degree of culpability.

          • zamarax

            Or that Police Officers are not bound directly to the same laws we are especially when they are on duty – and rightfully so.

          • the_lemur

            They are bound by the same laws as everyone else, but with certain privileges afforded to them by virtue of their role. A police officer can kill someone who poses a direct and immediate danger, on certain conditions, but that doesn’t mean he can kill someone using that as a pretext and be exculpated just for being a cop.

          • zamarax

            ok – and someone brandishing a knife that has already threatened people does not present a direct and immediate danger?

          • the_lemur

            It does, and I’m not saying that it doesn’t. The guy with the knife presents the conditions I referred to that would make it a legitimate killing (subject to interpretation). It still means that a cop is bound by the laws regarding homicide – not ‘indirectly’ bound but subject to certain considerations.

          • zamarax

            ok – and by Ontario Police Force Training

            http://wpmedia.news.nationalpost.com/2013/07/force2.jpg?w=620&h=952

            Yatim’s actions called for Lethal Force to be used.

          • John Duncan

            Umm… Yatim’s actions (what we know of them from the video at least) pretty clearly fall into the category of “passively resistant” on that infographic. He was on the streetcar, alone, neither moving towards the officers or attempting to escape from them, when shot.

          • OgtheDim

            Threatening while armed is not enough, in Canada, to warrant being killed.

            You might want to watch less Law & Order reruns.

          • zamarax

            under certain circumstances it certainly is, and for an on duty officer it likely is – however I’m not 100% on that.

          • OgtheDim

            If that was true, every person who drew a knife would be shot dead.

            Think it through.

          • zamarax

            not true at all – plenty who have drawn weapons, are confronted by police and are told to drop the weapon actually do…they also live to tell about it.

          • OgtheDim

            The vast majority of people who draw a weapon are not confronted.

            The situation is deescalated.

            Unlike what this cop did.

            Doesn’t get on CP24 so you don’t hear about it.

          • zamarax

            Right, because they drop the weapon and obey orders.

        • vampchick21

          The officer was charged with SECOND DEGREE MURDER.

          The difference:

          First Degree Murder – Planned and deliberate; contracted; committed against an identified peace officer; during a hijack; during a sexual assault; during sexual assault with a weapon; during aggravated sexual assault; during kidnapping and forcible confinement; during hostage taking; committing criminal harassment; during committing a terrorist act; while using explosives in association of a criminal organization; while committing intimidation.

          Second Degree Murder – any murder which is not first degree murder

          Manslaughter – any culpable homicide which is not murder or infanticide

          An argument can be made for laying either SECOND DEGREE or MANSLAUGHTER chargers against the officer. Currently they have laid SECOND DEGREE MURDER. A Jury could very well find him innocent of SECOND DEGREE MURDER, but guilty of MANSLAUGHTER. It all depends on the evidence that will be presented during the court case.

          Personally I think the officer committed manslaughter as opposed to second degree murder.

          But before you go off on one of your now classic little angry rants, I wanted you to understand exactly what you were ranting for and/or against.

          Especially since you never did answer my question earlier as to WHY EXACTLY you feel that the officer(s) were 100% in the right in that situation. You never did answer as to WHY you believe that was literally the ONLY ACCEPTABLE course of action.

          It’s one thing to support police officers in their work, I think the vast majority of us do. But to blindly support is to give a free pass to actions and activities that they should not have.

          • zamarax

            @vampchick21:disqus – you couldn’t be anymore wrong there – this is taken from the Law Society of Upper Canada

            Second-degree murder

            Definition: A deliberate killing carried out without planning that does not fall under any of the categories of first degree murder.

            again meaning that his intent, while unplanned was to make certain that Yatim never breathed another breath.

          • vampchick21

            Ummm…ok. You do realize that the definition you copied/pasted from LSUC is the same definition worded differently from the one I posted? In other words, we just said the exact same thing differently.

            So therefore I was not wrong or incorrect in terms of the definition of Second Degree Murder. I was correct, as are you. BECAUSE THEY ARE SAYING THE SAME DAMN THING.

            We cannot have a proper discussion on this issue when you are constantly telling people they are wrong.

            It also doesn’t help that you continue to avoid answering why you think that the actions of the officers that night was literally the only course of action they could take.

          • zamarax

            Wrong again – your post said

            First Degree Murder – Planned and deliberate;

            Second Degree Murder – any murder which is not first degree murder.

            Again, this is wrong – second degree is still deliberate but without planning.

          • vampchick21

            This is where I bang my head repeatedly against my desk in utter and complete fustration. My six year old stepson has a better level of reading comprehension than you seem to.

            Go back up. Read my post slowly and carefully. See all the various types of murder that fall under First Degree. Then see the simple but correct defintion of Second Degree which is the same as the one you provided BUT WORDED DIFFERENTLY.

            Stop being such a thick headed, stubborn little mule.

          • zamarax

            Far from little and a mule – in fact anybody that does actually read into these comments will realize how inept you are based solely on that when people strongly disagree with you, you go on to taking personal shots at them.

          • vampchick21

            You strongly disagree with the fact that we provided the same defenition of Second Degree Murder worded differently? Or you are just throwing anger out there to see who bites?

          • zamarax

            no – that we disagree on the officers actions so you resort to calling people names.

          • vampchick21

            Only when you fustrate the hell out of me with your pig-headed stubborness. Hell, you can’t even be bothered to go and check the goddamn wording in the bloody criminal code to see that while yes I did pluck it from Wikipedia, THEY FUCKING SOURCED IT FROM THE CRIMINAL CODE AND THE WORDING IS ALMOST IDENTICAL YOU %^&$%*$.

            But no….you have to be right, so right that you’ll argue the most inane things and beat them into the ground until the rest of us get sick and tired of your childish antics and pointless anger.

            I’m done with you like I’m done with that now banned troll. Because until you show yourself otherwise, all you are to me is a troll not worth my energy.

          • zamarax

            more so you get frustrated because you are unwilling to admit you were wrong, terrible debater.

          • the_lemur

            Your concern with ‘wrongness’ relies on the question of intent being involved at all, as a personal opinion, not whether intent is involved in the definition of first vs second-degree murder, which is something that the Criminal Code definition and the Wikipedia entry that cites it both agree on.
            The role of intent in the definition of either type of murder is not a matter of debate or personal opinion.

          • zamarax

            Of course it is a matter of debate – why else would it be going to court? If it wasn’t he would be convicted and sitting in a jail.

          • the_lemur

            You think the charge is not appropriate because intent to kill cannot be shown. The court is not seeking to prove or disprove intent, only whether Forcillo caused Yatim’s death and whether Forcillo, in seeking to subdue or incapacitate Yatim and knowing that he could cause death or injury resuling in death, caused such to occur whether he meant to do so or not.
            It’s a second degree charge because the prosecution is not seeking to establish that the death was planned or deliberate.

          • vampchick21

            OMG. Seriously?>?????? SERIOUSLY?????????????????

            YOu are……Jesus H Christ…you are a complete and utter troll, just spewing rage and anger and insisting only you are right on anything and everything. You give me a migraine and not even Dave Williams did that.

          • zamarax

            I’ve stated nothing more then my opinion on the matter, which is far from being a troll – if this gives you a migraine then so be it.

          • OgtheDim

            Says the guy who use the phrase “to quell the idiots” to begin a point.

            Ur a hypocrite zamarax.
            :

          • zamarax

            ???

          • OgtheDim

            Read your own posts.

          • zamarax

            I have.

          • OgtheDim

            So you disagree that calling somebody idiots is name calling?

          • zamarax

            No, I would agree with that.

          • OgtheDim

            So ur a troll.

            Ignore.

          • zamarax

            incorrect – when did I ever call someone an idiot?

          • the_lemur

            The Criminal Code definition of murder includes
            (b) where a person, meaning to cause death to a human being or meaning to cause him bodily harm that he knows is likely to cause his death, and being reckless whether death ensues or not, by accident or mistake causes death to another human being, notwithstanding that he does not mean to cause death or bodily harm to that human being; or
            (c) where a person, for an unlawful object, does anything that he knows or ought to know is likely to cause death, and thereby causes death to a human being, notwithstanding that he desires to effect his object without causing death or bodily harm to any human being

            IOW, still murder if he knows it could kill but acts without intending to kill.

          • zamarax

            but…you are missing that it was not for an unlawful object; the officer was on duty, Yatim was brandishing a weapon and he refused to obey direct orders…it’s been said time and time again.

          • the_lemur

            If we look at the circumstances in terms of b), it would have to be established that Forcillo was reckless (indifferent to whether the outcome was death) and either accidentally or mistakenly caused death without meaning to cause it.

          • zamarax

            ok – but imo he was far from thoughtless in his actions; more thoughtful.

          • the_lemur

            Well, he presumably put SOME thought into what he was doing, which still suggests intent to do something, not an accidental killing or inadvertently attempted homicide. The case will deal with what he was intending to achieve, not what you thought of his actions..

          • zamarax

            achieve – to an armed individual who refused to obey direct police orders.

          • the_lemur

            What was Forcillo’s mandate in that situation?

          • zamarax

            To Yatim? – drop the weapon.

            By definition for a Toronto PO in regards to their job I’m not certain however I would suspect something along the lines of to protect and assure the safety of all lawful citizens….etc..etc..

          • the_lemur

            No, I mean what was Forcillo expected or required to do? Make him drop the weapon specifically? Subdue him by some means?

          • zamarax

            Per their contracts I would suspect subdue to protect the lawful citizens.

          • the_lemur

            Does subdue encompass kill, or kill only if absolutely necessary?

          • zamarax

            By definition

            Bring (a country or people) under control by force.

            which he did by force.

            Look, you have to know that front line officers are prohibited from carrying tasers.

            So in his position I feel he was entirely correct in his actions – you have a subject, brandishing a knife, unwilling to listen to your direct orders.

          • the_lemur

            That still doesn’t clarify how the TPS or the law defines subdue in this type of situation. What is ‘control’ in this context?
            The only front line personnel permitted to carry Tasers are front line supervisors. Other than that, ETF-type units and hostage rescue. Forcillo called for a Taser, but it was not used until Forcillo had shot Yatim and Yatim was already dead, so I’m not sure what the point of that was.

          • zamarax

            Right, which questions why was it even used? why are we not looking at the other officer who potentially failed to react in a timely manner leaving Forcillo with such a decision – it was a good 26 seconds later that the taser was deployed.

          • zamarax

            But even on that note – the fact that it was deployed suggests to me anyways that Yatim was still attempting to threaten in one form or fashion the officers after getting 9 bullets shot at him.

            Or did both cops band together in that instance to murder someone? come on.

          • the_lemur

            It would be worth looking at the timing of the request for a Taser with respect to the time of the shooting and the coordination of the actions of Forcillo and the actions of whoever had the Taser.

          • zamarax

            ok fair enough – they should also release the autopsy because they are yet to confirm if the bullets actually killed him, lots of people have died from a single taser shot as have from bullets, and on the other side lots of people have survived being shot more times then Sammy Yatim – for all the actual evidence that we have so far the bullets might not even be the reason he died.

          • OgtheDim

            As she copied and pasted from the legislation and you from the Law Society, I think I know which one is going to be top dog here.

          • zamarax

            actually she copied it wikipedia.

          • the_lemur

            No, there is still first degree murder that is not planned or deliberate but which is first degree by other definitions (killing in the course of a kidnapping). There is no second degree murder that can be planned but not deliberate, or deliberate but not planned, that does not actually fit the definition of first degree.

          • the_lemur

            vampchick’s definition is the same as in the Criminal Code of Canada. Are you saying that particular piece of legislation is wrong as well?
            The definition of second-degree murder covers all eventualities of murder that would otherwise be first-degree murder were it not for the difference of intent without planning OR without being deliberate.

          • vampchick21

            At this point he’s just disagreeing for the sake of disagreeing.

          • OgtheDim

            More like hitting over the head lessons.

          • vampchick21

            Excuse me, is this the right room for an argument?

          • the_lemur

            Hmm, Mr the_lemur’s free but he’s a little bit conciliatory.

          • vampchick21

            SHUT YOUR FESTERING GOB, YOU TIT! YOUR TYPE MAKES ME PUKE! YOU VACUOUS TOFFEE-NOSED MALODOROUS PERVERT!!!

          • the_lemur

            Better, better, but: Whaaa!

          • vampchick21

            Allow me to introduce myself. I’m Inspector Fox of the Light Entertainment Police, Comedy Division, Special Flying Squad.

          • the_lemur

            What news flom Prymouth?

          • the_lemur

            You mean the the automatic gainsaying of any statement the other person makes?

          • zamarax

            not at all, there are comments on this thread that I completely agree with.

          • zamarax

            vampchick21 took her definition from wikipedia – word for word – it’s not the definition from the criminal code.

          • the_lemur

            The Wikipedia definition cites the Criminal Code definition by restating/summarizing it. It’s not the exact same wording, but the definition is the same: all murder that is not first-degree (defined by one or more provisions, being the same in the Wikipedia summary as in the CC text) is second-degree murder.

          • zamarax

            but it’s really not – take a look for yourself.

            http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/

          • the_lemur

            You’re citing the entire criminal code? Or just this:
            http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/C-46/page-112.html#s-231
            That defines first- and second-degree murder in terms equivalent to the wording in Wikipedia, which – surprise! – is based on, and which cites, the relevant CC articles.

          • zamarax

            But it does not, go and check for yourself and compare to what is on the wikipedia article.

          • the_lemur

            Let’s compare and contrast to see if they really define murder differently, shall we?
            Criminal Code, s. 222 (5)
            What culpable homicide is:
            Homicide:
            By means of an unlawful act;
            By criminal negligence;
            By causing that human being, by threats or fear of violence or by deception, to do anything that causes his death; or
            By wilfully frightening that human being, in the case of a child or sick person.
            What Wikipedia says:
            Culpable homicide is death caused:
            By means of an unlawful act;
            By criminal negligence;
            By causing that human being, by threats or fear of violence or by deception, to do anything that causes his death; or
            By wilfully frightening that human being, in the case of a child or sick person
            Murder is culpable homicide.
            What is first degree murder?
            (Wikipedia)
            Nature of murder meeting the definition of first degree:
            was planned and deliberate
            was contracted
            was committed against an identified peace officer
            while committing or attempting to commit the hijacking of an aircraft
            while committing or attempting to commit sexual assault
            while committing or attempting to commit sexual assault with a weapon
            while committing or attempting to commit aggravated sexual assault
            while committing or attempting to commit kidnapping and forcible confinement
            during a hostage taking
            while committing criminal harassment
            was committed during terrorist activity
            while using explosives in association with a criminal organization
            while committing intimidation
            (any of these constitute first degree, including if the murder is not planned or deliberate but meets another definition above)
            Second degree murder is all other murder, i.e., including murder not meeting the above definition and not planned or deliberate.

            Criminal Code:
            Irrespective of whether a murder is planned and deliberate on the part of any person, murder is first degree murder in respect of a person when the death is caused by that person while committing or attempting to commit an offence under one of the following sections:
            (a) section 76 (hijacking an aircraft);
            (b) section 271 (sexual assault);
            (c) section 272 (sexual assault with a weapon, threats to a third party or causing bodily harm);
            (d) section 273 (aggravated sexual assault);
            (e) section 279 (kidnapping and forcible confinement); or
            (f) section 279.1 (hostage taking).

            Second degree murder is all other murder. A murder cannot be unplanned and non-deliberate AND not fulfil any of the above sections AND still be first-degree. Therefore it is second degree.

        • tyrannosaurus_rek

          It isn’t the role of Ontario courts to offer token charges in order to “quell” upset protestors.

          • OgtheDim

            Wait a second….. are you telling me I can’t get all my knowledge of Canadian Criminal proceedings from reruns of Street Legal and Da Vinci’s Inquest?

          • dsmithhfx

            Or in this case, Judge Dredd.

          • zamarax

            rather the SIU.

          • tyrannosaurus_rek

            The SIU and court system are very different things; to confuse them, or switch one for the other after an accusation of pandering to the masses, undermines everything you’re trying to say.

          • zamarax

            it was the SIU – taken from their own website “As a civilian law enforcement agency, the SIU has the power and authority to investigate and charge police officers with criminal offences.”

          • tyrannosaurus_rek

            Now that you’ve made up your mind: It isn’t the SIU’s role to “quell” protesters with token charges against officers.

          • zamarax

            Maybe not on paper but they would certainly be more adept too considering that all full-time SIU investigators are former law enforcement personnel or have worked for law enforcement agencies.

        • the_lemur

          Police brutality per se is not a criminal charge.

          • zamarax

            ok, what is is, abuse of power?

          • the_lemur

            How is it that you are able to dispute the definition of first/second-degree murder by citing the Criminal Code and the LSUC and then demonstrate that you have no clue that ‘abuse of power’ or ‘police brutality’ do not constitute possible criminal charges?

          • zamarax

            I never said they do not constitute criminal charges.

          • the_lemur

            No. Indeed you seemed to suggest that they did.

            You said that he should not have been charged with second-degree murder because what he did constituted, in your words, ‘police brutality’ at best.
            Are you saying that police brutality does not merit a legal charge of some sort?

          • zamarax

            Well that is your interpretation of what I said, outside of that we already determined that ‘Police Brutality’ wasn’t an official charge so it would be ‘Abuse of Power’ – which does contain a legal charge.

          • the_lemur

            Does it? You suggested that this case merited a charge of manslaughter as a more serious charge against the officer, as you doubted the intent aspect, or ‘something just under’.
            ‘Abuse of power’ is a consideration only in cases involving kidnapping, trafficking, abduction, etc., or sexual exploitation.
            Criminal negligence causing death might apply, and since a firearm was involved, the sentence would, as with 2nd degree murder, be 4 years to life.

          • zamarax

            umm where did you read that definition of Abuse of Power? I read that it can relate to any interaction with a public employee (noting the items above) and can certainly apply where a death has occurred.

          • the_lemur

            That’s not a definition of ‘abuse of power’ – I summarized the instances in the criminal code where abuse of power is a factor in laying a different charge, since abuse of power in itself is not a charge, regardless of whether such abuse is committed by a public employee or someone else.

  • P M

    The word professional is so misused. A profession is a vocation or occupation requiring specialized, university education. Law, medicine and engineering are professions. Police work is not. The conduct of those 23 or so overpaid idiots present on the day of Yatim’s murder underscores the lack of any learning or even thinking among police employees.

    • dsmithhfx

      That’s a pretty broad brush. And I disagree with your narrowly elitist definition of “professional”. I think it is very, very important to instill a sense of professionalism in this sadly derelict organization, such that the police will no longer routinely countenance corruption, incompetence and malfeasance within their ranks.

      • P M

        It’s THE definition in the dictionary. Words signify and mean something. Sticking to that isn’t elitist.
        We need to instill the sense that police workers aren’t doing us any favours in doing the job that they’re extremely well-paid and compensated for. Discipline and accountability are what’s required along with strong mechanisms to deal with corruption and incompetence. Laws with teeth that deal harshly with police malfeasance are essential. The big stick approach is what’s needed with the police personnel we’re saddled with today. (Remember the G20 debacle?) When new, more educated recruits are brought in that have a sense of civic duty, then we can talk about the carrot of ‘professional’ status.

        • zamarax

          TPS patrolling officers are far from well paid, they are adequately paid considering the line of work they are in. Want well paid – look at the TTC booth collector making over 130k a year.

          • OgtheDim

            The largest group of people on the sunshine list is TTC police constables.

            There are about 8 ttc operators a year on that list, most of them getting there because of severance or pension payouts.

          • zamarax

            I by no means said all TTC operators – I specifically said the booth collector that get’s over 130k.

            TPS officers that are putting their lives in danger daily to keep our city safe deserve every single penny.

          • glenn_storey

            oh, my fucking god, how stupid can one person be? there are no t.t.c. ticket booth operators making 130k / year. do some math, dude. the wage for a t.t.c. collector is 28$ /hour +/-. that’s 56,000$ / year. for somebody to make 130k, they’d have to work an extra 30 hours a week of overtime. idiot.

          • glenn_storey

            actually, it’d be more like 50 hours of overtime.

          • zamarax

            Far from stupid and I got the numbers slightly a miss, take a look for yourself

            http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/2010/03/31/ttcs_bigearners_club_up_by_almost_onethird.html

            Excluding a driver paid out for injuries suffered on the job, the top-earning TTC driver was Dean Tassis, who took home a total of $129,242.05.

            The best paid collector was Yasin Saleemi, who pulled in $114,520.99 in salary and overtime.

            So $115 000.00 is certainly a lot closer to $130 000.00 then your suggesting of only making $56 000.00 a year.

          • glenn_storey

            you are innumerate as well as illiterate. how may hours did he work? answer that, please.

          • zamarax

            Don’t get hostile because you are wrong, the hours are not publicly available, however I’m sure most would agree that someone who does not require post secondary education for the position, who sits in a booth all day, collects fares and issues tickets should never make that amount of money based on the cost of living / working in this city even if they are working double overtime.

          • glenn_storey

            who’s hostile? i’m just shocked that you’re either too dumb to do the math, or so stubborn that you refuse to.
            they are paid hourly. in order for somebody to make 115k / year @ 28$ / hour, they would have to work over 4100 hours at straight time. i don’t know what the o.t. rates are, but i’m assuming time and a half for anything over 40 hours, and double time for holidays. the thing is, if one guy didn’t work those hours, they would have to hire another worker to do it.

          • zamarax

            Where are you getting $28/hr? Under the last collective bargaining agreement that was the minimal / starting someone could make for the bottom positions – such as cleaning.

            I can’t find it online right now but I think I remember reading that the max based on seniority (they would have to be 35 years +) was $95/hr, just looking at the basic math they could not work overtime with a rate of $58/hr and get $115 000.

          • zamarax

            Wrong again, it’s 217 operators, and almost 1400 in total.

            http://globalnews.ca/news/437719/over-1300-ttc-employees-on-sunshine-list/

        • dsmithhfx

          That is one of several definitions. The most narrow and elitist, and arguably anachronistic as well. So there. At least we seem to agree the TPS really needs to clean up its act. Now Bill Blair, tell us about the crack video.