Monday, April 11, 2016
WAS THE RULE OF LAW VIOLATED?
This case as presented in last Saturday's Waterloo Region Record does no favours for the perception that our courts sometimes play favourites. If there were extenuating circumstances they should have been clearly explained by the judge in this article titled "Police officer receives discharge". The circumstances as explained were wholly inadequate to have given the officer a discharge considering that both the judge and the officer involved admitted that he had committed a criminal offense. Two offenses actually. Firstly criminal harassment and secondly possessing an unregistered .357 magnum revolver.
Officer Brad Finucan of the Waterloo Region Police Service received a discharge on both charges by Justice Kathleen McGowan. I would love to see the statistics on how many private citizens charged with either of those criminal charges, much less both of them, walk out of court without a criminal conviction? If indeed a discharge is the norm for general citizens then I have no problem with the decision by the Justice. If on the other hand she was solely concerned about the officer's inability to enter the United States, keep his job or anything else relevant to his being a police officer; then I am appalled. Whatever court result is the norm for one citizen in similar circumstances it should have been the same result for this officer.
What is especially galling is how rapidly the Waterloo Regional Police discharged officers a couple of years back whose behaviour while nowhere near the criminal level nevertheless allegedly was "...not consistent with the values of the organization.". This is in regards to the officers who were part of a messenger service and shared rude comments etc. about two citizens who had called them for assistance. While discipline was certainly warranted, dismissal for the lesser offenders was not.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Truely charter rights in Canada isn't equal police are above the law they can harrass assault stock murder or shoot in self defence in fear of there life feared for public safety is there loop hole but if a Canadain citizen tried to shoot someone in self defence its instantly murder there murders also if a citizen commits assault or threatens people and is found guilty they cant own fire arms but police still can clearly our charter of rights isnt Equal n clearly police are above the law n free to harass who they please or dont like with no regards for the law they swear to uphold Only in Canada can police shoot n kill or murder some one in self defence in fear of life n public safety but if a Canadian citizen shoots n kills in fear of there life they go to jail 4 years minimum our charter of rights isn't up to date and our courts clearly arn't treating people Equally everyone is equal in eyes of the lord and equal to right to life but not in Canada were our charter of right is just paper with loop holes to protect police who shoot to kill if a citezen said well he had a knife so I shot him in fear of my life registered gun or not a citizen would get 4 years minimum why even have a charter of rights in Canada that favours police and puts them above the law In many states if a armed home invader comes in your'e home and your'e in fear of your'e life one can shoot in self defence not in Canada here we have no right to life or protect our family we have to die n why we have so many unsolved murders criminals are getting away with murder knowing home owners cant shoot them in self defence our laws need to be changed so every one equal in charter of rights as in the eyes of the lord witch the charter of rights was meant and writing for
ReplyDelete