G20 Summit: We passively let police and politicians trample our rights

[LisaOfToronto]

https://www.thestar.com/news/toront...let-police-and-politicians-trample-our-rights

I took myself to Jamaica during the G20, mainly because I knew I would have a problem entering downtown hotels for work and I just didnt want any problems with the police.

Needless to say when I was arrested on another matter July 4,2010 I spent time with the young protesters in jail. They were still sitting in jail cuz the police charged them with "conspiracy". Basically they were looking at 14 years, crown was refusing bail for most of these 20 year old University students.

I was horrified seeing what the police did to them, their parents were putting up their houses to bail their kids and it still wasnt good enough. The crown should take responsibility for the bungled mess ! but that aint gonna happen

 

[tboy]

well, if they were actually protesting, i feel for them but you have to admit, a hell of a lot were just there to cause trouble, break windows, trash police cars etc......

 

[LisaOfToronto]

well, if they were actually protesting, i feel for them but you have to admit, a hell of a lot were just there to cause trouble, break windows, trash police cars etc......

the women I spent time with, were arrested before G20 started. The police hauled them out of their homes in the middle of the night 1 or 2 days prior. Their crime : talking on the internet about it.

 

[TINY]

n an to Torontonians, Police Chief Bill Blair said Friday he accepts responsibility for the actions of his police service and its members during the G20 summit, but stopped short of an apology.

“I will ensure that the lessons we learn during the G20 are incorporated into our procedures, our training and our future response. I am also fully committed to holding police officers of any rank accountable for misconduct,” the chief said.

Porter: We passively let police and politicians trample our rights“I remain committed to the safety of our city and all its citizens. I remain committed to restoring the confidence of the people we are sworn to serve and protect.

Blair announced Friday he will take the rare step of bringing in a retired judge and former Crown attorney for the G20-related misconduct hearings. The hearings will be open to the public, as is standard.

He also said he brought eight more applications to the police services board Friday, requesting permission to lay disciplinary charges against officers for their roles during the summit.

About 15 officers will face disciplinary hearings, as some cases involve more than one. They include officers in the high-profile Adam Nobody case, a source told the Star.

The Office of the Independent Police Review Director (OIPRD) has identified five officers who should be charged in the Nobody case.

DiManno: Why won't police chief Bill Blair say he's sorry for police actions during G20?

Eight constables have already been charged under the Police Services Act for alleged G20 misconduct, bringing the total number to about 23.

When the process is complete, 28 frontline officers are expected to face disciplinary action, as well as two senior officers, although it’s unclear whether they were among Friday’s group.

The charges stem from investigative reports completed by the OIPRD, the province’s police complaints watchdog. They “substantiate” allegations of misconduct, meaning the investigators believe there’s enough evidence to prove misconduct occurred.

Police hearings act much like a court of law, where officers may defend themselves against charges levied against them. If the charges — which are not criminal — are upheld, penalties range from docked pay to losing their jobs. Charges filed so far include the use of unnecessary force and unnecessary arrest.

Earlier this week, OIPRD director Gerry McNeilly released a scathing systemic review of the G20, slamming police for poor planning, breaching Charter rights and using excessive force.

The June 2010 summit, which saw a group of black-clad vandals wreak havoc on the downtown core, also resulted in the largest mass arrest in Canadian history.

As revealed in Friday’s Star, the OIPRD has also “substantiated” allegations of misconduct against three senior officers, including Supt. Mark Fenton, the commanding officer who ordered mass arrests and the “unlawful” kettling at Queen St. W. and Spadina Ave. on the final day of the summit.

The other two officers are Supt. Michael Farrar and Staff. Insp. Frank Ruffolo, who were in charge of the prisoner processing facility on Eastern Ave. Both are now retired and so can not face disciplinary hearings.

A fourth senior officer, Insp. Gary Meissner, will face disciplinary action stemming from alleged G20 misconduct.

When reached Friday, Meissner said he has not yet received an official notice of a disciplinary hearing but has been “informally” notified.

It is unclear what allegations of misconduct have been made against Meissner. He politely declined to comment at this time.

“Unfortunately, I can’t,” he said. “I’m sorry, I’m not in a position to do so.”

During the summit, Meissner was the public order unit alpha section commander in charge of deploying the long range acoustical device (LRAD), which can send verbal warnings and also control crowds with pain-inducing tones.

According to the McNeilly’s review, orders were given for the LRAD to be used at 5:43 p.m. on June 26, 2010 at Queen’s Park, shortly after the breakout of violence led by black-clad vandals. Five minutes later, Meissner was making arrests, according to a special operations director quoted in the report.

The report noted, however, that many people failed to hear crowd warnings from the LRAD. If G20 planners and commanders were relying on the LRADs for crowd control, the devices should have been used “more times, in more directions, and in more locations around Queen’s Park.”

“It appears the use of the LRAD was more about using the new piece of equipment rather than a method to have real and meaningful communication with the protesters,” the report said.

Meissner also deployed the LRAD on Queen St. W. at 6:26 p.m. that day — this time, without permission, according to the report.

“I understand why they wanted us to ask the MICC (major incident command centre) for permission to use it,” Meissner told the police watchdog. “But, I didn’t ask for it on Queen St. because I was told to arrest everybody and to my way of thinking as a site commander, I needed to assure myself and I needed to prove to everybody else that this was a compliant crowd.

“As a consequence, I stepped out of the line and did not ask for permission to use the LRAD, but used it to prove a point,” he continued. “And the point was that if you are involved in an engagement where, in fact, the crowd can hear the message clearly and is willing to comply, then all they want is direction.”

Prior to the G20 summit, a Superior Court judge imposed restrictions on use of the LRAD, noting it “requires very senior command authorization.”

Meissner, who is based out of 51 Division, was also site commander for the peaceful evictions at St. James Park last year during the Occupy Toronto movement. Many protesters there praised the efforts of police for reaching a peaceful resolution in a temporary standoff over the library yurt.

In a statement Friday afternoon, the Toronto Police Services Board said it is “acutely aware” the OIPRD’s systemic report has raised “considerable and significant issues” about G20 policing.

“The board wants to reassure the public that it is committed to ensuring that all recommendations made in that report respecting police accountability and responsibility will be thoroughly reviewed and addressed as expeditiously as possible,” the statement said.

The board also said it is awaiting the Independent Civilian Review of the G20 in late June, led by retired judge John Morden, which will focus on the role of civilian oversight.

“The board is very serious about discharging its responsibilities in the public interest. To this end, it has already begun a review of the recommendations of Mr. McNeilly.”

Also on the Star:

G20 timeline: How events unfolded on the streets

DiManno: There’s blame aplenty in the OIPRD’s G20 report, but no accountability

G20 policing: the major incidents

https://www.thestar.com/news/articl...r-to-seek-permission-to-lay-more-charges?bn=1

 

[Angusmybeef]

I hear 29 to officers are facing disciplinary action and the top 4 in charge can get suspended with no pay.

 

[tboy]

the women I spent time with, were arrested before G20 started. The police hauled them out of their homes in the middle of the night 1 or 2 days prior. Their crime : talking on the internet about it.

i kind of find that hard to believe, but let's just say they were arrested/detained for talking about it. That would mean the police had full and complete access to monitoring everyone's internet access (all 20 million canadians) and had immediate court orders for the isp's to relinguish the personal info of all their users.

YOu see, if they didn't get warrants for the isp's, then they'd be up on charges for invasion of privacy. If they did or were able to get court orders for each and every internet user, that's got to be a record.....

Barring that, if all that did occur and they were detained for what they talked about on the net, let's just say one of them said they were planning to firebomb a particular location. Wouldn't you want to know that the police had the ability to stop it? For eg: himshad mohammed goes online and plots to put a bomb on a plane...talks about it to his other jihadists.....if the cops have the ability to monitor all internet users, and arrest them before they can carry out the plot, i'm glad they have that ability actually.

Think about it: if what they were talking about was serious enough to warrant investigation, aren't you glad they were able to do something about it?

I for one highly doubt that anyone was arrested for simply saying "I'm going to the g20 to protest".......

 

[tboy]

the thing is lisa, people have to realize that you can't just do or say anything you want without some repercussions. Yes, we have a right to privacy, but that begins and ends in our home. As soon as you transmit, post online, or say something to someone in public, you forgo those rights since it is no longer private.

plus, if you say something bad enough, sure, you have the right to say it, but you also have to bear responsibility to what you've said. For eg: we have laws against uttering a threat to someone. If these people uttered a threat to the g20, they've broken the law and were arrested for it.

Again, i say if they were peacefully voicing their opinions, then no, they shouldn't have been arrested.

I hate to break it to you, and everyone else, but i am 99.8% sure the NSA and our own RCMP monitor every cellphone, the internet, and other forms of communication for key words......in fact, i bet my post above has been flagged for review.......and i bet someone is reading it right now......

 

[Madman]

I hate to break it to you, and everyone else, but i am 99.8% sure the NSA and our own RCMP monitor every cellphone, the internet, and other forms of communication for key words......in fact, i bet my post above has been flagged for review.......and i bet someone is reading it right now......

This has been going on ever since 9/11, especially in the US.

 

[LisaOfToronto]

the thing is lisa, people have to realize that you can't just do or say anything you want without some repercussions. Yes, we have a right to privacy, but that begins and ends in our home. As soon as you transmit, post online, or say something to someone in public, you forgo those rights since it is no longer private.

plus, if you say something bad enough, sure, you have the right to say it, but you also have to bear responsibility to what you've said. For eg: we have laws against uttering a threat to someone. If these people uttered a threat to the g20, they've broken the law and were arrested for it.

Again, i say if they were peacefully voicing their opinions, then no, they shouldn't have been arrested.

I hate to break it to you, and everyone else, but i am 99.8% sure the NSA and our own RCMP monitor every cellphone, the internet, and other forms of communication for key words......in fact, i bet my post above has been flagged for review.......and i bet someone is reading it right now......

tboy, i only recall that they could not divulge much information to me, or other inmates, at their lawyers request...but what i do remember is this:there was 1 or 2 main organizers of a peaceful protest, the rest of them were the peaceful protesters (many came from different parts of Canada). Some already in Toronto were sleeping in the university dorms ...there were many...so they slept on floors or where ever they could find a place to rest their heads. I believe they were communicating via a facebook group, which was infiltrated by police.

you act like as if the police never lie to get a warrant lmao

anyway they were all rounded up before the G20 began

oh btw pls check our Charter of Rights first; we have the right to peaceful assembly

 

[tboy]

see lisa, half your problem is the way you take immediate offence anytime anyone enters a discussion with you that might not be totally on your side.

for example: i never once said anything about whether or not police lie to get warrants. why even bring that up? what difference does that make with the discussion we are having?

Whoever said we don't have the right to peaceful assembly? not me....that is a very antagonistic statement....insinuating that i disagree with that right.

infiltrated by the police lol...you sound like then sent a spy in behind the iron curtain to obtain the codes for the nuclear missiles lol.....now as i said; if they were just talking about assembling, then i highly doubt the police could arrest them...hell, if they wanted to arrest people simply for assembling, they would have arrested everybody, which they didn't.

Now with neither of us knowing the complete truth, i will say this: from what you've told me they could have been arrested for exceeding the maximum allowable occupant density of the dorms they were sleeping in. There are fire codes in place to limit the amount of people you can have in any given place. Especially a dorm. In addition, they could have been arrested for trespassing as I bet the dorms had rules in place about who and who cannot be there.

Don't get me wrong, i support the peaceful protests that went on and i fear that unless those in power wake the fuck up, more violent protests like what is going on in montreal will only happen everywhere.....

Which brings me to the next point: you also know that some anarchy groups travelled to toronto to do nothing but cause riots and damage right? they weren't there to protest anything, just wanted to burn police cars, loot and damage public property.......