Custom Search
Top Stories
Go to Site Index See "Top Stories" main page
CONTRIBUTION · 8th January 2011
David Ealing
In Kelowna, British Columbia in democratically free Canada a man is hired by a golf course to use a shotgun to scare geese away. The man has a permit for this activity. Someone sees this man fire his shotgun. The man then gets in his pickup and drives away. The observer then reports this to the police. The policeman on the street, being told that information, locates and stops the pickup. At that time someone from across the street starts recording the encounter on their video camera or cell phone.

The first thing this video shows us is the officer standing beside the drivers door. It seems as if the officer asked the driver to get out of his vehicle. It then appears that this officer has his weapon (taser or gun) drawn and aimed at this man. The man is then ordered to get on the ground. As he gets to his hands and knees the officer who is standing in front of him kicks him directly in the face. The sound of the kick is clearly recorded from across the street.

It's at this point that I became irate. It has been years since I felt the rage that went through my body at that instant. Not only did I feel rage against this officer, but tears of sympathy came for the man receiving the kick.

And now, a couple hours after viewing this video, I'm afraid. Not for myself, but for all the completely innocent people who will endure this and more in the future. It's difficult to believe that this will never happen again. It will. It has become an almost weekly event in Canada.

I remember an incident that occurred in Victoria, BC. Afterwards police officers were reported by TV news as saying that they are trained to do this. Is this true? Was this officer trained to kick innocent, defenseless and unarmed people in the face? This man was innocent, he was defenseless and he was plainly unarmed.

I will agree that the job of a policeman is not an easy one. It is at times dangerous and even fatal. In conversations with people I have said that you may or may not like the police but there is one thing that we should be thankful for. We should all be thankful that when the need arises they would risk their lives to save ours. For that I am thankful.

But I am not thankful for the sense of fear that I feel today. I am an old man (68); I have children and grandchildren and for them I am afraid. In years to come what will be their experiences of the police. It's no longer true that if youíre innocent you have nothing to fear from the police. I'm old enough to look back a lot of years and see that things are getting worse. And recently, they're getting worse quickly.

And to the Police Forces

The RCMP and other police forces in Canada have always been looked upon by most Canadians with respect, honour and pride. I'm hoping that itís important to you (the police) to know you're losing that. I'm not the only one who feels this way. As each of these incidents happen, the rest of us talk about them. I can tell you that the consensus is not good. The respect and pride is still there but I assure you, it's waning. If it's important to you that you keep that, then these abuses must stop. They simply must stop.

As I have stated, we know your job is dangerous but the response to danger should never be criminal. What I saw today, in my view, was a criminal assault. What I saw happen at the Vancouver airport was a criminal assault. If you're not threatened with harm, you, just like the rest of us, have no right to harm innocent people. If you are threatened by someone with a weapon, I'm on your side. Shoot them. But today I'm on the side of the innocent man who lost his blood on the streets of Kelowna. You need to know that there are many who feel the same.

This letter will be sent to the Commissioner of the RCMP as my plea that these events cease. I encourage all who feel as I do to make your feelings known.

A poem comes to mind.

First They Came For
By Reverend Martin Niemoeller

In Germany, the Nazis first came for the communists, and I didnít speak up because I wasnít a communist.

Then they came for the Jews, and I didnít speak up because I wasnít a Jew.

Then they came for the trade unionists, and I didnít speak up because I wasnít a trade unionist.

Then they came for the Catholics, but I didnít speak up because I was a Protestant.

Then they came for me, and by that time there was no one left to speak for me.


Reverend Niemoeller, a German Lutheran pastor, was arrested by the Gestapo and sent to Dachau in 1938. The allied forces freed him in 1945.

I admit that in Canada in 2011 we are nowhere near where Germany was in 1938 and I don't think we'll get there, however to ensure that we need to speak up.

Thanks for listening. I somehow feel a little less afraid now.

David

To view the incident click HERE.

To see the latest update from Castanet.net in Kelowna click HERE.
Although this is blury, you can clearly see the mans head thrown backwards after the kick is delivered.  This is cropped from the video linked in the story.  Watch the ferocity of the kick.
Although this is blury, you can clearly see the mans head thrown backwards after the kick is delivered. This is cropped from the video linked in the story. Watch the ferocity of the kick.
whhhhattt?
Comment by m.b.weston on 10th February 2011
Holy crap. Lots of people with lots of time on their hands. But that's okay. You'd be better off going for a nice long walk & getting some real exercise but it's a free country.

However, I do think that either you get to be anonymous (including not known to TD) or you have to be who you are, i.e.give a real name.

I don't see why TD gets to have the inside scoop but no one else does.
Reply to Ealing
Comment by Blueline on 21st January 2011
Mr. Ealing, I spent an hour the other day writing a response to your post. However for whatever reason it did not get posted.

Instead of investing another hour of my life trying to make the points you clearly missed or misinterpreted, I will instead make the following comments:

- Do not pass judgement until all the facts are known.
- You should avoid speaking on matters which you have no knowledge of.
- Police officers do not have the luxury of assuming people are unarmed just because they don't have a weapon in their hand.
- Your and your families interactions with police will be determined by decisions you and your family members make. Good decisions promote good outcomes. Bad decisions are usually followed by bad outcomes. You and yours get to choose what way it will be.

I sincerely hope that you never sit on a jury, either for a civilian suspect or for a police officer on trial. You are quick to jump to conclusions that are formed with only tiny pieces of the big picture. For this story you refer to the person being arrested as "innocent" and the police officer as "criminal." What kind of world would we live in if police followed your lead and arrested, charged, and jailed people without learning all of the facts first?

I can tell you from personal experience that the image of the perfect mountie being everything to everyone is a farce. It is propaganda from the federal government and RCMP brass who want the general citizenship to believe that the RCMP is a cutting edge police agency. The truth is that we are understaffed, undertrained, and our equipment is poor, often made and provided by the lowest bidder. We are so far behind municipal police agencies in the above areas that it is embarassing. I tell you this so that you can use some of that intense emotion to hopefully lobby the RCMP brass and the federal government to make the RCMP better instead of attacking the officers who are trying to work under these conditions.

You make the connection between current day Canada and Nazi Germany which is at first offensive, but I understand the point you are making, kind of. I'll liken your response, and many other peoples, to that of lynch mobs during the 40's 50's and 60's in the southern United States. Hungry for blood, certain of guilt and innocence without knowing all of the facts. No need for an investigation, trial, or sentencing. You already know the cop is guilty, find a tall tree and grab some rope.
Response to Ealing
Comment by Blueline on 21st January 2011
No doubt you will not respond to this because I refuse to provide my name. I don't need the hassle.

I'm not admitting to all past allegations of police brutality as being founded. All I am saying is that police use of force is now available to the public to see on the evening news. Some people will think its brutality, others will see a cop dealing with a person and be glad they didn't have to do it. I never once said the public is getting more ignorant, however a little knowledge is a dangerous thing. Oh, if you are the one paying my wages, I want a raise.

I prefer partners with a healthy mix of brains and guts. If I had to take one or the other I would take a saskatchewan farmboy as my partner over a university grad any day. Anybody who has been a cop and reads this will instantly understand why. I agree wholeheartedly you should voice your concerns. Just do so once you know the whole story.

A picture is worth a thousand words, yes, however this incident if written on paper would be ten times that. If you had you car broken into Mr. Ealing and you actually tried to subdue and arrest, as is your power as a citizen, the man you found stealing from you and he fought back, you punched him, but only the punching was caught by a passerby with an Iphone people would be calling for you to be charged with assault. They didn't see all that happened before. Thats what I'm talking about when I refer to context. The big picture.

The officer may have perceived some sort of threat. You cannot state that he didn't because you weren't there, or inside his head. Quite possibly he didn't perceive a threat. You're right then his actions are criminal. But you don't know what he perceived since he hasn't made any public statements. Reserve your judgement until you know all the facts.

You completely missed the point I was trying to make when you refer to a Hollywood movie. I'm not saying we are above the law, as I previously posted. I know we are required to work within the parameters set by government and the criminal code. What I am saying is that the uninformed public who criticizes police action prior to being provided all of the details demoralizes police officers. You have to understand that we face this crap on a daily basis, from the people we arrest to the people we associate with outside of work. If this cop is found guilty in court or admits to wrongdoing then go ahead and criticize him. But not keeping your comments to yourself until that appropriate time bothers us, and causes there to be an every increasing distance between the police and citizens. As far as the movie, you're right, I find it easier to relate to the crusty marine whose thoughts and ideals more closely resemble those of active police officers than I can with the socialite navy lawyer who lives in a bubble of a perfect world like most average citizens.

If you are my employer since you pay my wages then consider this. What happens when an employee only ever hears how bad he screws up? He quits. I love my job, but unless something changes it just wont be worth the bull&hit. There are lots of other jobs out there and most of them pay a lot better than mine. You want a better police service? Then start doing positive things to make change, instead of cursing us on a public internet site.

I'm going to let you in on a little secret. Police officers feel the following on the job: FEAR, PAIN, TERROR, ANXIETY, HELPLESSNESS, BETRAYAL. They also feel: PRIDE, ELATION, JOY, SATISFACTION, and CONTENTMENT. When the wolf is on your doorstep with the police unavailable to protect you, you will feel the same terror we feel. The same fear, and the same helplessness. And you will feel betrayal.

You are absolutely right when you state that being a police officer is not in the top five most dangerous jobs, when it comes to death. But you must understand that physical violence towards officers happens daily. Injuries are common. You must understand that any time a person engages a police officer in a fist fight and the officer loses and therefore loses control over his firearm death or greivous bodily harm may result to the member or a member of the public. This weighs heavy on the mind of every cop. You likely have no idea how many people fight with the police. Did you have to deal with this interpersonal aggression as a mill worker? No, and I know that cause I too used to work in sawmills. Do fisherman worry about getting punched, stabbed, or shot? Not too likely. The difference is that I have people out looking to do me harm, that hate me for the uniform I wear, and would take any moment of weakness to hurt me or my co workers. You just can't understand that.

Please read a book titled "On Combat" by Dave Grossman. It will give you insight on interpersonal aggression and why it effects police officers mindsets during times of stress.

Blueline wants to add more comment
Comment by Editor on 21st January 2011
We have a policy, which we oversee and enforce almost without exception. We accept virtually no anonymity. In unique circumstances we will allow someone, such as 'blueline' to post however we cannot accept posts without knowing the identity 'in house'. There are Terrace residents, and politically involved persons, who we have allowed to use a pen name, however this only after we have confirmed the true identity. This keeps this forum, this website, legitimate, not a ruse for anonymous acrimony.

So, Blueline, with confirmation, to us directly, that you are who you say you are, your very relevant comments can be posted, then we are sure you will see some response. Without this, we are sorry, it has been a policy of this site for years now; ever since a controversy developed over comments delivered and posted. This is a small community and we wish to keep this a honest and friendly site.

Thanks for your understanding, and we do think your comments are valid.

Mr Peters
Comment by James Ippel on 17th January 2011
Pulling your gun does not mean you need to use it, but are prepared to do so. I was always told, once you pull the trigger you cannot pull back the bullet, so be sure of your reason for shooting, and be prepared to answer all questions.
As for your military training as sniper you had it easy. You had no one shooting back at you, so you were always safe in your little cacoon (unless you saw service in a war zone).
The most powerfull weapon the RCMP have is their mouth, and have extensive training in attempting to talk their way out of serious situations. There is a whole lot less paperwork involved than in shooting someone.
Your sargent does not impress me as a person I would look up to. If someone threatened me with a knife or gun, he would expect me to subdue or "eliminate" that person without the use of force.
Please explain how that is possible. I have had 25+ years of ongoing police training, and I guess the military never did share this one with us.
Bill
Comment by Helmut Giesbrecht on 17th January 2011
Did you read David Ealing's response in its entirety? I think he said it better. This is not about whether anyone has respect for the RCMP generally. Most people I know do. This is about one incident which clearly shows that one needs to be vigilant with all members of any public institution. Questioning actions which are not professional by one member does not mean that the vast majority are not respected.

You have made it sound by your previous comments like we should never hold any one of the members to account for their specific conduct.

It is true that as in any profession the inappropriate conduct of one reflects negatively on all. That is just the way it always has been for all professions.
and now it's time for a bit of mutual respect
Comment by bill braam on 16th January 2011
Ok, lets take a break here. The prosecution and defence seem to have made their points known here. The officer has now had charges recommended by the independant Abbotsford Police. If I may say, there seems to be some underlying grudges expressed and it does nothing to help the next RCMP officer doing his/her job. Policing is still one of the most hazardous jobs where human to human interaction takes place. Let's give them respect as they process the unfortunate results of our societys mistakes on a daily basis. Allegations and recommended charges will now be processed by our legal system. Respect goes both ways, please acknowledge the next officer you meet in a courteous way and courtesy will come back to you. Thank You.
James
Comment by Helmut Giesbrecht on 16th January 2011
Not to detract from David's response below but...when anybody in any profession screws up, they pay the price. Politicians included even if it takes a while.
Informed (Part two)
Comment by David Ealing on 16th January 2011
For the first part of this response see:
Informed (Part one)


If the outspoken public such as yourself continues to criticize us based on uninformed opinions, you may just find yourself without police at all. If that happens you may get to see what real brutality is when it shows up on your doorstep. It will have no fear of a police officer coming to help you. At that moment you will feel exactly what we feel on the job, and you will feel regret for treating your police officers like garbage.

Listen to yourself here. Did you read it before you sent it? And do you actually believe what you said? You just said if I and others continue to criticize you, brutality will show up on my doorstep and I will feel exactly what you feel on the job.

First of all, if we continue to criticize we will not lose our police force but we may get a better one. Thatís my hope anyway.

Second, I cannot believe that you or any other police officer feels the terror on the job that would be inflicted upon an innocent family in the situation you describe.

Third, let me assure you that I am rarely uninformed. To that end let me informing you.

The most dangerous job in Canada is that of a commercial fisherman. Their death rate is 129 out of every 100,000. Second are loggers. They die at a rate of about 92 out of every 100,000. Then come, (in approximate order due to fluctuating numbers each year) ranchers/farmers, steel industry, miners, aircraft pilots, roofers, merchant mariners, power line workers, construction workers, gas and oil crews, taxi drivers and security guards. All of these workers (in your mind the blissful ignorant) have jobs that are more dangerous than yours, the security guard is just slightly more dangerous and few of them carry a weapon. Taxi drivers, whose job is about 25% more dangerous than yours carry no gun. Now thatís a job I would not like, especially on Friday or Saturday night. Have you ever thanked one for risking their life in taking people home so you donít have to deal with them later? It doesnít sound that you have.

Police officers die on the job at a rate of about 16 out of every 100,000. And many of those deaths are due not to weapons but to traffic accidents, accidents that in many cases were the fault of the officer and in which innocent lives were lost in other vehicles. Weapons account for just over one third of police deaths. And I agree, each one of these is tragic.

That makes your job eight times more safe that a commercial fisherman. When was the last time you ever thanked a fisherman for risking his or her life to put a meal on your table; or a logger for getting the lumber to build your home; or the farmer for growing your food?

I spent most of my working life in the forest as a logger, machine operator, truck driver and a saw fitter in lumber mills. I did it because I loved it. And I did it knowing that it was one of the most dangerous jobs around. I have seen far too many loggers hurt badly and killed not to be acutely aware of this.

Mr. blueline, people arenít ignorant. Most are hard working, honest and informed. But when they see wrong they will speak. You cannot ask them not to. The ability to speak is what ensures our system of rights and liberties. If you donít understand that you should not be a police officer. Part of what your job entails is the protection of these right and freedoms. You must let them speak even if their wrong. And if they are wrong your job will be to educate, not threaten.

If you wish to continue this discussion youíll have to identify yourself. Otherwise I will not answer.

To see how police officers die on the job visit this link:
http://www.nleomf.com/facts/officer-fatalities-data/causes.html
informed (part one)
Comment by David Ealing on 16th January 2011
Dear Mr. blueline,

Let me first say that what I say here is meant in answer to him or her who uses the name blueline. It is not meant generally to all police officers. My feeling for most of them is still respect and thanks. I say these things only because a few of blielineís comments were aimed at me. So this is my response.

What people have to realize is that policing can be brutal, ugly, and sickening. The general civilian public has for centuries lived blissfully ignorant of the realities of policing violent or armed individuals. With the advent of digital media and social networking sites this ignorance has ceased. Police use of force is not getting worse, it is just now available to the public to witness.


Listen to what youíre saying. The people who pay your wages (thatís most of us) are ignorant (blissfully or otherwise) and weíre getting more ignorant by learning more. If police force is not getting worse that means much (if not all) of the complains of brutality in the past were true. You basically admitted that youíve always done this. Weíre just hearing about it now. Thanks for your honesty.

Many will post opinions on this site with no practical knowledge of the realities of policing in an ever increasingly dangerous society. Many will criticize the police officer, and will never have to physically arrest an armed individual. The truth is you don't really know how you would react, if you even had the guts to do anything in the first place.

Ah yes, Guts. I prefer police officers with brains. I do have the courage to state what I feel and then like most who respond here, put my name to it. I am also equally willing to enter any public debate on this issue, no matter how ignorant that debate may appear to you.

As far as this video is concerned, I agree that it is ugly to watch and may at face value indicate some amount of wrongdoing on the part of the police officer. Never forget though that context is lost through the lense of a video camera. It provides only a small part of the bigger picture.

ď...content is lost through the lens of a video camera.Ē Itís plain to see throughout your whole response that youíre not from the world of, ďA picture is worth a thousand words.Ē

I guess the moral of this story is "When police have guns pointed at you, do what you are told immediately and without delay."

I would have hoped that the moral of this story would have been, ďIf youíre not threatened, donít kick innocent people in the face.Ē

To Mr Ealing, You should know that I am personally sick of members of the public that I put my life on the line to protect constantly complaining about the manner in which we provide that safety. I agree that we are not outside the law, and that our use of force should be within the guidelines set. The problem lies in the fact that people such as yourself who complain about us never have all the details about the incidents you are so outraged about. WE talk about this issue all the time. It is hard on morale. It pisses us off and stays with us because we are dedicated to our job

Iíll finish this response to your letter with what I think of you ďputting your life on the line...Ē but first a word about ď...constantly complaining about the manner in which we provide that safety.Ē Iím not a movie buff but I think I can come close to picking your favourite movie. Itís A Few Good Men, right? And your favourite in the movie must be Colonel Nathan Jessep. Mr. blueline, the whole tenor of your response is in this quote from that movie.

Colonel Nathan Jessep
You can't handle the truth! Son, we live in a world with walls that must be guarded. Who's gonna do it? You? You, Lt. Weinberg? I have more responsibility than you can fathom. You weep for Santiago and curse the Marines. You don't know what I know. Santiago's tragic death saved lives. And my existence, while grotesque to you, saves lives! But deep down, in places you don't talk about at parties, you need me on that wall. We use words like honour, code, loyalty. They're the backbone of our lives. You use them as a punchline! I haven't the time or inclination to explain myself to a man who needs my protection but questions the way I do it.


You missed the whole moral of the movie if you can paraphrase the last line of this quote to make your point. The moral was and still is, ďIn a place of authority the onus is on you to uphold the law. Not to make your own as you see fit.Ē Colonel Jessepís egotistical arrogance was wrong, and so is yours.

For the rest of this response see: Informed Part two
Video Training/Pay the Price
Comment by James Ippel on 16th January 2011
I have in past taken video training, and can assure you that this is probably the closest to the real thing as you can get.
Having said that, no matter how much training one has, the "Real Thing" is nowhere near what is encountered in training. You will not find the real thing in textbooks, as some may want to believe. There is always a monkey wrench thrown into the textbook scenario.
"When you screw up you pay the price". Unfortunately this only seems to apply to the Police, not polititians. A bit of a double standard, don't you think?? A high standard of professionalism is expected of all public servants, but is it evenly applied?
So now the news is out
Comment by Helmut Giesbrecht on 16th January 2011
The investigating team from Abbotsford recommends the policeman be charged with assault. Yeah policing is a tough job and it demands a high standard of professionalism. When you screw up you pay the price. That's the way life is.
thank you 'blueline'
Comment by bill braam on 16th January 2011
Every allegation deserves a defence in our law system. 'blueline' expresses that in words that I was so far unable to communicate. Working alongside the RCMP as a fellow emergency provider (I am a volunteer firefighter) I have gained much respect for them. As I said before in other articles, I have witnessed many acts of pure kindness from RCMP officers as I know these same officers will show great bravery when faced with criminal elements. Kelowna has its share of hard criminal elements hoping the police let their guard down at an opportune moment. Trying to figure out each person they meet is a fine art, sometimes too much force is used and sometimes not enough force is used as the RCMP was unfortunate enough to discover in Mayerthorpe.
Officer training
Comment by Karen Dedosenco on 16th January 2011
I have heard that the RCMP use videos made by U.S. police, because they are more cost effective, to train recruits here. I don't know if this is part of the obvious over-kill manner of policing or if the RCMP have relaxed rules on accepting mentally stable individuals into the force. What ever the problem is the RCMP had better determine the cause and make some adjustments before they lose all credibility.

I am proud of the history of the RCMP and would hate to lose what was once an honourable profession and respected institution because of poor management.
Police "Brutality"
Comment by Blueline on 15th January 2011
What people have to realize is that policing can be brutal, ugly, and sickening. The general civilian public has for centuries lived blissfully ignorant of the realities of policing violent or armed individuals. With the advent of digital media and social networking sites this ignorance has ceased. Police use of force is not getting worse, it is just now available to the public to witness.

Many will post opinions on this site with no practical knowledge of the realities of policing in an ever increasingly dangerous society. Many will criticize the police officer, and will never have to physically arrest an armed individual. The truth is you don't really know how you would react, if you even had the guts to do anything in the first place.

As far as this video is concerned, I agree that it is ugly to watch and may at face value indicate some amount of wrongdoing on the part of the police officer. Never forget though that context is lost through the lense of a video camera. It provides only a small part of the bigger picture.

I guess the moral of this story is "When police have guns pointed at you, do what you are told immediately and without delay."

To Mr Ealing, You should know that I am personally sick of members of the public that I put my life on the line to protect constantly complaining about the manner in which we provide that safety. I agree that we are not outside the law, and that our use of force should be within the guidelines set. The problem lies in the fact that people such as yourself who complain about us never have all the details about the incidents you are so outraged about. WE talk about this issue all the time. It is hard on morale. It pisses us off and stays with us because we are dedicated to our job.

If the outspoken public such as yourself continues to criticize us based on uninformed opinions, you may just find yourself without police at all. If that happens you may get to see what real brutality is when it shows up on your doorstep. It will have no fear of a police officer coming to help you. At that moment you will feel exactly what we feel on the job, and you will feel regret for treating your police officers like garbage.
Well James except ...
Comment by Helmut Giesbrecht on 14th January 2011
...I think you were doing the same and so is Bill. You are assuming all kinds of things not evident in the video so I think your trying to take the high road is a mite disengenuous. My comments were on what the video shows which anyone will admit is pretty damaging and probably more accurate than the hypothesis you or Bill advanced..
Helmut/Rudi
Comment by James Ippel on 14th January 2011
I have always thought of you as being reasonable, intelligent people; yet here you are passing judgement before all the facts have been placed on the table.
Let's take the time for the Abbostford Police Dept. to come to a conclusion, and accept that decision.
.....
Comment by ed braun on 13th January 2011
Perhaps the officer was afraid this man had a concealed stapler,a weapon feared by many police.
Thanks Rudi.
Comment by Helmut Giesbrecht on 13th January 2011
No further comment required.
Sue the Gov't $40000 per day
Comment by Moe Naguib on 13th January 2011
If you have a spare fortune and have your teeth smashed out, your face kicked, or find yourself pounded senseless at you front door at 2:00 am by police in BC. You can sue, if not, well then you just have to sit back and take it as did poor souls who endured these atrocities in BC at the hands of various police departments here in BC. Its a cost saving measure of the Campbell Liberal government to set court costs so far out of reach of the majority of those of us who invest, work and live here.
a credible threat is a credible threat
Comment by bill braam on 13th January 2011
The person was on his hands and knees with his face down, still a credible threat. The person could still lunge forwards and tackle the officer and start a wrestling match for the officers gun. On his hands and knees he still had his the use of his legs to propell himself forwards into the officer. On his hands and knees he could still attain three point contact (one arm and two legs) and use an arm to bring a concealed weapon forwards to inflict harm on the officer. With the person having his face down the officer would not be able to read the persons 'body language' completely and predict the persons intentions. The person was on his hands and knees but certainly not helpless. Thank You
Bill
Comment by Helmut Giesbrecht on 13th January 2011
Come on man. He's on his hands an knees and the other officer has a gun on him. This is a no brainer.
agree on..
Comment by bill braam on 12th January 2011
Yesterday in Alberta an inquiry started for the four mounties who were viciously gunned down, today in Toronto a person in a stolen snow plow ends the life of a city policeman. I don't agree with a person being kicked in the face but if it leads to ending an incident with a known armed person it may be necessary. Police officers are not expendable. Even on ones hands and knees one is still a credible threat and credible threats can and do end up badly. Thank You.
So we agree...
Comment by Helmut Giesbrecht on 12th January 2011
...that the kick to the face, a kind of blindsided attack as he was looking down in the video, was unwarranted. Sounds like an assault to me. You can bet the RCMP will be paying out in a civil suit. Guess who pays for that?
James
Comment by Stacey Tyers on 11th January 2011
Pretty sure we've had this conversation in the reverse! Pretty sure you were quick to accuse the young man being beaten by police of many crimes.

Pretty sure when you declared we should allow citizens to judge you made some bltant comments about them all being guilty.

You've come 360, that's nice.
if I may add...
Comment by bill braam on 11th January 2011
The person in the video was not in a nuetral/submissive position. He was on his hands and knees, still quite capable of doing harm to the officer. Kelowna has its share of bad guys with guns and the officer could not take a chance with the person until he was spread-eagled on the ground. The officer was alone (soon to be joined by other RCMP) and taking down a known-to-be-armed person who had just been randomly firing a shotgun. Only after the dust settles is it known that the person was legitimate, the officer didn't have the luxury of knowing that. I don't agree with the kick in the face, perhaps the officer was aiming for the shoulder in an attempt to get the person spread-eagled. Thank You
The Outcome??
Comment by James Ippel on 11th January 2011
A Police Force independent of the RCMP (Abbotsford) have been appointed to investigate the alleged offence. As we all know, any offence is alleged until proven otherwise in a Court of Law. We could go on ad nausem about "alleged" and get exactly nowhere.

On several news reports today it was stated that the gentleman in question was being apprehended for a report spousal assault/altercation. This in conjuction with a shots fired report is what the police were investigating. The reports went on to say that he had been in a motorcyle accident last summer, suffered a broken back, and sustained brain injuries, and further more he did not have permission to be on the golf course. He may have had permission at one time to scare geese on the course, but is currently on medical leave. I also noticed his estranged wife was by side when he was released, and she said she was not afraid of him. The question begs to be asked: why was she there, is there a motive? I don't know, if you have the answer, please post.

Everyday a little more information is made public, so why don't we wait for the investigation to be completed before passing judgment.

Bottom line: Do I agree with what happened? No, but I will reserve judgment till all the facts are made known, and yes, I do have faith in the Abbotsford Police Dept. to carry out an honest and unbiased investigation. If it were another RCMP detachment, I would have a lot of questions.
Just a little kick to the face...
Comment by Janice Robinson on 11th January 2011
Ever heard of an RCMP constable kicking a Mafiosa in the face during an arrest?

Or, of an H.A. getting kicked in the face during an arrest?

No, eh?
Sorry fellows but...
Comment by Helmut Giesbrecht on 11th January 2011
...watch the video. The victim is not holding a gun or shotgun. He has his hands on the ground in front of him and his face lowed. Then he gets kicked in the face. There is no nanosecond that requires a kick in the face.

There are times when such brute force is required. This is not one of those times. You can't make excuses for this kind of unprofessionalism/
Well said Mr. Braam
Comment by James Ippel on 10th January 2011
Your comments are well thought out, and to the point. I would not like to place anyone in the postion that this officer was placed in and try to guess what the outcome would be.
And for the comment of Mr Ealing that the assault ceased to be "alledged" the minute it was placed on Youtube. Under our flawed judicial system this is still "alledged", and I for one am glad that Youtube does not pass judgement on the guilt or innocense of people. Also, it does'nt matter how much training and officer receives- training is far different than the real thing. Trust me, I know. I have experienced it, and it is not pleasant, regardless of the training.
And Mr Peters, from your comments, I gather that you are a proponent of Vigilante Justice. I sincerely hope that you would do things in a legal manner instead of getting personnal satisfaction, and in the process hurting our judicial system, flawed as it is.
still support the RCMP
Comment by bill braam on 10th January 2011
In recent years I spoke to a soldier fresh from Iraq. If I may make a parrallel and hopefully the next reader will understand my point, bear with me. The soldier in Iraq spoke of how he, when on patrol, had to make life and death decisions in less than a nanosecond. Was the person he saw rushing out of a door on a busy street a friend or a foe, was he intent on harming him (the soldier), was he armed or unarmed or was the man rushing out of the doorway merely late for a last minute appointment. Of course we are not in a war zone here but every police officer has to have similar thoughts when approaching an armed person. The officer has to put that person in the most submissive position as possible in as short a time as possible. At that nanosecond in time it is imperitive that the subject obey as quickly as possible. A person known to be armed and still not in a completely submissive position is still a credible threat to the officer. The officer finds out after the fact that the armed person is in fact not a threat. Perhaps in our laid back society we can second guess a police officer. We can judge him or her for being too forcefull or not forcefull enough. In Kitimat a number of years ago an officer lost her leg and nearly her life for possibly not being forcefull enough. In the recent Kelowna incident it appears the officer used the force he judged necessary at the nanosecond in time when he was trying to totally subdue a known armed person. We sit back and try to give or take away credit to the police officer here but we really can't put ourselves in his position. In a society where guns are readily available and many bad incidents involving shootings happen please don't judge the officer too quickly. Thank you.
Alleged?
Comment by David Ealing on 9th January 2011
From the moment this video went on Youtube this assault ceased to be alleged. It did occur. The only thing to be decided is if this assault was justified. In all the evidence presented by this video I see nothing that justifies kicking a compliant man in the face.

As for adrenilin flow, I would hope that all officers have some training that allows them to be under mental control rather than chemical control. If not, we're all in more trouble than I think we are.

And yes, we would all call for the police in the time of need. Whether fortunately or unfortunately, they're the only ones we have. Personally, I'm still on the side of fortunately.
Questionable conduct?
Comment by James Ippel on 9th January 2011
There appears to be no excuse for the conduct of the officer involved in this incident,based on current information , but, neither of you has apparently listened to the person who took the video of the event. He was interviewed by the Media, and having witnessed the event first hand, refused to lay blame till all of the evidence came forward.
Yes, the subject had permission to fire a shotgun on the Golfcourse to scare geese away-but did you no also hear that at the time of this incident he was on leave due to a "Brain" injury suffered in a motorcycle accident this past summer?
In this case the police were involved in a "High Risk Takedown," so already they are in a state of high adrenilin flow. Any report of a person firing a shotgun is enough to get anyones blood flowing, and the pictures I saw of the Golfcourse on TV showed it to be snow covered-hense doubtful that anyone would be golfing.
Quite frankly Mr Peters, I hope you never have occaision to encounter an incident where you might have to contact the police for help. You say you have no use for them, but I am willing to bet that if your wife or child were assaulted or molested, the first people you would look to for help would be the police.
As for charges for this alleged assault, the only one that would fit would be Assault Causing.
Also, in the interview with the person taking the video, he stated, it is entirly possible that the subject was still armed. The possiblilty being that he had a handgun in small of his back, and even being handcuffed he still would have had opportunity to use this.
Please do not pass judgement till all the facts are in.

makes me sick
Comment by eric gavelin on 9th January 2011
This makes me absolutely sick. I hope this cop gets whats coming to him sooner or later. What a disgraceful piece of garbage this person is. I would like to see some on shove a taser up his #!,,, and pull the trigger until the battery dies then boot his teeth out of his skull.