5 Canadian soldiers suspended after Nazi salute video emerges

[Colin Parkinson]

Depends... They can easily be smart enough to not say things at work. Particularly if they keep to themselves at work.


Hard to say, we have zero information about them beyond being on the site. As noted above they could easily be loners who don't talk to people at work much beyond talking about work.

I'm not saying it's impossible that people knew, I'm just pointing out that it is quite possible for them to live a "double life" and the CoC would have no idea. People do it all the time with regards to lots of things in their personal lives.

Many people nowadays don't talk about certain subjects at work, but will let it out on forums where they feel safe. So quite possible their peers don't really know about their other lives.

 

[MilEME09]

Many people nowadays don't talk about certain subjects at work, but will let it out on forums where they feel safe. So quite possible their peers don't really know about their other lives.

When people hold such strong views though, it can become noticeable in how they act at work around their peers.

 

[The Bread Guy]

And this take on the latest from right-of-centre media on this and other recent extremist activity coverage ....

IN-DEPTH: Rachel Gilmore, 'Anti-Hate Network' accused of working with feds to attack nationalist group

Questions are being raised after the CBC and political commentator Rachel Gilmore published articles on Canada’s “active club” movement on the same day, with both stories citing the involvement of the Canadian Anti-Hate Network (CAHN) and one drawing on an internal Public Safety Canada brief...

www.westernstandard.news

 

[Colin Parkinson]

When people hold such strong views though, it can become noticeable in how they act at work around their peers.

5 days a week, for sure, 3hrs a week, many can keep it to themselves for that long.

 

[MilEME09]

5 days a week, for sure, 3hrs a week, many can keep it to themselves for that long.

depends, we talking a Pte/cpl or leadership? Jr ranks, for sure, but once you are administering people, starts to get noticeable if Bloggins who is of a visible minority is a good troop but always gets the short end of the stick

 

[Eaglelord17]

depends, we talking a Pte/cpl or leadership? Jr ranks, for sure, but once you are administering people, starts to get noticeable if Bloggins who is of a visible minority is a good troop but always gets the short end of the stick

You can have bigots and racists who treat people fairly. Someone having biases doesn’t mean they inherently act upon them.

 

[MilEME09]

You can have bigots and racists who treat people fairly. Someone having biases doesn’t mean they inherently act upon them.

my example would be considered acting upon them, as overlooking someone for taskings, promotions etc based on race would be discrimination

 

[Furniture]

my example would be considered acting upon them, as overlooking someone for taskings, promotions etc based on race would be discrimination

Yes, but @Eaglelord17 was simply pointing out that they could have those feelings in private and not act on them at work.

Which is why it goes back to the reality that they might have hidden their racism while in the office, and expressed it in private. That is also a rumor that one of them was signed-up for the site as a joke by friends... I'm not sure I believe it, but it wouldn't be the first time someone did something as a joke and it backfired terribly.

 

[brihard]

That is also a rumor that one of them was signed-up for the site as a joke by friends... I'm not sure I believe it, but it wouldn't be the first time someone did something as a joke and it backfired terribly.

Oof. Where are you seeing that?

 

[KevinB]

Oof. Where are you seeing that?

Probably not the guy commenting on X about using Bio weapons on India I would guess.

 

[Jarnhamar]

Oof. Where are you seeing that?

Could the police lay charges against someone for hate speech or whatever if the user information came from an illegal activity (hacking) and not legally obtained with a production order to the host website? Would a production order to CBC for the user information they obtained hold up in court?

 

[MilEME09]

Could the police lay charges against someone for hate speech or whatever if the user information came from an illegal activity (hacking) and not legally obtained with a production order to the host website? Would a production order to CBC for the user information they obtained hold up in court?

Im no lawyer, but the comments made were public, it was the hacking that identified them, seems kinda a grey area.

 

[Cloud Cover]

Probably not the guy commenting on X about using Bio weapons on India I would guess.

I just saw that. He needs the treatment.

 

[brihard]

Could the police lay charges against someone for hate speech or whatever if the user information came from an illegal activity (hacking) and not legally obtained with a production order to the host website? Would a production order to CBC for the user information they obtained hold up in court?

Tough to say. Depends what specifically they want to use, and for what.

The website itself likely won’t be the cause of any criminal prosecution. Calling to hit Indians with a bio weapon on Twitter under your own name? A bit more likely to have serious consequences. Because the comments are readily available open source or were), I’d be looking to corroborate ID as being at least reasonably like to be the guy, then production orders to Twitter and other service providers for basic account info and login IPs, and then chase more production orders from there until an ISP identifies a residential/mobile subscriber. And then there would be other steps to seal the deal.

 

[Furniture]

Oof. Where are you seeing that?

I heard it from a source with direct ties to the unit of one of the members listed, but I won't say more so I don't out my source.

Like I said, just a rumor.

 

[brihard]

I heard it from a source with direct ties to the unit of one of the members listed, but I won't say more so I don't out my source.

Like I said, just a rumor.

I’ve heard similar from a similarly placed source. Maybe we have the same one. shrug. I’ve heard other tidbits that would make it very plausible.

 

[Cloud Cover]

I’m no lawyer, but the comments made were public, it was the hacking that identified them, seems kinda a grey area.

It’s not a grey/gray area. That type of evidence is hearsay.

Under the principled approach, internet postings are not always excluded as evidence if it’s deemed as reliable and necessary. But generally there must be a lot of other evidence lawfully collected by the police using police powers. This particular evidence alone as described by CBC wouldn’t likely be sufficient to obtain a conviction especially since it was obtained by illegal means already contrary to the criminal code. (Unauthorized access to data). Further, if CBC accessed private communications as seems to be the case here there’s a good civil tort waiting for them.

In point of fact, actual admissions of guilt to indictable offences - made online - have been excluded as evidence just as often as such evidence is admitted. For example, in one case in Ontario the kidnap and murder if a young girl the BBM messages (and images) between accused admitting their involvement were captured and stored by an internet provider, and then produced to police under a search warrant, and then subsequently excluded by the trial court. Conviction was obtained using other evidence. It was found the provider had no lawful authority to collect and store the content of messages.

 

[The Bread Guy]

Oof. Where are you seeing that?

Likely from defense counsel/friend of the accused

 

[brihard]

It’s not a grey/gray area. That type of evidence is hearsay.

Under the principled approach, internet postings are not always excluded as evidence if it’s deemed as reliable and necessary. But generally there must be a lot of other evidence lawfully collected by the police using police powers. This particular evidence alone as described by CBC wouldn’t likely be sufficient to obtain a conviction especially since it was obtained by illegal means already contrary to the criminal code. (Unauthorized access to data). Further, if CBC accessed private communications as seems to be the case here there’s a good civil tort waiting for them.

Which specific part of the fact pattern are you talking about? If you mean presence on the website as evidence of, say, NDA 129 or 93, then sure. If we’re talking the open source Twitter stuff, different story. Agreed that no conviction would rest entirely or even largely on the reporting alone. Rather the reporting would trigger an investigation to collect evidence.

In point of fact, actual admissions of guilt to indictable offences - made online - have been excluded as evidence just as often as such evidence is admitted. For example, in one case in Ontario the kidnap and murder if a young girl the BBM messages (and images) between accused admitting their involvement were captured and stored by an internet provider, and then produced to police under a search warrant, and then subsequently excluded by the trial court. Conviction was obtained using other evidence. It was found the provider had no lawful authority to collect and store the content of messages.

Digital evidence is a constantly changing world, sometimes even varying by provincial jurisdiction. It’s highly dependent on the individual case and circumstances.

 

[MilEME09]

Likely from defense counsel/friend of the accused

Ah the barracks lawyers