G8/G20 June 2010 Protest Watch

[OldSolduer]

There have been a number of court cases where the judges have basically said:

"Yes your rights were violated......BUT....too bad...."

Can't give particulars but I'm sure there are a few police officers who can.

 

[mariomike]

Canwest Global National:
July 10, 2010:
G20 story. Check out the 01:55 mark:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cf42klzzYyA

"Vancouver Sun" and "The Province" ( another B.C. paper ) newspaper boxes getting tipped onto the street.
That must be from the Olympics on 13 Feb, 2010.

Looks like they are a little embarrassed:
Global removed their 10 July National newscast from their archives:
http://www.globalnational.com/video/index.html?releasePID=BrxUEHlXf8xQkLQIS5eqyMoj4ClbHdfT

Reminds me of the time many years ago when I saw a reporter pull a mangled tricycle out of the trunk of his car, toss it in front of a car involved in a Child Struck P.I., and take a photo. But, the child struck was a pedestrian!
I just know what I read in the papers. hahaha

 

[The Bread Guy]

From the National Post:

If some protesters of last month's G20 Summit thought they had got away scot-free, they may want to think again.

On Wednesday afternoon, Toronto Police will release a Top 10 "Most Wanted" list in the hopes of tracking down and charging some of the ne'er-do-wells who took over the streets, burning police cars and breaking store windows.

"Those responsible for the assault of police officers, the burning of our marked police vehicles and damage done to downtown buildings . . . will be held accountable for their criminal conduct," Det.-Sgt. Gary Giroux said in a statement ...

Nothing on the Toronto Police Svc site.... yet.

 

[mariomike]

Nothing on the Toronto Police Svc site.... yet.

http://www.torontopolice.on.ca/media/text/20100714-g20_top_ten.pdf

 

[57Chevy]

Hoping they get full recognition ;D

Photos of G20 suspects being run through banks' facial recognition software
Face Recognition
TORONTO — Toronto police are sending photos of violent demonstrators during the G20 protests to the Canadian Bankers Association (CBA), which has facial recognition software to help identify the perpetrators.

The images will be compared to those already in police databases to help identify suspects, Det.-Sgt. Gary Giroux, head of the G20 investigative team, told a news conference Wednesday.

Police released images of 10 men wanted in connection with crimes of arson and mischief over $5,000 in addition to another six images of suspects that they released last week.

The public helped identify, within 12 hours, three of the six suspects whose likeness was released last week, the police said.

Police now hope the banking industry software will help them sort through 14,000 photographs they have already collected from the public. Giroux expects to receive another 2,000 images and with only 15 investigators on his team, a little help from the banks is in order.

"We're just running it through our software and giving it back to police," said Maura Drew-Lytle, a spokeswoman for the CBA. She assured everyone handling the photos would adhere to privacy laws.

"The same technology is used with fingerprint recognition," said David Clausi, a professor of system design engineering at the University of Waterloo with expertise in computer vision, image processing, and pattern recognition.

He explained facial recognition works by first determining what features — such as distance between eyes — are being compared and how. Then the program uses an algorithm to decide which image in the database, based on this mathematical function, most closely resembles the unknown image.

"Basically, you're capturing some essential aspects of that image that can uniquely identify that person," Clausi explained. He added that, if the images are similar enough — lighting, angle, size and aspect ratio can all distort the comparison — the software can be quite effective.

If they aren't — if an image is blurry, too small or distorted by shadows — the accuracy is greatly reduced.

Clausi discounted pop culture notions of computer vision as precise as the human eye is years away. He said the images need to be comparable in order for the software to work well. This means that police will need to make sure the images are straight-on if being compared to mug shots, for example. Even beards, glasses or face-paint can decrease the software's effectiveness, let alone the bandanas many black bloc protesters were sporting.

Still, facial recognition software can be used to narrow a search. Even if only a person's eyes are visible, the software can significantly narrow the possibilities by listing, perhaps, 500 possible matches out of a database of 100,000. A policeman then has to go through 500 photographs instead of 100,000.

The police arrested their first suspect since the investigation was launched. Ashran Ravindhraj, 25, of Toronto, surrendered at Toronto Police 52 Division Wednesday morning. He has been charged with arson and mischief over $5,000


          (Reproduced under the Fair Dealings provisions of the Copyright Act)

 

[zipperhead_cop]

1 - Show the charter is actually useless, since apparently any legal body in power can violate it at its discretion.

Winner, winner, chicken dinner.  And it isn't any legal body, it is the Provincial government.  Perhaps you need to familiarize yourself with the Notwithstanding clause. 

Best interests of greater society is a very vague term and is subject to a wide range of opinions.
The charter of rights doesn't work on opinions. It works on objective statements that ensure equality.
They are meant to be absolute.

I don't know if you actually tripled back on your own thought there. 
In any case, the two of the better known cases are vehicle stops and Quebec.  Stopping a motorist and demanding proof of ID would per se be deemed a violation of ones Charter rights as defined.  The Supreme Court of Canada decided that the violation was worth it in order to stem drunk/suspended drivers. 
The other is Quebec's language laws, which CLEARLY blow away the spirit of the Charter.  Too bad, so sad.  Quebec elects its provincial government and they get to make their own rules. 

The Charter is a failed social experiment foisted on Canada by Trudeau and his ilk.  It did not take into account a citizens responsibility to society to act credible and put the good of the country over the individual.  So now we have this self absorbed Gong Show that seems to be equal parts apathy and disdain for anyone who speaks up to try to do anything. 

To try to say that some people who got ID'ed/searched during a time of crisis is a horrific effrontery to the spirit of the Charter and the precursor to a jack booted police state is beyond idiotic.  As mentioned: People! Get over it!! 

 

[bdave]

Point(s) taken.

 

[57Chevy]

The Charter is a failed social experiment foisted on Canada by Trudeau and his ilk.  It did not take into account a citizens responsibility to society to act credible and put the good of the country over the individual.  So now we have this self absorbed Gong Show that seems to be equal parts apathy and disdain for anyone who speaks up to try to do anything. 

I would not go as far as giving it a failure. I'm thinking the Charter puts everybody in the same boat context with respect to rights. Meaning that from "go", every citizen is responsibe, and otherwise credible. Therefore everybody has already been given the benifit of the doubt. A cornerstone of sorts,
where most law abiding citizens would easily find themselves.
Anyone falling short of that, is in violation of the Charter.

 

[the 48th regulator]

The Charter is a failed social experiment foisted on Canada by Trudeau and his ilk.  It did not take into account a citizens responsibility to society to act credible and put the good of the country over the individual.  So now we have this self absorbed Gong Show that seems to be equal parts apathy and disdain for anyone who speaks up to try to do anything. 

Yes,

And Trudeau boiled right wing babies, and shared them at Liberal picnics. 

You ask about One's responsibility of country over individual?  Your whole statement is a cunundrum.  Trudeau, acting as Prime Minister, brought the Charter of Rights and Freedoms to Canadians, yet you as an individual rile against it.  He did it for us, as Canadians, and I see no wrong in the Charter of Rights.

The canadian charter of rights and freedoms are fundamental rules, that all individuals should enjoy, everywhere on this planet.  Tell me what you consider as a failure, from the charter.

dileas

tess

 

[mariomike]

Something called "The Miami Model":
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miami_model

The article includes Toronto G20:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miami_model#See_also

In 2003, at the Free Trade Area of the Americas summit, more than 270 people were arrested. None convicted.
Last year, the City of Miami finally settled out of court with Amnesty International.
By then, the story had long since faded from the headlines.

Amnesty International has taken an interest in Toronto G20 ( 3 pages worth ):
http://www.amnesty.ca/files/Letter%20to%20Govt%20calling%20for%20Summit%20Security%20Review%2030%20June%202010.pdf
This also could take years, in and out of court, to settle.

 

[Jarnhamar]

The police arrested their first suspect since the investigation was launched. Ashran Ravindhraj, 25, of Toronto, surrendered at Toronto Police 52 Division Wednesday morning. He has been charged with arson and mischief over $5,000

lol, up yours Ashran Ravindhraj.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

Yes,

And Trudeau boiled right wing babies, and shared them at Liberal picnics. 

You ask about One's responsibility of country over individual?  Your whole statement is a cunundrum.  Trudeau, acting as Prime Minister, brought the Charter of Rights and Freedoms to Canadians, yet you as an individual rile against it.  He did it for us, as Canadians, and I see no wrong in the Charter of Rights.

The canadian charter of rights and freedoms are fundamental rules, that all individuals should enjoy, everywhere on this planet.  Tell me what you consider as a failure, from the charter.
dileas

tess

You have no right to protection of private property (property rights) and you have no right to compensation for confiscation. The government can take everything you own and there is nothing you can do about it.

As well, Section Eight provides everyone in Canada with protection against unreasonable search and seizure..................... unless you legally own a firearm. Then you are open to warrantless searches and confiscation on a whim.

There's just a couple of infringments (failures) on fundamental personal rights.

 

[Container]

The Charter often receives criticism from Police officers.

The issue being-we are no more free than we were prior to the Charter. However, the people that invoke the charter in a legal setting use it in an attempt to "loop-hole" their way out of responsibility. I as a free citizen of Canada have never used my "rights" in a fashion that I would not have been able to prior to 1982.

Neither have my friends and family. Nor the people I work with unless they did something against the rest of us.

Furthermore- the "rights" extend to everyone who find themselves in Canada. So the recent "refugee" with multiple violent offences can't be kicked out because he may be abused in his home country. So he abuses Canadians. Both born and naturalized.

The rights are beautiful- and your right. Everyone who is a law abiding citizen of Canada, like the people here, and 99% of Canada deserve everyone of them and not to be trampled on by the government.

As an aside- I dont want to hear that "innocent until proven guilty" stuff. Thats true for the purposes of court- court has to operate that way. I have observed crime. People doing terrible things to people who have been found not guilty due to some bizarre extinuating circumstance. They are most assuredly guilty of what they were accused of.

Even a judge will say in decisions that "unfortunately" they know "something" happened but can't quite make the determination of guilt. This has usually been in the case of a victim who cant bring themselves to testify- a child or otherwise. 

In an emotional example- a 7 year old child with an STD who can't testify against her uncle. He's "not guilty"? For court maybe but in the life of his victim he is guilty.

Or the individual charged with 30 or so offences on 5 or 6 files will be granted BAIL AGAIN because the Charter requires it. So sometimes it becomes easy to blame alot of justice system woes on it. Interrogations are often the subject of charter issues and without them there would be alot less convictions. Or less "guilty" people statistically.

People point out that in Britain the police officers are not allowed to do interrogations. But in Britain the police are allowed to offer inducements to get people to plead guilty and provide a statement. In Canada the supreme court, using the Charter, has said that the police shall NOT use inducements. So using the charter we have the very real possibility of being the first country that forbids interrogations and offering inducements. Now it may not come to this but Charter interpretation is a living breathing thing. The interpretation of it is more the problem I suppose.

It is always shifting further to protect the people from the evil government and playing into the hands of evil people who do not have any rules governing their conduct.

Canadians are on one hand demanding protection (the average Canadian) from evil doers (justice) and on the othert hand refuse to trust the people they have empowered to do it.  It cannot be both ways- but the Charter in a way suggests that it can.

Thats what Zipperhead is getting at I think- it fails to outline any social responsibilty.

But we're cops so our view of the entire thing is a little biased. We observe an endless parade of victimizers that wear the charter like the rest of us wear the Canadian flag.

I think the Charter is nice. I think that an endless parade of extremely detached, leftist social experimenting supreme court judges is more the problem. The interpretation is the issue.

As for property rights- what specifically are you looking for Recce? What warrantless search and confiscation are you talking about? I'm not familiar with a circumstance where we enter peoples homes without warrants just to seize firearms?? It may well be- I'm just not able to supply a situation for consideration.

Any time the police (the state) seize something- they are required to apply to a Judge for a disposition of the items. Im not sure what happens if the prime minister goes into your house but police are bound to report and judge makes a determination as to what happens.

As for your property- the concept of Color of Right is what covers that. Its yours- and Section 38/39 of the Criminal Code allows you to use as much necessary to keep possession of it. What types of items are people taking?

 

[OldSolduer]

Amnesty International has taken an interest in Toronto G20 ( 3 pages worth ):
http://www.amnesty.ca/files/Letter%20to%20Govt%20calling%20for%20Summit%20Security%20Review%2030%20June%202010.pdf
This also could take years, in and out of court, to settle.

When they start critquing China like they do us, they will be relevant. Until then......

 

[mariomike]

When they start critquing China like they do us, they will be relevant. Until then......

They critiqued China too....:
http://www.amnesty.org/en/region/china

Jim, what is relevant to me is closer to home.
ie: "the threats of lawsuits against the City of Toronto":
http://www.thestar.com/opinion/editorials/article/836033--hepburn-why-is-harper-escaping-g20-aftermath-scot-free

What drives our property taxes up. What takes money away from city services.
The City Solicitor employs about 100 lawyers, just for the regular business and lawsuits. ( T-EMS was a favorite: "Never, NEVER admit the department has done anything wrong!"  ) Plus paralegal, secretarial and administrative staff.
G20 lawsuits could become very challenging for them, time consuming, and take years to settle.

This took a decade to settle:
Two weeks ago:
July 1, 2010:
Washington Post:
"D.C. agrees to $13.7 million settlement in 2000 mass arrest: A federal judge gave final approval Wednesday to a $13.7 million settlement between the District and people who were picked up in a mass arrest during a 2000 protest near the World Bank and International Monetary Fund buildings.":
http://current.com/1fpj84c

"Under the settlement, each person arrested and found eligible for compensation will be awarded $18,000,"

Another:
"Last year, the city agreed to pay $8.25 million to almost 400 protesters and bystanders to end a class-action lawsuit over mass arrests in Pershing Park during 2002 World Bank protests, according to the Partnership for Civil Justice Fund, which also represents those plaintiffs. That case is awaiting final approval."

"He said it sparked a 2004 D.C. law that set out policies for police to follow at demonstrations, including a prohibition against encircling protesters without probable cause to arrest them."

Canadian Civil Liberties Association:
July 15th, 2010
Press Release:
"CCLA Files Five G20 Policing Complaints with OIPRD":
http://ccla.org/2010/07/15/ccla-files-five-g20-policing-complaints-with-oiprd/

Jul 13 2010
"The G20: Doing Security the Wrong Way":
http://www.themarknews.com/authors/1071-paul-cavalluzzo
http://www.themarknews.com/articles/1849-the-g20-doing-security-the-wrong-way

15 July, 2010:
Sun:
"Tiny bubbles cause international stir: 'Officer Bubbles' video goes viral around the world":
http://www.torontosun.com/news/torontoandgta/2010/07/15/14726401.html

FOX:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S9FKG1U5_BI

( Big surprise )
July 15, 2010
"Federal G20 inquiry not needed yet: Tory MP":
http://www.cbc.ca/politics/story/2010/07/15/g20-federal-inquiry546.html

"Ontario Premier Dalton McGuinty has ruled out a provincial inquiry, saying it was up to the federal government to call one.
But Dean Del Mastro, parliamentary secretary to the Minister of Canadian Heritage, said policing in Ontario falls under provincial jurisdiction."

Restaurants: "Our focus now is on ensuring that our members are fairly compensated for their business losses.":
http://www.torontonews24.com/latest-toronto-news/801-g20-losses-extend-beyond-downtown-core-for-toronto-restaurants

Sun:
Warmington: "Sources tell me security cost of the disastrous G-20 summit will reach at least $2-billion.":
http://www.torontosun.com/news/columnists/joe_warmington/2010/07/08/14651761.html

 

[the 48th regulator]

You have no right to protection of private property (property rights) and you have no right to compensation for confiscation. The government can take everything you own and there is nothing you can do about it.

As well, Section Eight provides everyone in Canada with protection against unreasonable search and seizure..................... unless you legally own a firearm. Then you are open to warrantless searches and confiscation on a whim.

There's just a couple of infringments (failures) on fundamental personal rights.

Uhuh......

Your statement is moot, as you display the part o the charter that protects your rights to protection of private property (property rights).  As to the compensation, apply the charter and you are warranted to compensation.

Recceguy,  answer me this.  According to your statement; is the Charter  a failed social experiment foisted on Canada,  a charter that can have additions made, or a charter that is good as is?

I take offense to this statement;

The Charter is a failed social experiment foisted on Canada by Trudeau and his ilk.  It did not take into account a citizens responsibility to society to act credible and put the good of the country over the individual.  So now we have this self absorbed Gong Show that seems to be equal parts apathy and disdain for anyone who speaks up to try to do anything. 

zipperhead_cop criticizes the Government for introducing a charter, that is foisted onto the people.  Then when the people use the charter, he sides with establishment, in stating that the individual does not bide with the Government.

zipperhead_cop,

I ask again, what is it that you are stating?  You are confusing me.

I am tired of the constant vilification o Trudeau, by people who hoist the Canadian flag.  He stood for what Canada is to be.  To this day, Canada is remembered everywhere for PET.

It is all plain fuddleduddle by a bunch o bleeding hearts!

dileas

tess

 

[57Chevy]

looks to be exactly like I had mentioned earlier
Officer Bubbles: "Police Brutality" yourtube superstar, the world over.
Power to officer bubbles.........He actually took the time to warn little miss bubble maker.
How brutal.
And this is exactly what I mean......Watch me provoke you while I exercise my rights.
Watch me turn you into a brute on yourtube for all to see. And just watch how much
support I will get from all the "MY RIGHTS !!!" activists.
And YOU......mr. policeman.......what rights do YOU have?

She is one flippin lucky little bubble maker........I would not have given ANY warning.
NO ONE touches MY uniform in ANY way.......especially little bubble blowing b&%$#$s.
(well that is to say....when I was in uniform) ;D

Oh......forgot to mention.....I like the PET also.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

Uhuh......

Your statement is moot, as you display the part o the charter that protects your rights to protection of private property (property rights).  As to the compensation, apply the charter and you are warranted to compensation.

No it doesn't. There are no property rights enshrined in the Charter. It was actually a deal breaker for the Provinces to get their vote. However, take it as you will. You asked for an example, I gave it. Don't shoot the messenger or try drag me into your crusade.

 

[the 48th regulator]

No it doesn't. There are no property rights enshrined in the Charter. It was actually a deal breaker for the Provinces to get their vote. However, take it as you will. You asked for an example, I gave it. Don't shoot the messenger or try drag me into your crusade.

My Crusade....

Recceguy,  as noble as it is to support your friend, don't guide this towards a lock.

You stated one situation which was excluded, then you gave the section (Section Eight) which explains the right to protection of private property (property rights).  Compensation can be achieved by use of Section Eight.

Your example, I say again, is moot.  I you want to enter the debate, fair enough, however based on what I asked you before; is the Charter  a failed social experiment foisted on Canada,  a charter that can have additions made, or a charter that is good as is?

Returning with  back handed comment about "My Crusade" dds absolutely nothing.  You were the one that decided to jump in with your statement of property seizure, firearms and what not, then proceed to give us the charter that protects you, and offers avenue of compensation.

Let's focus on a good debate, and not get into razor edged comments.

dileas

tess

 

[zipperhead_cop]

Thats what Zipperhead is getting at I think- it fails to outline any social responsibilty.

You are bang on, brother.  Your articulation is flawless.  I'd love to read one of your assault PC/Resist Arrest reports 

I think the Charter is nice. I think that an endless parade of extremely detached, leftist social experimenting supreme court judges is more the problem. The interpretation is the issue.

Very much agree with that too.  I think everyone deserves the right to be treated equally and without bias.  However, the way the courts interpret the Charter, criminals enjoy far more consideration and protection than people who matter.  You'd almost think they were some sort of over-class, who don't have to be responsible for anything. 

I take offense to this statement;

How very Liberal of you  : I hope you don't write a letter. 
Funny how you deftly ignored everything that Container said. 

zipperhead_cop criticizes the Government for introducing a charter, that is foisted onto the people.  Then when the people use the charter, he sides with establishment, in stating that the individual does not bide with the Government.

Okay, Trudeau was NOT MY government and never was.  People have short memories.  How that assclown is loved now that he is dead.  I guess the whole "Trudeau Salute" is part of the past? 
And pedantic wordsmithing doesn't become you.  Where have I suggested that anyone "bide with the Government"?  Holy hell, I hope that doesn't happen.  But being responsible to SOCIETY goes beyond the government.  It is a moral fibre that makes life worth living here.  The Charter allows people to tell greater society to go frig itself and they can do whatever they want with no real genuine fear of repercussions. 

I ask again, what is it that you are stating?  You are confusing me.

I guess I'm saying that bananas are a great source of potassium. 

I am tired of the constant vilification o Trudeau, by people who hoist the Canadian flag.  He stood for what Canada is to be.  To this day, Canada is remembered everywhere for PET.

Feh.  Uganda is remembered everywhere for Idi Amin.  Doesn't make him a good leader. 

Simple question:  Was Canada a better place before all of his left leaning policies entrenched the liberal bureaucracy of our government or if we could have a do-over, knowing what we know now, would going a more traditional path have gotten us to a better today?  (potential thread split fodder)