RCMP appeal Justice Arne Silverman's decision?

Up, Down.

Two Mounties appeal court ruling about Taser inquiry, and RCMP officers appeal ruling on Taser inquiry's jurisdiction.
Say WHAT!?
(Another report suggests that it is only two of them who will appeal: Bill Bentley/David Butcher and Kwesi Millington/Ravi Hira; but as far as the E Division Hall of Shame is concerned ... "tar 'em all with the same brush," sez I.)

These Mountie hounds and their thousand-dollar-an-hour lawyers are appealing the B.C. Supreme Court decision by Justice Arne Silverman? Will they go all the way to the Supreme Court of Canada in an effort to hide their crimes?

HALL OF SHAME: The E Division All-Stars.
Bill Bentley & David Butcher, Kwesi Millington & Ravi Hira, Benjamin Monty Robinson & Reginald Harris, Gerry Rundel & Ted Beaubier.



It is PUBLIC MONEY they are using for this fol-de-rol remember. When is someone going to put a stop to this ridiculous charade?

Is there not a single solitary ADULT anywhere in the Canadian Government?

Not William Elliott RCMP Commissioner, that's for sure, he's too busy with The Mikado. Neither the 'Honourable' Peter van Loan, Minister of Public Safety, who is theoretically in charge of Elliott; nor the 'Right Honourable' Stephen Harper, Prime Minister of Canada - the man who is theoretically in charge of all of 'em. But we know ... nobody's in charge. They are all hoping this will just go away so Canadians can go back to their dinners.

On the up side, none of them look like they are suffering weight loss these days from any hunger eh? They were probably skinnier in the days before they became 'Honourable' do you think?

Are they really 'Honourable' I can't help but wonder? That's impossible I guess, because if they were they would put the kibosh to these Mountie hounds and their lawyers both.

On second thoughts, maybe I am being unkind to the hounds to classify these Mounties with them? Anyway, the Mounties are not really hounds at all, more like miniatures aren't they? Jack Russell Terriers and the like, cowardly except for the bark ... So maybe we should be calling them 'doggies' then?

Not cowardly you say? Kill someone with a Taser and hide behind William Elliott (who is large enough as we have noted)? or kill someone with your car and literally run away? This is not cowardly? Oh ... Jack Russell Terriers? No idea ... and maybe it's not a thousand an hour, maybe it's only 800$.


reminds me of a joke (remember your liver, you have to find a laugh in it somewhere) ...

What looks good on a lawyer?
Couple'a dobermans.

here's another one I just made up ...

Look out boys, the swine flu's comin'.

***************************************************************************
***************************************************************************
Appendices:
1. Two Mounties appeal court ruling about Taser inquiry, Neal Hall, July 1 2009.
2. RCMP officers appeal ruling on Taser inquiry's jurisdiction, CBC, Tuesday June 30 2009.
3. Two Mounties appeal court ruling confirming inquiry's authority, Neal Hall, Thursday July 2 2009.
***************************************************************************
***************************************************************************
***************************************************************************
***************************************************************************
***************************************************************************
***************************************************************************
***************************************************************************
Two Mounties appeal court ruling about Taser inquiry, Neal Hall, July 1 2009.

VANCOUVER — The lawyers for two of four RCMP officers who confronted Taser victim Robert Dziekanski at Vancouver’s airport in 2007 are appealing a B.C. Supreme Court decision that confirmed the Braidwood Inquiry can make findings of misconduct against them.

The lawyers for Constables Bill Bentley and Kwesi Millington filed documents in the B.C. Court of Appeal earlier this week seeking to have the lower court ruling by Justice Arne Silverman quashed.

In his June 15 ruling, Silverman upheld the right of inquiry commissioner Thomas Braidwood to find misconduct by the four Mounties.

The officers’ position is that the Braidwood inquiry, which is probing the death of Dziekanski, 40, after he was Tasered five times, cannot authorize findings of misconduct against members of the RCMP.

Alternatively, the notices of appeal seek a permanent injunction to prevent the commission from continuing any proceedings against Millington and Bentley or making any findings of misconduct until 60 days after the appeal court rules on the matter. No date has been set for the appeal court hearing.

The Braidwood inquiry adjourned until Sept. 22 after an explosive e-mail from a senior commanding RCMP officer surfaced, which said the four Mounties had discussed using a Taser against Dziekanski before arriving at the airport. The e-mail, written by Dick Bent, contradicted the inquiry evidence of the four Mounties, who testified they had no discussions prior to arriving at the airport following a call about an agitated man. Dziekanski, a Polish immigrant, had been wandering in the secure arrivals area of the airport for more than eight hours after his flight landed, unable to find his mother.

Braidwood said he was appalled at the last-minute disclosure of the e-mail and said it had to be investigated.


***************************************************************************
RCMP officers appeal ruling on Taser inquiry's jurisdiction, CBC, Tuesday June 30 2009.

The four RCMP officers involved in Robert Dziekanski's death will appeal a court decision that allows a provincial public inquiry to make findings of misconduct against them.

The four Mounties challenged commissioner Thomas Braidwood's authority to allege misconduct against officers on the federal police force — something the commissioner has warned he'll consider when he writes his final report.

But a B.C. Supreme Court judge recently dismissed their claims, prompting the officers to take the case to the B.C. Court of Appeal.

A lawyer for the officer who fired the Taser, Const. Kwesi Millington, has already filed his appeal and the others are expected to follow.

David Butcher, who represents Const. Bill Bentley, said the case raises important constitutional questions about a provincial inquiry's authority over federal police officers.

"It involves an analysis of the division of powers between the provincial government and the federal government," said Butcher on Tuesday.

The appeal proceedings will likely unfold at the same time as the Braidwood inquiry into the death of Dziekanski resumes in the fall, said Butcher.

Dziekanski — a Polish immigrant who had just arrived in Canada — died after being jolted several times with a stun gun by RCMP officers at Vancouver International Airport in October 2007.

Prosecutors in B.C. decided last year not to charge the officers, but Braidwood is considering a number of allegations made during the inquiry, including that they lied about what happened at the airport that day.


***************************************************************************
Two Mounties appeal court ruling confirming inquiry's authority, Neal Hall, Thursday July 2 2009.

Officers maintain commissioner can't make findings of misconduct

The lawyers for two of four RCMP officers who confronted Taser victim Robert Dziekanski at Vancouver's airport in 2007 are appealing a B.C. Supreme Court decision that confirmed the Braidwood Inquiry can make findings of misconduct against them.

The lawyers for Constables Bill Bentley and Kwesi Millington filed documents in the B.C. Court of Appeal earlier this week seeking to have the lower court ruling by Justice Arne Silverman quashed.

In his June 15 ruling, Silverman upheld the right of inquiry commissioner Thomas Braidwood to find misconduct by the four Mounties.

The officers' position is that the Braidwood inquiry, which is probing the death of Dziekanski, 40, after he was Tasered five times, cannot authorize findings of misconduct against members of the RCMP.

Alternatively, the notices of appeal seek a permanent injunction to prevent the commission from continuing any proceedings against Millington and Bentley or making any findings of misconduct until 60 days after the appeal court rules on the matter. No date has been set for the appeal court hearing.

The Braidwood inquiry adjourned until Sept. 22 after an explosive e-mail from a senior commanding RCMP officer surfaced, which said the four Mounties had discussed using a Taser against Dziekanski before arriving at the airport. The e-mail, written by Dick Bent, contradicted the inquiry evidence of the four Mounties, who testified they had no discussions prior to arriving at the airport following a call about an agitated man. Dziekanski, a Polish immigrant, had been wandering in the secure arrivals area of the airport for more than eight hours after his flight landed, unable to find his mother.

Braidwood said he was appalled at the last-minute disclosure of the e-mail and said it had to be investigated.



***************************************************************************


Down.

Braidwood Inquiry, testimony ends

Up, Down.

maybe Thomas Braidwood will have something to say "by the fall," say, October 14? that would be two years ... two years of travail which could have been made unnecessary by the merest display of honour by any single one of the RCMP goon squad, that's to say any one of the some 25,000 of them walking around, disgraceful!

meanwhile, in late June there will be "final submissions" by Ravi Hira and David Butcher and Reg Harris and Helen Roberts, and such like dishonourable maggots in defence of their dishonourable maggoty client viz. the Government of Canada in its daemonic incarnation as the RCMP, not clear if this folderol will be published with the Braidwood Site transcripts

Taser inquiry testimony ends, Stunning attitude, Police could have avoided inquiry - lawyer.

speaking of maggots, here's another one, Grant Fredericks, a "forensic video expert," another Taser International shill spinning desperate and far-fetched lies and fabrications to shore up the official RCMP lies, pardon me, LIES(!):



Fredericks is closely associated with LEVA (Law Enforcement & Emergency Services Video Association), who count among their Corporate Sponsors (surprise, surprise), Taser International, Inc., well to remember that some people will say anything if you pay them, this Grant Fredericks fellow is not only an "expert" but is apparently "a pioneer in forensic video analysis," you can watch him lying at the CBC Dziekanski site, Thomas Braidwood, God bless his heart, does not seem to be buying what the BBB (baffle-their-brains-with-bullshit) crowd are selling

and thank goodness that there is the odd honourable one in the bunch, here is Mike Webster's recent letter to the Braidwood Commission: (I have posted his previous testimony here: Braidwood Transcript)



April 17,2009

Braidwood Commissions of Inquiry
Art Vertlieb QC
Commission Counsel
980-T500 West Georgia Street
Vancouver, B.C.
V6G 2Z6

Dear Mr. Vertlieb,

You have asked me for my opinion in the case of the death of Robert Dziekanski that is before the Braidwood Commissions of Inquiry. I am a Registered Psychologist (in private practice) that has worked in the area of police psychology for over 30 years. I completed basic police training at the RCMP Training Academy (Depot Division) in 1988. I specialize in the area of crisis management and have experience in the application offeree across a broad array of police tasks including: hostage/barricade incidents; kidnappings; incidents of public disorder; and crisis intervention. I have been instrumental in the creation and delivery of crisis intervention, crisis negotiation, and incident command courses from the Canadian Police College (Ottawa, Ontario) to the B.C Police Academy (New Westminster, B.C.). I have been an adjunct lecturer at the FBI 'Gaining Academy. I have consulted internationally with several law enforcement agencies including: Colombia, Mexico, Singapore, Brazil, the United Arab Emerates, Hungary, Iceland, Sweden, Australia, and Europol. I have consulted operationally at a variety of incidents including: the old BC Penitentiary (hostage takings); Waco, Texas; Gustafsen Lake, B.C.; Jordan, Montana; Ft. Davis, Texas; the G8; the G20; Apex Alpine; and numerous kidnappings from Iraq to Indonesia, and Kashmir to Colombia. I am familiar with both Use of Force Models; the RCMP's Integrated Model of Incident Management and the National Use of Force Framework.

In forming my opinions I have reviewed the following materials:

• Transcripts on 2 dispatch calls (DRIP Dl 3.WAWD RIP D I 5.WAV)
• Transcripts on hearings dated February 23, February 24, February 25, February 26, March 2, March 3, and March 4; and, March 23, March 24, and March 25 2009
• Robert Dzfekanski - Circumstances; and,
• The Pritchard Video and enhanced audio by Sharpe.

In my opinion the RCMP members mishandled this call and responded inappropriately in the following ways:

i. Only "Fools Rush In"

All the RCMP members agreed in their evidence that this was an unusual call. It should have been apparent to them that it would require a different approach than their usual general duty fare. Mr. Dziekanski wasn't going anywhere and none of the public was in immediate danger. It is difficult to believe that Cpl. Robinson, nor any of his members, had a plan. (All Use of Force models begin with some form of "assess-plan-act")- It is equally difficult to believe that he would have left the "lead" or "contact" position to such junior members, considering the nature of the call.

A well trained and well experienced NCO i/c would remember to take a moment to formulate a plan. (In their basic training these members would have heard me old adage "if you fail to plan, you plan to fail" many times from their instructors). In my opinion, he would have "verbally contained" Mr. Dziekanski after putting the "rule of ate" (or whatever ft was called in his training) into motion. The rule is: "locate", "isolate", "evacuate", "communicate". The subject had already been located. One of the members could have been dispatched to the Customs Hall to ensure no one was allowed to enter the IRL (subject isolated), while another evacuated the public from the area (scene evacuated). Now the "contact" member could take bis time to communicate with a hyperarouscd subject.

ii. "Low and Slow"

I'm sure these members in then1 basic police training had some conflict resolution instruction. Part of that instruction would have focused on how it's much easier to increase the intensity of approach than decrease it On a scale of 1-10 it's much easier to come in at a 3 or 4 and then increase if need be. It's next to impossible to come in at an 8 or 9 and then expect to defuse an emotionally distraught individual. Vaulting the railing (not one but all four) was inconsistent with coining in "low" and creating a safe non-threatening environment (which they should also know from their training is the best way to calm an agitated individual).

One more thing they would have learned in their conflict resolution training was the ability to put themselves in someone else's shoes (i.e. to empathize). Not one of the members appeared to have placed himself in Mr. Dziekanski's shoes and considered how, in his state of hyperarousal (fear?) Mr. Dziekanski would have perceived four heavily armed policemen jumping a barrier to get to (at?) him.

iii. "Too Many Cooks ..... "

In their basic training, likely during conflict resolution and arrest procedures instruction, these members would have been informed about the interaction between arousal and cognitive process. They would have learned that during hyperarousal someone's cognitive process is disrupted and disorganized. They would have been told that a highly aroused person does not process instructions well, can't make good decisions, doesnt use good judgment, and is not a good problem solver. In other words, they should have known that Mr. Dzjekanski (language difficulties aside) would not be able to respond to them until he bad been calmed down. UK fact that, at feast, two different sets of instructions were given to him, each inconsistent with the other, would have served to bom confuse and frustrate him.

iv. "First Impressions...."

As put of their basic training these members would have learned (conflict resolution basics) dial before you get someone else under control you must get yourself under control. This means using neutral, non-threatening body postures and calm, non-confrontational tones. These members had this situation resolved when they first arrived (despite vaulting the barrier). Just like it's supposed to, "presence" and "communication'' worked like a charm. Mr. Dziekanski dropped his hands to his sides and engaged the "contact'' member. Everything they did after that was absolutely inconsistent with their conflict resolution training. Following the contrary commands came the pointing of (at least one) black leather clad finger. I understand that these "slash" gloves are worn for protection but they could (put yourself in Mr. Dziekanski's shoes) be interpreted as threatening by a frightened individual If you were faced by policemen with bare hands, hats, ties, and concealed body armour alongside the four members in question which would you turn to for help?

v. "Circle the Wagons"

Once again "put yourself in the subject's shoes", what do you think that a man in a state of hyperarousal (likely frightened by what has transpired to this point) is going to think when surrounded by four policemen with their hands hovering around their duly belts? (I believe the Taser had been unholstered by this time and he may have caught a glimpse of it). What would ever make us think that this would calm him down or allow us to control him? During their training these members would have been taught that the genesis of human behaviour is interactional not dispositional (perhaps different words were used but the idea was the same). The notion that Mr. Dziekanski was in charge and trie police were responding to him is illogical and unscientific. Mr. Dziekanski and the police were locked in a dance of behaviours and responses; each being influenced by and influencing the other all at the same time. People will respond reactively to the use of "heavy tactics". Trapping someone (especially a frightened someone) in a circle is bound to stimulate defensive behaviours. If the four policemen had done something different, chances are Mr. Dziekanski would have responded differently. And no, it would not be Mr. Dzieksnskj's responsibility to calm down first and create a different dance. He is the "client". The police are the authorities and it is their responsibility to change the dance and take control (they are trained and he isn't).

vi. "Is it, or isn't it?"

One final comment. There has been much discussion both in and outside these proceedings with regard to the stapler as a weapon. While I believe that anything can be used asa weapon, it is interesting that not everyone (including police people) regard the danger posed by the stapler in the same way. During the proceedings those who see the stapler as a credible threat have focused on the policemens' perceptions, and quite rightly have stated that the policemens' perceptions were their reality. I want to point out that perception and tactical considerations are inter-related (in all use of force models). These concepts hold equal status in the models. Tactical considerations, in this case, would include such factors as containment, position, backup, proximity of the public, police tools available, condition of the subject, and nature of his weapon. In my opinion, the tactical considerations during this incident were significantly in favour of the police. Arguably this could make the deployment of the Taser an excessive use of force. In light of the "one-plus-one" rule it could be argued that there was no reasonable relationship between the degree of threat and the amount offeree applied to it. The amount offeree applied was "precise" in nature rather than proportionate to the threat, Moreover, these tactical considerations emphasize the excessive nature of the multiple taserings, following the first (that took Mr. Dziekanski to ground), in both the probe and drive stun modes.

Thank you for consulting me on this matter. I hope these opinions will be of assistance.

Sincerely,
Dr. Mike Webster
Centurion Consulting Services Ltd.

[Note: this letter came to me as a pdf which I re-formatted to HTML using OCR. So, there may be some OCR typos I have not caught, and while the overall paragraph structure is consistent with the original, the actual presentation and spacing is a bit different - apologies, this technology is really, well, the word for it is 'the shits.']


***************************************************************************
Stunning attitude, North Shore News, May 27, 2009.

AS the inquiry into the Tasering death of Robert Dziekanski enters its final stages, it is hard to imagine what more the RCMP and its supporters could do to hurt their own officers.

Over the past several weeks, the force has offered up witness after witness whose purpose appears to be to defend the institution's good name. Each has succeeded in doing the opposite.

First there was the officer who claimed Dziekanski's stapler was a threat to the public. Then there was the superintendent who said allowing the media to be misled about the number of jolts was good for the investigation. Now, in testimony this week, we have an "expert" who claims the video of the incident showed Dziekanski moving toward the police. That expert, it would seem, is a former Vancouver police officer with no formal training in photogrammetry and whose organization counts Taser International among its sponsors.

Each of these witnesses, in attempting to justify a series of grievous missteps by those involved, has succeeded only in further damaging the institution's reputation. Instead of simply accepting responsibility and vowing to do better, the force is seen to be suppressing the truth and defending the negligent in its own self-interest.

In doing so, the RCMP's management is betraying its own members. Frontline officers rely on the trust and respect of the general public to do their jobs. The institution is undermining both.

The force must stop making excuses, take its lumps and move on -- if for no other reason than to help itself.


***************************************************************************
Taser inquiry testimony ends, May 27, 2009.

VANCOUVER - The public inquiry into the death of Robert Dziekanski, which heard compelling testimony from the Mounties involved in his death and airport visitors who witnessed the tragic incident, ended with a bit of a whimper Tuesday as the last witness took the stand.

Engineer Duane MacInnis testified that amateur video taken of Dziekanski moments before he was stunned with an RCMP Taser could not be used to support the force’s claim that the Polish man was advancing on officers.

With that, the proceedings were adjourned until June 19 when closing arguments will be heard. A final report by commissioner Thomas Braidwood is expected in the fall.

Dziekanski died on the floor of Vancouver’s airport in October 2007 after he was shocked multiple times by an RCMP Taser.

He had wandered around the customs hall for hours, looking for his mother after arriving from Poland to start a new life in Canada.

Police were summoned to deal with Dziekanski after he began throwing furniture in the arrivals area of the airport. He was jolted by the Taser within seconds of their arrival on the scene.

The inquiry, which heard from more than 80 witnesses and stretched beyond four months, heard conflicting views about what actually caused Dziekanski’s death and about the actions of RCMP and airport officials.

The four officers each told the inquiry they tried to calm the man, but he came at them with a stapler. They repeatedly stunned him on the ground because, they said, he was fighting back.


***************************************************************************
Police could have avoided inquiry - lawyer, May 27, 2009.

Robert Dziekanski's mother, the public and law enforcement could have been spared a lengthy public inquiry if RCMP officers had only admitted they made mistakes shortly after the Polish immigrant's death, a lawyer said Tuesday as the Braidwood Inquiry neared an end.

I think that the public expected a proper and heartfelt apology to the family," said lawyer Don Rosenbloom, representing the Polish government at the inquiry, which wrapped up four months of testimony Thursday.

Had they come forward and been forthright in acknowledging that they had done wrong at the time, this wouldn't have been the story that it is . . . none of us would have been here."

Dziekanski came to Canada as a landed immigrant in October 2007, but he never made it out of Vancouver International Airport. The inquiry has heard Dziekanski spent hours wandering around the immigration hall and arrivals area of the airport, never connecting with his mother, who had come to meet him.

Dziekanski died after he was hit with an RCMP Taser weapon multiple times after being confronted by four officers.

The inquiry has exposed questions like why the officers' accounts of the events appear to differ in key ways from an eyewitness video; and why the RCMP a year to correct misinformation released after the event.

The many lawyers involved in the inquiry will reconvene in mid-June to make their final submissions. A final report, including any recommendations from Commissioner Thomas Braidwood, could take months.

Down.

LIARS!

day 16 & losing count
Up, Down.

William/Bill Sweeney, the deputy commissioner (should that be capitalized I wonder? Deputy Commissioner? or should I just capitalize the L on Liar and the D on Dissembler?) of the RCMP goes before a Senate committee and apologizes for what the RCMP did to Robert Dziekanski. He says he is really really sorry and he promises, cross his measely little heart, that he will learn from his mistakes. In the same breath he says he is sorry he cannot say more but ... he doesn't want to prejudice the 'investigation' ... blah blah blah ...
more of the same old FUCKING BULLSHIT LIES from the RCMP!
RCMP deputy commissioner apologizes for Dziekanski's death, Janice Tibbetts, May 11, 2009. I guess I should be surprised that the Globe and Mail praises his lameness: The talking cure, Editorial, May 13, 2009.

Ujjal Dosanjh is finally coming forward and telling some truth, he says:

"By impeding certain witnesses or trying to prevent certain witnesses from coming before the inquiry is preventing the commissioner from coming to a conclusion based on all of the evidence -- that is insulting to Canadians."

(Dziekanski 'would not have died' if spared Taser, expert tells inquiry, Friday, May 8, 2009; Braidwood inquiry 'a battle of experts': lawyer, Sat May 09 2009.)

One could ask why it has taken almost two years for him to do so? Better late than never you could say. That this oh-so-late hand wringing is a way to appear honourable among these despicable rogues ... well, that's the k-k-Canadian way eh? Here he is yukking it up with his buddies, Tom Smith President of Taser International, and Ravi Hira lawyer for Constable Kwesi Millington:

still and all, somebody should tell Ujjal Dosanjh that it is TOO LITTLE TOO LATE!

A-and Brian Mulrooney is also on the stand lying today. Oh, he is so meek and mild. CTV tells us that, "Former prime minister Brian Mulroney fought back tears at the Oliphant inquiry Wednesday."

"Cry me a river," sez I.

i have been re-reading The Great Code the way i prefer to read it which is to open at some page and carry on till i fall asleep, all this caps-lock angst is no doubt just misplaced something-or-other, being too alone with a language that is 99% culturally conditioned maybe :-) and i wish someone was here who could explain it all to me in terms that i might understand what it is exactly that i have misplaced

something else came to me today, meditating on Michael K and such, a series of reductions, losses, no need to go into the details, things loved: architecture, women, geometry, children, open space, certain kinds of cooperative conversation ... and today, standing at the streetcar stop i saw that very very small things have been arriving just in time to keep me on the thread ... infinitesimal things, a smile on the girl's face in Tims, a laugh overheard in the park, a phone call, an email with almost no message, a promise i do not expect to see fulfilled

i bought a cutting board, then went to the fruit store for avocadoes, ginger and garlic, and the woman saw the board and said to me, "you are cooking," not, "are you cooking?" a chinese woman, i overheard her tell someone whe has four children, and this is like a little chestnut now, a little sprouted seed in my garden of imaginings

and the other thought around whoremonger, Ephesians 5,5: For this ye know, that no whoremonger, nor unclean person, nor covetous man, who is an idolater, hath any inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and of God. there is some wiggle room here though eh? seems like it needs to be and-ed with idolater? i always thought a whoremonger was a seller, a pimp then, like a monger generally which is a small-scale or petty trafficker, trader, dealer, but when it comes to whores, no, the OED is clear, it is a user, a lecher, a fornicator, a dealer with, not a dealer of or in so it would be a waste of time to hedge on simple penetration ... oh my, well, fuck 'em sez i, and of course immediately tempted to put all of this straight into the toast later in the summer :-)



***************************************************************************
The talking cure, Editorial, May 13, 2009.

The lessons from the needless tasering death of Robert Dziekanski have long been in plain sight. At last, they seem to be sinking in among the Mounties.

The 40-year-old Polish immigrant was zapped five times on Oct. 14, 2007, though he had no weapons, struck or threatened no one, and was in anguish because he had been waiting 10 hours at the Vancouver International Airport for his mother. The Mounties killed him.

William Sweeney, the Senior Deputy Commissioner of the RCMP, told a Senate committee, which is studying reform of the federal police force, that the Mounties are very sorry for his death, the subject of a judicial inquiry at which RCMP officers have repeatedly shown they have learned nothing. Mr. Sweeney, rather than falling back on narrow explanations drawn from the manual on “the use of force,” said the Mounties need to relearn how to talk to people, to avoid harming them.

How true. Time was on the Mounties' side. They could have tried talking to Mr. Dziekanski, offered him a chair and a glass of water. They could have stood back, instead of closing in as a pack on a bewildered man. Why has it been so hard for the Mounties to say so until now?



***************************************************************************
Dziekanski 'would not have died' if spared Taser, expert tells inquiry, Friday, May 8, 2009.

Robert Dziekanski would have lived if he hadn't been stunned by a Taser when confronted by RCMP officers at Vancouver airport in 2007, a medical expert in sudden death testified Friday at a public inquiry.

Dr. Zian Tseng, a cardiac electrophysiologist at the University of California in San Francisco, has studied in-custody sudden deaths, and his work shows that once Tasers were deployed, the rate of those deaths increased six times, though not all were directly attributed to Tasers, the inquiry heard.

In his testimony, Tseng outlined what happens to the heart when a person is stunned by a Taser. In the Dzeikanski case, he concluded that the Polish immigrant would not have died if he hadn't been jolted by a Taser.

"I tried to put myself in that situation and think about if the Taser was not discharged in that case and he simply struggled with police," Tseng said. "In my opinion, in that kind of scenario, he would not have died."

Dziekanski died on the floor of the airport soon after being shocked five times by a police Taser. Four RCMP officers had been sent to the international arrivals lounge in response to reports that Dziekanski was throwing furniture and causing a scene. Within seconds of their arrival, a Taser was deployed to subdue Dziekanski.

Tseng told the inquiry Friday Dziekanski was already in a heightened state of stress, frustrated by the situation he found himself in.

Dziekanski's stress level was made worse by the use of the Taser, which triggered a medical condition known as "ventricular tachycardia," which Tseng described as a dangerous heart rhythm.

The Taser jolts in this case either directly or indirectly led to that condition, which could lead to the heart stopping completely, Tseng testified.

The inquiry heard last month from a cardiology expert, who was paid by Taser International for sitting on its medical advisory board, that Dziekanski's death didn't seem to be related to the stun gun.

Dr. Charles Swerdlow testified Dziekanski's heart didn't stop immediately after the deployment of the Taser, adding that if the heart was affected by electrical current, the resulting heartbeat would be either too fast or irregular.

Not acting in public interest: Dosanjh

Liberal MP Ujjal Dosanjh paid a surprise visit to the inquiry Friday to listen to Tseng's testimony.

Dosanjh, who was B.C.'s attorney general in 1999 and okayed the use of Tasers by police in the province, said he now regrets his decision.

"If I had known all of the information [about Tasers], if I had been given the truth, which I wasn't given, I wouldn't have made the decision I made," Dosanjh said.

He also said lawyers representing the federal government and the Mounties in the inquiry are not acting in the public interest at the inquiry.

The provincial inquiry was called in the wake of Dziekanski's death and is being overseen by Thomas Braidwood, a retired B.C. Court of Appeal justice. Braidwood will make recommendations to prevent similar incidents, and he could make findings of misconduct against the officers or anyone else involved.

Throughout these proceedings, Dosanjh said, the federal lawyers have taken a position of undermining Dziekanski's victimization and defending the role of the RCMP officers and the use of the Taser.

He said the federal lawyers seem to be doing that "because they want to limit the liability of the four officers in the RCMP and the federal government."

"But what they are doing by pursuing that short-term interest is actually preventing the public interest in a larger sense from being served, and that is absolutely not appropriate," Dosanjh said.



***************************************************************************
Braidwood inquiry 'a battle of experts': lawyer, Sat May 09 2009.

Lines have been drawn between Taser supporters on one side and Taser detractors on the other at the Braidwood Inquiry into the death of Robert Dziekanski. At the centre of the debate are the experts.

Dr. Zian Tseng, a leading cardiac specialist, told the inquiry he believed the Taser was a direct factor in Dziekanski's death at Vancouver International Airport in 2007.

"In my opinion -- in that scenario -- he wouldn't have died in a sudden death, if the Taser was not introduced in this situation," Tseng said.

This is testimony the lawyer for Taser International didn't want the Braidwood Inquiry to hear, saying "the evidence has no value."

On Thursday, in a surprise motion, David Neave asked that the reports by Tseng and several other doctors who were critical of Tasers be blocked, even though the non-critical reports by scientists employed by the manufacturer had already been heard.

"This is devolving into... has become, a battle of experts," he told Judge Thomas Braidwood.

Braidwood later decided the testimony of Tseng and the other medical experts would be allowed.

Taser international's lawyer wasn't the only one critical of Tseng. Counsel for the Government of Canada -- Helen Roberts -- questioned the specialist about every other possible contributing factor of Dziekanski's death.

Tseng agreed that tobacco could have had a negative impact on Dziekanski's body.

Roberts also asked about Dziekanski's lack of food and sleep, his agitation and his fear of flying, but nothing about the Taser's role.

Earlier in the inquest, she tried blocking RCMP officers, like Superintendent Wayne Rideout, from appearing at the inquiry.

This upsets former B.C. Attorney-General Ujjal Dosanjh. He gave political permission to introduce Tasers a decade ago. Dosanjh now believes he wasn't told the truth about the safety of the weapons.

He says the federal government and the RCMP are not serving the public interest.

"By impeding certain witnesses or trying to prevent certain witnesses from coming before the inquiry is preventing the commissioner from coming to a conclusion based on all of the evidence -- that is insulting to Canadians," he said.

Dosanjh believes the most prudent thing Canada could do is take Tasers away from the police until Judge Braidwood makes his final recommendations.



***************************************************************************
RCMP deputy commissioner apologizes for Dziekanski's death, Janice Tibbetts, May 11, 2009.

OTTAWA — The RCMP's second-in-command issued a direct apology Monday for the "tragic death" of Robert Dziekanski, saying the police service wants to learn from its mistakes and refocus training so that officers use force as a last resort.

"We are very sorry for Mr. Dziekanski's death," William Sweeney, the senior deputy commissioner, told a Senate committee studying RCMP reforms.

"We are committed to learning as much as possible from the circumstances surrounding his tragic death."

The Polish immigrant died at the Vancouver International Airport in October 2007 after four RCMP officers Tasered and restrained him after he threw furniture.

Sweeney, when asked what the force has learned from Dziekanski's death, said that Mounties need better training to return to traditional policing methods of diffusing potentially violent situations — such as talking down a suspect — rather than using force.

"We must spend more time with our training to use de-escalation techniques in a much more effective manner than perhaps we have in the past," Sweeney told the national security committee.

"In my day, it was always talking," he said. "We prided ourselves on time, talk and, if necessary, tear gas before we attempted to do any sorts of interventions that would physically cause harm to others."

Sweeney, the former deputy commissioner for the North West Region, which includes Alberta, Saskatchewan and Manitoba, cautioned that "Sometimes things happen so quickly that the outcome is not one we would have desired."

Dziekanski had left his home in Poland more than 24 hours before his death to immigrate to Canada to live with his mother in Kamloops, B.C., but they never connected at the airport and she returned home.

The 40-year-old stayed in a secure area, not accessible to the public, for almost nine hours. He eventually became agitated. When RCMP officers gave him conflicting commands, he threw up his hands and grabbed a stapler from a counter. An officer then used a Taser to shock him.

Dziekanski died within minutes and an inquiry in Vancouver is currently hearing evidence on the events surrounding his death.

RCMP senior media spokesman Sgt. Tim Shields said he was sorry two weeks ago after a former media relations officer testified at the inquiry that he provided inaccurate information about the fatal incident.

Sweeney on Monday did not directly discuss the RCMP use of Tasers, and said he would not comment specifically on the events surrounding the public probe.

However, RCMP Commissioner William Elliott has changed the force's policy on Taser use since Dziekanski's death — which was captured on video by a witness and shown worldwide.

Officers are now cautioned to only use the stun guns in situations that pose a safety risk, rather than simply to restrain a suspect.

Elliott has acknowledged that the RCMP has to rebuild public trust. The force has been plagued by scandal in recent years and began a process of reforms, as recommended in a December 2007 task force report on how to fix the embattled institution.

Keith Clark, assistant commissioner in charge of the reforms, told the Senate committee Monday that the force still has a long way to go in terms of a culture change, which he said remains overly bureaucratic.

Sweeney was considered a top contender to head the RCMP, but he was bypassed for Elliott, a civilian and former senior bureaucrat appointed by the Conservative government in July 2007.

Down.

Braidwood Inquiry - Nothing left but expletives.

Up, Down, In This Thread.

“You're trying to make a bad person out of him, which means you can kill a bad person but you cannot kill a good person.”
        Iwona Kosowska, witness.

Two weeks hiatus for march Break and now the Braidwood Inquiry is taking another week off. Easter I guess. Life is good and life is easy among the legal elites.

I guessed at lawyer's rates the other day - came up with a grand a day - WRONG! Try $750 an HOUR; 8 hours of that is 6 GRAND PER DAY. They are making a killing so to speak.

I watched a few hours of the 'proceedings' on Tuesday, and another few on Thursday. I wish I had seen Iwona Kosowska's exchange with Ravi Hira but I didn't know there was a CBC web-cam in play at the time - and the transcripts are not available yet.

The pussy footing servile politeness in the tone and content of remarks by David Butcher and Ravi Hira, two of the Mountie lawyers, particularly towards Thomas Braidwood, and Braidwood's tone in response indicates that he has whacked their little legal pee-pees over the attempted character assassination of Robert Dziekanski. No love lost between them I would say. Good for Braidwood.

But Braidwood himself looked unkempt, and lost his thread at least once. It looks as if the strain is taking its toll on an old retired guy.

Everyone except the RCMP is demanding that the decision not to charge these men be revisted. Wally Oppal has opined that this may be possible once he has Braidwood's report in his hands. But when will that be?

Say, another few weeks of testimony; a month minimum to cook up the report - June July time. By then the Canadian attention span may have run its course.

It all leads me to expect a whitewash in the end.

“I’m a citizen that cares about innocent Polish people. These cops ain’t gonna see any Fucking time for this.

There’s no justice in this country. These cops aren’t going to see any Fucking time. Fucking snakes! Fucking losers!”
        Unidentified onlooker 'acting out'. (I second.)




“Are you out of your mind?!”
        Robert Dziekanski, April 15 1967 - October 14 2007, last words.


Good question Robert.

Down.

Braidwood Inquiry - duty, truth, honour.

Up, Down, In This Thread.

"Sir, it was my duty. And I will continue to do my duty."
        Ravi Hira, lawyer for Kwesi Millington at Braidwood Inquiry.



Presumably on instructions from the RCMP, he finds himself as the point man in the attempted character assassination of Robert Dziekanski. When the transcripts are released I expect we will find the other Mountie lawyers in there up to their elbows as well.

Technically he's right of course, it is his duty to defend his client. We could wish that his client had a similar operational understanding of duty. And given that the Braidwood Inquiry has morphed into a quasi-criminal trial ... it is his duty to scrape the bottom of the barrel, tactically speaking - which is exactly what he is doing.

At the taxpayer's expense too eh? And not cheap either - gotta be a grand a day each for these guys plus disbursements ... say, half a million total to 'defend' the perpetrators. I would have preferred to be able to say 'represent' but there you go. They deserve representation - but their actions are indefensible.

That Ravi Hira 'storms off' in the words of a commentator, is the best that can be said of him - it shows that he knows very well that he has given up something important for whatever 'mess of pottage' the RCMP are handing out.

Thomas Braidwood eventually cut him off, "That is irrelevant. I've ruled against you." Good for Thomas Braidwood - he seems to be the only adult in the room. I note that he had a similar exchange with Don Rosenbloom, the lawyer for Poland at the Inquiry. He is an adult, and he is fair.

To put it in terms that most people seem to use (primarily) these days - this whole 'expense', millions upon millions of dollars, could have been saved if the RCMP had acted honourably from the outset.

Who to blame for this 'expense'? The 'perps', the guys who did the deed, Benjamin 'Monty' Robinson, Kwesi Millington, Bill Bentley, and Gerry Rundel; and, of course, the grand pooh-bah, William Elliott, who sets such a sterling example as a truth teller; and all of them at the various ranks inbetween for following the line: Stan Lowe, Al Macintyre & Wayne Rideout, Peter Thiessen, Pierre Lemaitre, Dale Carr ... the list goes on and on and on.

Why put 'expense' in inverted commas? Because the expense in money is ultimately irrelevant. It is the expense in 'human coin' that is important. The death of Robert Dziekanski, the endless grief of his mother, the several and collective reputations of the RCMP squandered, the shame felt by every Canadian at seeing the true north strong and free debauched.

With the exceptions of those at the true centre of this, Robert Dziekanski and his mother, any one could have stopped it.

The 'officials' and the 'bystanders' at Vancouver YVR airport could have stopped it before it began. Sima Ashrafinia or Paul Pritchard, relative heroes in the piece that they are, could have stopped it. Any single one of the four Mounties involved could have stopped it. Any single one of the scores of RCMP involved after the fact could have spoken out and seen to it that the matter was dealt with honourably. Any one of the 'running dogs and lackeys of the imperialist' RCMP like Ravi Hira could have done the same.



I'm an old red neck myself. I have used Denial as the tactic of choice many times in my life - it is only now, as I get older and find that denial doesn't work so well on arthritis, that I begin to see through it :-)


So what's your duty? The best I have found is this: ... and what doth the Lord require of thee, but to do justly, and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with thy God? (Micah 6-8)

Down.