Canadian court rules shooting cop was self-defense.

[Beirut]

The courts in Canada have struck another blow for the common man. Though this one came at the cost of a cop's life, the issue itself is one of great importance and sets a huge precedent. It's the first time in Canada anyone has ever used a self-defence plea and won after being charged with shooting and killing a cop. The bottom line being that the police (and therefore the state itself) can not do what ever they want.

The story in short: the police staged a raid on a suspected drug dealer's house in the early morning. The guy who owns the house wakes up thinking it's a home invasion. He opens his bedroom door and there's a man dressed in black, with no police markings on him, right in front of him. The home owner fires gun and hits the cop three times. The cops return fire, hitting the guy's wife and one of their own, along with a bunch of misses. The guy is arrested and charged with first-degree murder of a police officer, which carries an automatic 25-years with no parole sentence. He claimed self-defense in court. He won. The no-knock search warrant was also declared unconstitutional, a violation of Section 8 that protects us from unreasonable search and seizure.

http://www.canada.com/montrealgazette/news/story.html?id=2edf6fd8-88d0-4289-b789-16a962da4f05

Now, as much as I'm no great fan of the police, I do think that people shooting cops is a bad idea. However, if the police act like nuckleheads and are hurt or killed as a consequence of their knuckleheadedness, Joe Citizen should not be held liable for it. This time he wasn't. Don't know how the laws are where you are, but this is a huge deal here in Canadaland.

This is the third time in so many months that Canadian courts have passed intelligent precedent setting decisions. Must be the silly season for all this common sense to be breaking out.

[m52nickerson]

Damn, on one hand it is hard to believe that all the officers were not shouting "Police" at the top of there lungs. On the other hand if I woke up to that I might shoot as well.

Tough call.

[Fragony]

Not that tough a call, it's not their decision but the person who sends them.

[rory_20_uk]

They are responsible for their actions and how they undertake their job: being sent to a war zone for example does not mean the individual is somehow absolved of all responsibility for their actions.
Why did the uniform not have "Police" written along the front?

Are tazers not an option in these raids? I know they might kill the suspect, but it is rare and I believe they are as effective as guns at close quarters.

But good call by the courts. The designer of the uniforms requires censure, and the ability of the police to apparently not hit the subject but kill one of their own and kit someone else seems to be another area to work on.

~:smoking:

[Alexander the Pretty Good]

The no-knock search warrant was also declared unconstitutional, a violation of Section 8 that protects us from unreasonable search and seizure.
Excellent. :2thumbsup:

[m52nickerson]

Don't get me wrong. I think in this case the courts did the right thing. The police obviously have to change there tactics.

[DukeofSerbia]

Police action was reckless if that can be called as action after all :wall:. Court has right.

[woad&fangs]

A :balloon2: for the judges of our northern neighbors.

[GoreBag]

"He did not have licences for the other three firearms and is charged with improperly storing all three."

Heh.

[discovery1]

Wow, I am impressed by Canada. Cudos.

[Beirut]

From our Constitution. :canada:

(My God, we actually did something right.)

Legal Rights

Life, liberty and security of person 7. Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of the person and the right not to be deprived thereof except in accordance with the principles of fundamental justice.

Search or seizure 8. Everyone has the right to be secure against unreasonable search or seizure.

Detention or imprisonment 9. Everyone has the right not to be arbitrarily detained or imprisoned.

Arrest or detention 10. Everyone has the right on arrest or detention

(a) to be informed promptly of the reasons therefor;
(b) to retain and instruct counsel without delay and to be informed of that right; and
(c) to have the validity of the detention determined by way of habeas corpus and to be released if the detention is not lawful.

Our Constitution only used to be used by the provincial and federal governments to moan and whine about bureaucratioc jurisdiction, so I'm really liking this stuff where individual rights are coming to the foreground.

[drone]

Bravo, Canada. Send some of that common sense down this way.

[Divinus Arma]

Parasiris was never charged with drug trafficking after the raid.

The jury was never told about the warrant or why the Laval police were in Parasiris's home. The six men and six women on the jury never heard that the police found less than one gram of cocaine, nearly two grams of marijuana, 13 cellphones and four pagers inside the home.

They also found eight pages of what one investigator described as possibly being the accounts of drug trafficking.

Parasiris admitted during an interrogation that he had been involved in drug trafficking for three years to get out of financial trouble.

The jury never heard this evidence.

So a drug trafficker kills a cop and gets away with it and you all celebrate? Jesus Christ. :no:

[Sasaki Kojiro]

Way to miss the point...

[Oleander Ardens]

I'm again the widespread posession of weapons - this situation is far harder to imagine here in Europe. But first of all I think that the rule of law must be applied with common sense in every difficult situation which is brought to an court. If the police officer was not recognizable either by sign or call the owner of the house had a reasonable to see in the dark figure coming out of a darkened hallway who raised his arm against him and his familiy an armed robber.

So I congratulate the decision of the jury but I fell sorry for the death of the officer.

OA

[Crazed Rabbit]

So a drug trafficker kills a cop and gets away with it and you all celebrate? Jesus Christ. :no:

Even criminals - though not convicted of anything it would seem - have the right to self defense. If the police hadn't burst into his house in the middle of night this would not have happened. But I guess just knocking on a guy's door in the afternoon isn't nearly as cool as getting dressed up like commandos.

Very well done Canada. I wish we could get some of that sense down here, where an innocent man sits on death row for shooting a cop who barged into his house late at night.

The bottom line is you should be allowed to shoot people who burst into your home at night. It should be noted that some criminals have taken to wearing police markings and shouting police in home invasions in America.

Therefore, the police shouldn't burst into homes at night.

CR

[Reverend Joe]

So a drug trafficker kills a cop and gets away with it and you all celebrate? Jesus Christ. :no:

I might also mention, DA, that what you are facing is the Dresden dilemna.

It does not matter if the man was the most evil person in the world. Whether or not he broke the law, the police themselves should be following a proper code of civil conduct. As I said, it's the same problem as the firebombing of Dresden, which was explained as a retaliation for similar atrocities by Germany, when they frequently bombed civilian targets; this excuse does not hold up, because rather than excusing the firebombing, it just means that what we did is just as bad as what Germany did.

No matter how evil a person, no matter how many laws they have broken, it does not excuse the police from doing wrong themselves, because then they are just as guilty of breaking the code of good civil conduct as the lawbreaker.

[Beirut]

So a drug trafficker kills a cop and gets away with it and you all celebrate? Jesus Christ. :no:

Not at all. I'm celebrating the rule of law and the protections afforded us by our Constitution being respected even in the most egregious circumstances.

Nobody wanted that cop to get shot. But nobody wanted the guy to do 25 years in jail because the cops screwed the pooch either. If they have a case against him for dealing drugs, fine. But that case must follow the rule of law and in this case it did not.

Also, you have to understand that Quebec has a history of innocent people being killed by the police and the police walking free afterwards. Hell, some cops got promotions after killing innocent people. The public's empathy for the accused is a direct result of that. This rulling shows that civil rights are starting to take precedence over police powers and their associated "we do what we want and you pay for it" attitude.

[Reverend Joe]

But nobody wanted the guy to do 25 years in jail because the cops screwed the pooch either.

:brood:

[Xiahou]

So a drug trafficker kills a cop and gets away with it and you all celebrate? Jesus Christ. :no:Then charge him for drug trafficking instead of trying to put him away for a crime that he didn't commit. It sounds like this guy should be in jail, but not for murder.

As an aside, here is a fine example of when it's the police who are guilty of a spray and pray approach, whereas the civilian fired accurately. I only bring that up to point it out to those who say such a thing isn't possible....

[Banquo's Ghost]

As an aside, here is a fine example of when it's the police who are guilty of a spray and pray approach, whereas the civilian fired accurately. I only bring that up to point it out to those who say such a thing isn't possible....

A hit sir, a very palpable hit. :bow:



Detention or imprisonment 9. Everyone has the right not to be arbitrarily detained or imprisoned.

Arrest or detention 10. Everyone has the right on arrest or detention

(a) to be informed promptly of the reasons therefor;
(b) to retain and instruct counsel without delay and to be informed of that right; and
(c) to have the validity of the detention determined by way of habeas corpus and to be released if the detention is not lawful.

Since Her Majesty is also the Brits' head of state, do you think you might persuade her to mention this Magna Carta based subversion to her PM over there?

:2thumbsup:

[KrooK]

This sentence is well in my opinion. Police should look like police and yell "police" not just enter someone home and terrorise its owner with a guns.

[Beirut]

Since Her Majesty is also the Brits' head of state, do you think you might persuade her to mention this Magna Carta based subversion to her PM over there?

:2thumbsup:

When I have the pleasure of an audience with Her Majesty, I will mention your concerns. :bow:


Police should look like police and yell "police" not just enter someone home and terrorise its owner with a guns.


Excellent point.

Before those cops screwed up the raid and ended up shooting one of their own and losing a member of the team, I'll bet they had a wonderful Goth dress up session. Bloused trousers, black... everything. I'm sure they looked cool enough to form a band. Too bad they weren't smart enough to perform their duties.

Cops should look like cops, not a South American death squad.

[CountArach]

Cops should look like cops, not a South American death squad.
Unless of course they are a South American death squad.

[Rhyfelwyr]

The guy should not be charged with murder, but they should still sort him out for the drugs. The Polics should have been more careful, although I doubt it was entirely the fault of the cop that was killed, or even his team that day.

Sensible decision by the courts I suppose.

Wow, it feels strange on the liberal side. But its getting agrophobic so I'm going back to my authoritarian bunker where the police take rocket launchers on drug raids...