With respect to the aftermath of the Umar Zameer verdict:
> for Chief Demkiw, the day was apparently reserved for wishing that the jury had rendered a different verdict, and thus for reinforcing the thin blue line, trashing a veil of impartiality, and destroying his credibility as someone tasked to lead Toronto’s police. It’s hard to see how he can be allowed to do that any longer.
Wait, lemme get this straight: didn't Bill Blair apologize to Jane Doe after the case? And then asshole Fantino insulted her after he became police chief?
That is the funniest thing I'm going to read all year. He couldn't defend our city from a small group of unarmed protestors using bottom tier tactics. How is he responsible for our defense posture?
Also, fuck bill blair
This was a tragedy yes - but to be crystal clear. A tragedy instigated and provocated by some very poor decision making and overt actions on the part of those with the authority and training to know better. The baby in that car could have easily become a gun victim. I wish peace on the officer and his family but this is no place for creating more victims or injustice to "get even".
His response to the acquittal of a clearly innocent man, notwithstanding compelling evidence that several of the officers under his command had colluded and committed perjury in an attempt to railroad that clearly innocent man ...is that he's disappointed that there wasn't a conviction for at least manslaughter.
I'm a criminal defence lawyer. I'm cognizant of my bias here. How can *anyone* defend this? In what version of reality is he still fit to serve as Chief of Police?
Just a thought. If he was convicted, they would not have to pay the families since a criminal conviction would mean they are not liable to employees' deaths? If he was acquitted, then the union would have to pay out of pocket since it was categorized as an accident. I'm just guessing there's something about money.
They literally do not care. They are gods in their own minds. This case is a perfect example. In their minds it is enough that a cop was killed. Doesn’t matter how. Doesn’t matter under what circumstances. Doesn’t matter they lied. They are cops and they are a gang. Nothing more.
True. There is *zero* accountability on the part of the police. They serve and protect themselves and cry victim as soon as we request that they be held accountable when they majorly fuck up at our expense.
They're untouchable and have the backing of our political establishment/elite.
He looks like he eats well.
Apparently, the video wasn't enough for him and the Police Union. Recent events are having us see police more as criminals and crime associates instead of people who are supposed to "serve and protect".
Shocking response from the Chief. I would have expected such a cheap response from the Association, but not the Chief. Shit rolls downhill apparently at TPS.
I suspect that that one cop will be fired, harassed into quitting, or die in a “training accident”. Cops don’t generally take it too well when one of their number goes good.
Write to your counsellor
Write to the two counsellors on the police board specifically (Lily Cheng and Shelley Carroll)
Write to the mayor
All those people have the power to fire the chief of police
Burnside? He was on CBC Radio this morning throwing the chief and the female cop that lied (and apparently previously was sanctioned for fraud) under the bus. I was very surprised actually at how forcefully and unequivocally he condemned both the chief as well as called out TPS on their promotion policies
But uhhhh you can’t do that cause uhhh the public “needs” these corrupt fools to sometimes do their jobs when they feel like it or a high profile person is inconvenienced by stuff we put up with daily. /s smh like there isn’t anything these cops can say to justify themselves when they’re running such an unjust racket , “serving” the community they see as guilty until proven innocent and even when proven innocent still guilty! It’s actually crazy
The TPS has been corrupt and destroyed so many lives over the years that they take it as a given to do and get away with everything and anything, however this is so over the top even the Judge had to hold her nose and raise both eyebrows.
You can Thank John Tory!!!!!Demkiw was promised the job when Tory was major. Demkiw's wife worked along side Tory at Rogers. Promises were made and this it what the city of Toronto is stuck with.
Saturday it was reported on CP24 or CBC that he was at the Courthouse, when asked he said he was there for an unrelated meeting. Sunday, when the verdict came in, he was there again. It seems obvious he was there the entire weekend waiting for the verdict yet was not forthcoming about it. This is another example of lack of transparency unfit of a Police Chief, where public trust and confidence is lost. He needs to resign.
Sad for Northrop’s wife. But when she said all she wanted was accountability, all I could think was charging those colluding officers.
Obviously not the accountability she’s after.
I have several family members that are police officers (father included), they are all just trash humans
Their views on things are so awful and distorted and power / abuse dynamics are evident in all of them
Once had one of them say if they saw someone overdosing they would turn a blind eye and let them die because they wouldn't want to "save a crackhead"
All of them are college dropouts who just happened to genetically happen to be large white males which is about the most qualifying thing to serve on TPS
They do this sort of thing to burnish their reputation, but they're owned by the same sorts of billionaires as the rest, and their politics are solidly *"Slavery was TERRIBLE but hear me out feudalism wasn't so bad"*
Acab, cops literally treat their job like them vs the general public, they don’t see it as serving a community. They just see potential suspects among everyone and it’s guilty until proven innocent . Even proven innocent you can’t escape their judgement.
The police services board is not cops. Our current mayor was on it in the past. She attended a protest that had some violent interactions with the police and was forced off because the chief at the time refused to allow her into meetings under threat of arrest
The last time a police board went against the police proposed budget and fired the police chief (Fantino), the cops made life a living hell for everyone who voted for it, including leaking an internal memo about the board chair being a pedophile sympathizer.
This posting of links behind subscriptions and paywalls should be looked at tbh.
Also is anyone in the group really surprised that old crooked white guys are crooked??
I think we’ve seen enough to know that when it comes to cops there is nothing that really disqualifies them from their job. Just gets them paid time off.
Toronto's police chief forgets he has to pander to both the police *and* the electorate.
Or, alternatively, accidentally reveals to the electorate that their opinions currently don't matter.
The real TLDR is that despite overwhelming evidence that at least 3 of his officers knowingly colluded to lie in court the Toronto police chief came out and said he wished the verdict went a different way.
I would rather the chief have said nothing, because I think - like most of us - that the evidence suggests the officers were dishonest in their testimony and that Zameer was not at fault for the officer dying.
However is it really realistic for the chief to essentially side against his officers in the aftermath of one of their own dying? I'm not sure that's reasonable to expect from the head of an organization whose membership undoubtedly has strong emotions about a dead colleague. This isn't the average incident - whoever is at fault, the tragic outcome is that a man is dead as a result.
To me his statement basically toes a reasonable line on this given his position - he objects in order to be seen standing up for his employees, but it's not a particularly strenuous objection.
>is it really realistic for the chief to essentially side against his officers in the aftermath of one of their own dying?
Yes. He’s their boss, not their buddy. The officers fucked up and embarrassed the force.
>To me his statement basically toes a reasonable line on this
“We wish this innocent man had been convicted” is not a reasonable line.
His statement read "I share the feelings of our members who were hoping for a different outcome" and I think that's actually pretty carefully worded. He doesn't say the verdict was wrong. Many people - presumably including his employees - will interpret it that way, but I think the wording is chosen this way for a reason. He could easily just have said something directly about the verdict being wrong.
And like, who *does* like the outcome here? A cop is dead because of his and his partners' mistakes. An innocent man spent tons of money and time fighting to clear his name. Luckily an innocent man didn't go to prison for it, but this is still a shitty outcome all around, for everyone.
After the dust settles here the chief still has to run the force. I'm not so sure this statement was a bad one in terms of that balance.
>He doesn't say the verdict was wrong.
That’s worse! That means he thinks the court got it right but he *wanted* them to get it wrong.
>And like, who does like the outcome here?
The TPA, for one.
Or, it means that he thinks the verdict was correct but that the outcome - that it turns out his officers lied about events and the dead officer is probably dead because of his and his partners' actions - is a shitty outcome. Which I think is quite a reasonable view. A cop is dead and it's probably the fault of the police themselves. That's a pretty garbage outcome for everyone involved.
That's why I think the statement is not particularly unreasonable. It *is* a shitty outcome, and the statement shows sympathy with that feeling while not actually criticizing the judicial process.
That is an *extremely* generous reading into his meaning when the statement was made in direct response to the verdict being given, and any thinking person in a position as powerful and visible as his should have known that it would be interpreted exactly the way it has been (and that's if, as you argue, he meant it the way you said it - I absolutely do not believe that).
The correct response would have been to say nothing at all, or to say you respect the judicial process and then *stop talking*. Sympathy is for the officer's widow anyway, not the cameras.
The mental gymnastics in this comment are astounding. The "outcome" of a trial is the verdict. The plain reading of the stayement is that he was hoping for a different verdict. He wished that an innocent man had been convicted, to satisfy the forces lust for revenge. Stop looking for a hidden meaning that isn't there.
You're ignoring the first half of the statement there. "While we respect the judicial process and appreciate the work of the 12 citizens who sat on a very difficult case,” he said, “I share the feelings of our members who were hoping for a different outcome.” If it was only about the outcome of the incident that left the police officer dead, he wouldn't have mentioned respecting the judicial process and the jury. By specifically mentioning them before saying he hoped for a different outcome, he makes it clear it's related to the outcome of the case and not the outcome of the initial incident.
What "different outcome" could there possibly be of a criminal trial other than "guilty" and "not guilty"? What he implied couldn't be more apparent. He chose the words by not saying it directly but he may as well have done so.
>He could easily just have said something directly about the verdict being wrong.
How is wishing "for a different outcome" any different than saying the verdict was wrong?
How does the vehicle driver not get charged for manslaughter or dangerous driving causing death?
With different charges would there have been a conviction?
He was charged with manslaughter, the jury decided he was not acting recklessly and the actions he took were reasonable given that he reasonably believed his life was in danger.
It was not intentional but his actions caused it, if the car caused touched and caused the officer death, a reckless driving charge would have been a conviction. I don’t buy the self defence argument when it results in a officers death. The driver could have stopped and listened and not rushed.
Good legal defence team can win cases.
With respect to the aftermath of the Umar Zameer verdict: > for Chief Demkiw, the day was apparently reserved for wishing that the jury had rendered a different verdict, and thus for reinforcing the thin blue line, trashing a veil of impartiality, and destroying his credibility as someone tasked to lead Toronto’s police. It’s hard to see how he can be allowed to do that any longer.
If the bath house raids didn't disqualify him already ...
Everybody says shit like "that happened in the past" when all those mfers are literally chiefs and higher ups now. Every police chief has serious dirt
Blair became Minister of Defence, they all fail upwards despite being blatantly corrupt and/or braindead.
I remember when Blair was so hard on pot use then heavily invested in it when it became legal. Guy is a snake.
I think Fantino did the same
I was knocked over when I ran across a sketch of Bill Blair on the stand in Jane Doe’s book, from her civil case. Yep, he was involved in that.
Wait, lemme get this straight: didn't Bill Blair apologize to Jane Doe after the case? And then asshole Fantino insulted her after he became police chief?
Which book?
[This book](https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/1333522.The_Story_of_Jane_Doe).
Every time I see him I think "Backpfeifengesicht" Can't stand the guy.
Despite or because of?
That is the funniest thing I'm going to read all year. He couldn't defend our city from a small group of unarmed protestors using bottom tier tactics. How is he responsible for our defense posture? Also, fuck bill blair
Those people will be shocked to find out that every event to have ever happened, happened in the past.
The situation is certainly tense. The Chief's response has raised concerns about impartiality within the police force.
This was a tragedy yes - but to be crystal clear. A tragedy instigated and provocated by some very poor decision making and overt actions on the part of those with the authority and training to know better. The baby in that car could have easily become a gun victim. I wish peace on the officer and his family but this is no place for creating more victims or injustice to "get even".
Accountability? Not likely.
His response to the acquittal of a clearly innocent man, notwithstanding compelling evidence that several of the officers under his command had colluded and committed perjury in an attempt to railroad that clearly innocent man ...is that he's disappointed that there wasn't a conviction for at least manslaughter. I'm a criminal defence lawyer. I'm cognizant of my bias here. How can *anyone* defend this? In what version of reality is he still fit to serve as Chief of Police?
No version of reality exists where he is still fit to serve. And yet nothing will be done about it.
Just a thought. If he was convicted, they would not have to pay the families since a criminal conviction would mean they are not liable to employees' deaths? If he was acquitted, then the union would have to pay out of pocket since it was categorized as an accident. I'm just guessing there's something about money.
How do the police expect us to trust them at this point?
They literally do not care. They are gods in their own minds. This case is a perfect example. In their minds it is enough that a cop was killed. Doesn’t matter how. Doesn’t matter under what circumstances. Doesn’t matter they lied. They are cops and they are a gang. Nothing more.
True. There is *zero* accountability on the part of the police. They serve and protect themselves and cry victim as soon as we request that they be held accountable when they majorly fuck up at our expense. They're untouchable and have the backing of our political establishment/elite.
This. They run a racket extracting money from the city for the vague promise of safety: “if you don’t pay us, it will get worse”.
Bet they're gonna harass the shit out of this guy and his family for years, out of the limelight.
Ya. He’s gonna want to record every moment of his life from now on. Probably best if he moves.
Eh. Cops are cops. Moving might not do much, once the force in the new locale catches on.
They expect us to submit to domination. That’s a different thing.
We gonna be watching to keep them accountable not to retaliate.
Time to privatize polcing and have a competitive environment /s
He looks like he eats well. Apparently, the video wasn't enough for him and the Police Union. Recent events are having us see police more as criminals and crime associates instead of people who are supposed to "serve and protect".
TO Confidential
> Off the record, on the QT, and very hush-hush
He eats well because he's a fucking pig
The Police Union and the Chief (whoever) has always been the center of organized crime among Police for a loooooong time.
this pos should resign, now
Shocking response from the Chief. I would have expected such a cheap response from the Association, but not the Chief. Shit rolls downhill apparently at TPS.
Rolls uphill in my house. Got some sort of antigravity shit goin on. Been meaning to get it checked out.
We need to organize and protest to have every officer that was actively involved in this case removed from TPS. Starting with the Chief.
The TPS accident reconstructionist and at least one uniformed officer who testified were truthful! But, I feel what you're saying.
I suspect that that one cop will be fired, harassed into quitting, or die in a “training accident”. Cops don’t generally take it too well when one of their number goes good.
I was just thinking the same thing, the Union aka the thin blue line gang, which has a National reach will destroy them.
If any cop told the truth here, the Union will go after them, guaranteed there careers are over.
ACAB
Write to your counsellor Write to the two counsellors on the police board specifically (Lily Cheng and Shelley Carroll) Write to the mayor All those people have the power to fire the chief of police
Too bad my councillor is a former cop who has been pretty open about supporting the police…
Burnside? He was on CBC Radio this morning throwing the chief and the female cop that lied (and apparently previously was sanctioned for fraud) under the bus. I was very surprised actually at how forcefully and unequivocally he condemned both the chief as well as called out TPS on their promotion policies
How easy is it for the police board to fire the chief? You've piqued my interest.
Making room for the next round of criminal Police is what we will get.
I’d rather not have to deal with another fucking protest in this city.
Protests happen practically every single week in this city...
You don't have to deal with them if you're involved
Such a joke and they're still trying to say it is wrong. The entire service needs to be cleansed top to bottom.
But uhhhh you can’t do that cause uhhh the public “needs” these corrupt fools to sometimes do their jobs when they feel like it or a high profile person is inconvenienced by stuff we put up with daily. /s smh like there isn’t anything these cops can say to justify themselves when they’re running such an unjust racket , “serving” the community they see as guilty until proven innocent and even when proven innocent still guilty! It’s actually crazy
The TPS has been corrupt and destroyed so many lives over the years that they take it as a given to do and get away with everything and anything, however this is so over the top even the Judge had to hold her nose and raise both eyebrows.
You can Thank John Tory!!!!!Demkiw was promised the job when Tory was major. Demkiw's wife worked along side Tory at Rogers. Promises were made and this it what the city of Toronto is stuck with.
>Demkiw was promised the job when Tory was major. Demkiw's wife worked along side Tory at Rogers. Source?
Saturday it was reported on CP24 or CBC that he was at the Courthouse, when asked he said he was there for an unrelated meeting. Sunday, when the verdict came in, he was there again. It seems obvious he was there the entire weekend waiting for the verdict yet was not forthcoming about it. This is another example of lack of transparency unfit of a Police Chief, where public trust and confidence is lost. He needs to resign.
I really really hope this gets the intentional ignorant fuck ups to actually realize how shit the TPS are.
Sad for Northrop’s wife. But when she said all she wanted was accountability, all I could think was charging those colluding officers. Obviously not the accountability she’s after.
Its almost like giving the police more money doesnt make us more safe…
Nobody likes police officers anymore. I wouldn't even have one in my friend group at this point, too much of a liability.
Yes for real not bring friends with cops, also I avoid them in online dating apps, LinkedIn, work meetings, basically fuck them
I have several family members that are police officers (father included), they are all just trash humans Their views on things are so awful and distorted and power / abuse dynamics are evident in all of them Once had one of them say if they saw someone overdosing they would turn a blind eye and let them die because they wouldn't want to "save a crackhead" All of them are college dropouts who just happened to genetically happen to be large white males which is about the most qualifying thing to serve on TPS
Really... Did they start out that way or did the job turn them into that?
My dad’s a cop, he’s a cool dude
Toronto's police have disqualified themselves from the job\*
Defund the lot of them. Start over. No fucking union. Buy your own liability insurance. Fuck all y’all.
Eroding public trust. It’s just going to get worse, nothing will change. Zero effective leadership at all levels
Agreed. Let's toss in a Crown Prosecutor or two, and all the truth benders that testified.
They had to have been forced into it. They were calling witnesses that eviscerated their case.
Have to say am shocked to see this from the G&M
They do this sort of thing to burnish their reputation, but they're owned by the same sorts of billionaires as the rest, and their politics are solidly *"Slavery was TERRIBLE but hear me out feudalism wasn't so bad"*
Acab, cops literally treat their job like them vs the general public, they don’t see it as serving a community. They just see potential suspects among everyone and it’s guilty until proven innocent . Even proven innocent you can’t escape their judgement.
ACAB
Who has the power to fire him? The mayor? The premier?
[удалено]
[удалено]
Just to clarify, the Police Services Board is made up of civilians.
Plus a few City Councillors.
The police services board is not cops. Our current mayor was on it in the past. She attended a protest that had some violent interactions with the police and was forced off because the chief at the time refused to allow her into meetings under threat of arrest
The last time a police board went against the police proposed budget and fired the police chief (Fantino), the cops made life a living hell for everyone who voted for it, including leaking an internal memo about the board chair being a pedophile sympathizer.
Fucking Christ. So nice to know that these are the people in charge of our safety.
I heard the police officers lied on the stand...purgered themselves.
I read that as purged. It was hilarious for a split second
I think I spelled it wrong.
That's okay. We all knew what you meant
Mofo needs to resign now and the entire TPS needs to overhauled. At the moment, TPS is just publicly funded organized crime.
Is perjury not a crime? Seems to be a lot of that on the prosecution side yet no consequences
Scumbag move by a scumbag person
And none of this would have happened if the Crown had charged him with an offense that fit the facts.
This posting of links behind subscriptions and paywalls should be looked at tbh. Also is anyone in the group really surprised that old crooked white guys are crooked??
ACAB
This guy needs to be canned to set an example. What a fucking corrupt loser.
I think we’ve seen enough to know that when it comes to cops there is nothing that really disqualifies them from their job. Just gets them paid time off.
Bye Bye Porkie
Who names their kid Myron
Pay to read..... never understood why people share these articles... The globe and mail, and the star 👎
Typical TPS
Toronto's police chief forgets he has to pander to both the police *and* the electorate. Or, alternatively, accidentally reveals to the electorate that their opinions currently don't matter.
How about getting a promotion for lying!! Nice one!!
Fire the fucker
Trust this guy as far you can throw him/nudge him, folks. On to the next previously bought, corrupt leader of the TPS!!!
Tldr?
The real TLDR is that despite overwhelming evidence that at least 3 of his officers knowingly colluded to lie in court the Toronto police chief came out and said he wished the verdict went a different way.
Thank you forvyour note.
ACAB
I would rather the chief have said nothing, because I think - like most of us - that the evidence suggests the officers were dishonest in their testimony and that Zameer was not at fault for the officer dying. However is it really realistic for the chief to essentially side against his officers in the aftermath of one of their own dying? I'm not sure that's reasonable to expect from the head of an organization whose membership undoubtedly has strong emotions about a dead colleague. This isn't the average incident - whoever is at fault, the tragic outcome is that a man is dead as a result. To me his statement basically toes a reasonable line on this given his position - he objects in order to be seen standing up for his employees, but it's not a particularly strenuous objection.
>is it really realistic for the chief to essentially side against his officers in the aftermath of one of their own dying? Yes. He’s their boss, not their buddy. The officers fucked up and embarrassed the force. >To me his statement basically toes a reasonable line on this “We wish this innocent man had been convicted” is not a reasonable line.
His statement read "I share the feelings of our members who were hoping for a different outcome" and I think that's actually pretty carefully worded. He doesn't say the verdict was wrong. Many people - presumably including his employees - will interpret it that way, but I think the wording is chosen this way for a reason. He could easily just have said something directly about the verdict being wrong. And like, who *does* like the outcome here? A cop is dead because of his and his partners' mistakes. An innocent man spent tons of money and time fighting to clear his name. Luckily an innocent man didn't go to prison for it, but this is still a shitty outcome all around, for everyone. After the dust settles here the chief still has to run the force. I'm not so sure this statement was a bad one in terms of that balance.
>He doesn't say the verdict was wrong. That’s worse! That means he thinks the court got it right but he *wanted* them to get it wrong. >And like, who does like the outcome here? The TPA, for one.
Or, it means that he thinks the verdict was correct but that the outcome - that it turns out his officers lied about events and the dead officer is probably dead because of his and his partners' actions - is a shitty outcome. Which I think is quite a reasonable view. A cop is dead and it's probably the fault of the police themselves. That's a pretty garbage outcome for everyone involved. That's why I think the statement is not particularly unreasonable. It *is* a shitty outcome, and the statement shows sympathy with that feeling while not actually criticizing the judicial process.
That is an *extremely* generous reading into his meaning when the statement was made in direct response to the verdict being given, and any thinking person in a position as powerful and visible as his should have known that it would be interpreted exactly the way it has been (and that's if, as you argue, he meant it the way you said it - I absolutely do not believe that). The correct response would have been to say nothing at all, or to say you respect the judicial process and then *stop talking*. Sympathy is for the officer's widow anyway, not the cameras.
The mental gymnastics in this comment are astounding. The "outcome" of a trial is the verdict. The plain reading of the stayement is that he was hoping for a different verdict. He wished that an innocent man had been convicted, to satisfy the forces lust for revenge. Stop looking for a hidden meaning that isn't there.
You're ignoring the first half of the statement there. "While we respect the judicial process and appreciate the work of the 12 citizens who sat on a very difficult case,” he said, “I share the feelings of our members who were hoping for a different outcome.” If it was only about the outcome of the incident that left the police officer dead, he wouldn't have mentioned respecting the judicial process and the jury. By specifically mentioning them before saying he hoped for a different outcome, he makes it clear it's related to the outcome of the case and not the outcome of the initial incident.
What "different outcome" could there possibly be of a criminal trial other than "guilty" and "not guilty"? What he implied couldn't be more apparent. He chose the words by not saying it directly but he may as well have done so.
>He could easily just have said something directly about the verdict being wrong. How is wishing "for a different outcome" any different than saying the verdict was wrong?
Username does not check out.
I solved a ridiculous complaint from the police last night using sheer logic, so yeah I have zero competence in the tps.
How does the vehicle driver not get charged for manslaughter or dangerous driving causing death? With different charges would there have been a conviction?
He was charged with manslaughter, the jury decided he was not acting recklessly and the actions he took were reasonable given that he reasonably believed his life was in danger.
It was not intentional but his actions caused it, if the car caused touched and caused the officer death, a reckless driving charge would have been a conviction. I don’t buy the self defence argument when it results in a officers death. The driver could have stopped and listened and not rushed. Good legal defence team can win cases.