|
|
| The Names | Growing Pains | Reader Comments | back to Index |
The following discussion took place on an email list and is here reproduced for its relevancy to police brutality issues.-Ed.
from Tim Rourke
I think it is time to try to make my point about police violence in Canada
to a number of parties with different interests in it, so that I am not
further misunderstood. I have the e-mail postings from various sources to
corroborate or illustrate what I am saying. Some of it is from an e-mail
'penpal' I have in Tasmania. I am sure he won't mind me reposting it. What
I am saying here will probably offend some people I know at OCAP, but so
what. They have to start to get real.
Now, in answer to Bill's letter at the bottom of this montage, Toronto cops are famous for refusing to identify themselves and for not wearing their badges. They get very upset when ordered to identify themselves, too.
At past demonstrations in Toronto there have been a lot of fools who have worn balaklavas and bandanas over their faces. When I suggested that they should stop that or leave the demo because they are compromising everyone else, I was told that they had to wear the masks because they had immigration or criminal court cases pending. Nobody does this anymore since the cops started singling out doofuses with their faces concealed and hauling them out of the crowd.
You said; "I suspect your real problem is that you have a subservient mentality that thinks that your master class are *entitled* to bash you around the head. Maybe you even wear the scar as a badge of honour?" No, I think that our problem is even worse than that.
When I try to talk to some of the more obtuse members of OCAP about the need to take legal action against cops who attack people they stare off into space and repeat over and over "The police are an instrument of the state" or " the courts are an instrument of the state." Or they just walk away from me.
The thing is that obviously they don't really beleive that or they wouldn't come anywhere near OCAP. If the police were as all-powerful as these vacuum-heads pretend, and the courts really a mere instrument of the state, none of us would be around. We would all be dead or doing long jail sentences on trumped up charges. These people are living inside some romantic delusion of being 'revolutionaries' and a lot of them are flat-out crazy.
However, OCAP has been starting to lose credibility among its base of support because of its reluctance to use the courts. There are a lot of people now who have been really worked over by the police punks and who are looking for ways to take them to court over it.
Another thing that I get tired of hearing is that you can't charge the police, repeated over and over as a truism. There are several cops sitting in jails around Toronto right now. People are charging the police with ever greater frequency and increasing success. There is still a news blackout of successful prosecutions of police but one case did make it into the news lately. A Toronto cop was sentenced to 21 days in jail for beating a kid up at a bus stop.
So can anyone identify those cops and give us some details here.-Ed.
As the police have become ever more vicious in their response to peaceful protest, some of the more perceptive protesters have had it beaten into their heads that trying to shrug off these attacks isn't going to work. They can't simply ignore the police or say that the police are always going to be there and if you are afraid of going to jail you are no good for this.
So they are starting to look for ways to put the yahoo cops back in their boxes. The next problem here is the lack of lawyers willing to do the work of prosecuting the cops on what a bunch of stringy haired militants are able to pay. There is a cadre of lawyers that OCAP and some other groups have worked with who want to acheive lawyer immortality by winning some constitutional challenges in favor of greater civil rights.
However, they have this nasty habit of helping the police to tie up their clients with bizarre bail conditions that prevent them from carrying out their work. It seems that they don't want these clients to do anything that would affect these constitutional cases.
The trouble is that these activists are doing useful and needed things like representing people before the various courts and tribunals and getting people's social assistance and disability entitlements back. They can't do these things as efficiently if their members are constantly being harassed and half of them can't talk to the other half because of these bail conditions.
A lot of activists in Toronto have become impatient with boot licking
lawyers who are afraid to stand up for their clients. Of course, the
lawyers are a little afraid that representing poor people too effectively
could cost them their livelihood. A judge here can disbar any lawyer who
annoys them. But as I said, these activists are becoming skilled at
representing people in various types of situations. Some of them are
talking about developing a group of specialists at more areas of the law,
defending themselves and others their own way. This development is a long
time coming and very welcome.
Tim R.
Tim Rourke wrote:
Of special interest to people on this list in Australia.
In the past some of you have been unable to understand what the difficulty is in Canada with the police. We in Canada have been told to stop whining about the police, haul them into court and make them obey their own laws. Well, lets see the organisers of this protest do it.
The legal observers have already announced they will be taking legal action. And the Greens Senator Bob Brown has been circulating requests on the net for info about a particular instance pictured in the newspaper, of a cop using a pressure-point hold on a protestor's neck. The Victorian Ombudsman has also initiated an investigation, particularly into the widespread but unlawful action of many police who removed their identification. The top brass actually had the nerve (guess that's why they get called the "brass") to admit that many cops had removed ID so they couldn't be identified and hauled into court.
Much could be made of such gutless behaviour, if quite a few dumb fuck protestors hadn't been doing exactly the same thing by wearing balaclavas. Morons.
Green politicians from Australia and New Zealand were at the front line of the blockade and copped a serve, also an SBS cameraman was on the TV news last night reporting how he was knocked down from behind by the cops who lashed out at him with a baton while he was on the ground.
What strikes me, as it has striken me in researching police reactions to protests in other countries, especially in Europe, is that police are less violent but the people are more indignant about it.
What strikes me is how the fuck you can be blasé about it.
The aussie cops seemed to be focussed on breaking through lines to get people through. They are not attacking groups of people who are simply standing around and pursuing them as they retreat. They are not using pepper spray.
Gee, they only baton-charged non-violent protestors, what are they complaining about. What a bunch of whingers! They way they see it though, swinging a baton at someone's head is, potentially, lethal force. Someone could get killed.
This police viciousness seems to be a north american phenomenon. generally timid responses to it seem to be a largely Canadian one.
What do you mean by "timid"? Of course the yanks are inclined to pull out a gun and start shooting, but personally I think that is counter-productive. The Victorian police got into all sorts of trouble last time they used these tactics, under the former Kennett government. There will be similar court action this time, because court action has produced results.
Is this something about the much stated passive nature of Canadians, or about the draconian legal regime in this country? This is something for some political and social sciences types to study.
No mate, its something for the people at the front line to study. Something for *you* to study. I don't believe your claim about a draconian legal regime, you have an independant judiciary don't you? I don't see how your legal system can be much different than the Australian one. I suspect your real problem is that you have a subservient mentality that thinks that your master class are *entitled* to bash you around the head. Maybe you even wear the scar as a badge of honour?
We're over that. I have my court orders framed and hung on the wall as my
badges of honour, victory is sweet. They may be the ruling class, but
no-one here thinks they're our betters. Some cop ever whacks me on the face
with a baton and he can bank on me dragging him into court. It is my duty
to do so, otherwise cops start to get the idea they're above the law (like
in Canada) and no-one's safe.)
Bill Bartlett
Bracknell tas
from the GLOBE AND MAIL
JANE GADD COURTS REPORTER Friday, September 15, 2000
TORONTO -- The Ontario Superior Court has thrown out contentious bail
conditions imposed on three antipoverty activists who face charges stemming
from a riot at the Ontario Legislature in June.
Three executive members of the Ontario Coalition Against Poverty now can participate in peaceful protests, visit Allan Gardens -- a downtown park frequented by many homeless people -- and go within 500 metres of the legislature, provided that they don't enter the grounds.
However, OCAP leader John Clarke, executive members Gaetan Heroux and Stefan Pilipa still must not communicate with each other until they have been tried on charges related to the June 15 riot, in which scores of demonstrators, 42 police officers and nine police horses were injured.
Mr. Clarke is charged with participating in a riot, counselling others to engage in an indictable offence and two counts of violating court orders.
The other two are accused of assault, participating in a riot and violating a recognizance.
Lawyers for the three argued last month that conditions imposed by a lower court violated the accused men's constitutional rights by preventing them from performing their jobs, from expressing themselves and even from entering the downtown core, which falls largely within 500 metres of Queen's Park.
They said the conditions were aimed at silencing OCAP, which is campaigning for an end to homelessness and poverty in the province.
Mr. Justice Peter Grossi ruled yesterday that bail conditions preventing the three from demonstrating and from going near Queen's Park and Allan Gardens, their main staging ground for protests, were excessively broad.
He upheld their constitutional right to engage in protests, but stipulated that they must leave any demonstration that ceases to be peaceful.
Grinning broadly, Mr. Clarke told reporters outside the courthouse yesterday that "it's a safe bet" that there will be more and bigger demonstrations by OCAP in the near future.
"I think the struggle is going to grow," he said.
"Any restrictive measures that might be taken to try to stop this movement are not going to stop it."
Sue Collis, spokeswoman for the coalition, said the group has been forging alliances with native groups and unions throughout the province and will be able to muster larger numbers at future demonstrations.
While both Ms. Collis and Mr. Clarke refused to answer questions about possible violence at future protests, they said the people OCAP tries to help face daily violence because of poverty and homelessness.
"Look around the corners of this city alone," Ms. Collis said.
"Four, if not five, homeless people have been murdered this year," she said.
"People can't go on living with the threat of violence in their lives. . . . And if there are economic targets to be had, yes, we will target them."
Mr. Clarke, Mr. Heroux and Mr. Pilipa must appear in court on Oct. 30 for a date to be set for their trial.
Thursday, September 7, 2000
PHILADELPHIA, PA -- The American Civil Liberties Union of Pennsylvania
today denounced the use of state police to infiltrate political activist
groups that planned protests at last month's Republican National
Convention.
Evidence that such undercover tactics were used was disclosed yesterday when legal documents filed on August 1, 2000, were finally unsealed.
"Now we know why the prosecutors and police wanted to keep these documents secret," said Larry Frankel, Executive Director of the ACLU of Pennsylvania. "They are the most damning evidence of the highly questionable tactics used in Philadelphia to suppress First Amendment activities during the Republican National Convention."
"We can now add this constitutionally suspect collaboration between the Philadelphia police and the state police to the list of disturbing abuses of the criminal justice system to intimidate protestors."
Frankel noted that even before yesterday, "we had learned that the police had improperly spied on protest organizers. City building inspectors were used to shut down an activist studio in Center City. People who were arrested were subjected to unconscionable delays prior to being released. Extraordinarily high bail was set for many protestors."
The information that was revealed yesterday was contained in the affidavit of probable cause used by the police to obtain a search warrant that led to the raid of the puppet warehouse at 4100 Haverford Avenue on August 1, 2000. That affidavit had been sealed at the special request of the Philadelphia District Attorney's office.
Stefan Presser, Legal Director for the ACLU of Pennsylvania noted that the Philadelphia police are specifically barred from engaging in infiltration as a result of a 1987 mayoral order.
Explaining the dangers of such undercover operations, Presser said, "The First Amendment gives all individuals advocating for social change the right to be able to meet and plan without fearing that police are spying on them. The Bill of Rights, taken as a whole, surely guarantees that individuals may not be preventatively detained."
"This is a matter deeply woven into the fabric of our society since the tragic preventative detention of Japanese Americans over half a century ago," Presser added. "It is a sad commentary that Philadelphia, the origin of our Constitution, should have been the site of so many violations of protestors' rights during the Republican National Convention."
ABC News
Thursday September 14, 2000
Protest organisers say they are still gathering evidence against police, with 500 hours of video tape logged so far.
Lawyer Marcus Clayton says officers clearly used excessive force during two baton attacks on Tuesday, when protesters were standing or sitting in front of the entrance to the casino.
He says claims by Deputy Police Commissioner Neil O'Laughlin that police were provoked do not carry any legal weight.
"Provocation isn't a defence to an assault, if someone provokes you you're not entitled to hit them," Mr Clayton said.
"If someone provokes you, eggs you on at the pub, you're not entitled to lay them out, the police are in no legally different position."
Workfare-defeat: a list for discussion
about the international
resistance to workfare
To subscribe, post to
This material may be freely distributed,
provided this
footer is included in full.
Send your comments and stories of police brutality to: ruitsdawtah@Hotmail.com
This page created September 22, 2000
