verdict in police shooting.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by terrym

I think removing officers is easier said than done. Many end up on paid suspension, sometimes for years at a time.

---

I have a big issue with this nonsense,too. For all intents and purposes,this man is now a convicted criminal of a grievous offense. How he can be "suspended with pay" is beyond me. He should be dismissed. Should he win an appeal (which I doubt),reinstatment can be addressed,then. Personally,I think it's a waste of time because he should still be charged under the Police Services Act which would get him fired,anyway.

And you can bet with appeals and delays this guy will get a couple of years pay to fish, golf and spend time at home while making @ $90K.

Maybe so but I wouldn't want to be this guy right about now. I can't imagine what's going on in his head.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sawbill

Maybe so but I wouldn't want to be this guy right about now. I can't imagine what's going on in his head.

---

He has to live with what he did. His career is over and his family destroyed and likely on his way to the joint for a few years where he'll be real popular. Greater people have cracked under less pressure. It's hard to feel sorry for him,though. His attitude got him where he is.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by trimmer21

Deadly force is authorized when Police Constables are facing an edged weapon and a subject ignores orders to drop it and/or there's no time to even issue the order (direct attack). That's a given,so,there goes the 2nd Degree Murder charge. Once the subject was down,the threat ended,therefore,firing six more shots was deliberate,unnecessary and a violation of the Criminal Code. That was what he was convicted upon because he deliberately tried to kill the subject (according to the jury.) This verdict will,no doubt,be subjected to an exhaustive appeal process,but,my guess is leave to appeal will be denied,outright and the verdict will stand. Traditionally,verdicts by a jury are almost impossible to appeal unless it can be shown that the Judge made serious errors either in procedure or law while charging the jury. If that's the case,here,an appeal will go ahead. At any rate,this sends a loud and clear message to every LEO in Canada,if you use deadly force,you damn well better not make a mistake.

---

If i recall correctly the coroner said the first volley of shots killed the perp so how can one be charged and convicted of attempted murder of someone who is already dead...sounds like the jury consisted of a bunch of cop haters who were going to hang Forcillo one way or another!

Terry, don't open that Union can of worms and how much money is being paid to many who have been suspended for life despite serious breaches, offences. If Im not mistaken, he is suspended with pay, likely for years to come as the appeals process is exhausted.

/just another chink the trust.

I suspect Sharon it wasn't admissible for the same or similar reasons, records of criminals on trial are not admissible.

It could prejudice proceedings. Right or wrong, who knows. They say past behaviour is the best indicator of future behaviour and cops use it all the time in finding and charging suspects. But for trials, which are only about the specific current event...not past events...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Brampton Mike

If i recall correctly the coroner said the first volley of shots killed the perp so how can one be charged and convicted of attempted murder of someone who is already dead...sounds like the jury consisted of a bunch of cop haters who were going to hang Forcillo one way or another!

---

11 cop haters all on one jury ?
That's convenient. The defence was involved in the jury picking as well as the crown.
Would a not guilty verdict have to come from " cop lovers ? "


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dutchhunter

This is very hard to understand. Not guilty of manslaughter. But guilty of attempted murder. If you attempt something and get it done .you are guilty. Please explain. .?

---

A bit convoluted logic - but here's what it is.

Forcillo fired two volleys of shots within a span of 11 seconds. The jury found that the first volley of shots was justifiable, and it was those shots that fatally wounded the victim. The jury found that the second volley of shots was not justifiable, and found Forcillo guilty of attempted murder on based on the firing of the second volley. The victim died as a result of the first volley, not the second volley and thus no murder conviction.

Pretty warped. I'd be embarrassed with the verdict if I was on that jury... BUT the judge spent two and a half days councilling them on what to consider, so I suspect they were only "following directions".

I think some sort of internal police discipline and retraining would have been a more appropriate course of action that a murder/attempted murder charge.

Quote:

---

I think some sort of internal police discipline and retraining would have been a more appropriate course of action that a murder/attempted murder charge.

---

And there would be riots in the streets. Aka "same old same old". Cops and the system are circling wagons protecting their own......

There are reasons and one very good reason why the SIU was created in 1990.

Re the attempted murder charge: The logic being Forcillo couldn't have known the first volley was fatal. Im pretty confident forensics based on entry points, wound channels proved that. So even though he was going to be DOA, the 2nd volley was the "attempt to murder/execute" him and thus the guilty verdict.

Im wondering if he (Forcillo) regrets the 2nd volley. Not because thats what resulted in a conviction, but it, possibly more than Yatim being contained in the streetcar calls the entire shooting into serious question. Meaning if, if he had only fired the first three shots and killed Yatim. Quite likely there would still be outrage over the incident and whether or not thats a justifiable use of deadly force. Many will think in that situation, no it wasn't. Last I checked despite their jobs, they aren't handed licences to kill like 007 is.

The argument would be was it "justifiable", not "did he intend to kill him".

Not much different than hitting a pedestrian who runs out into the street. Your in a world of trouble but few will think it was with intent.
Back up and run over him again?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JBen

And there would be riots in the streets. Aka "same old same old". Cops and the system are circling wagons protecting their own......

There are reasons and one very good reason why the SIU was created in 1990.

Re the attempted murder charge: The logic being Forcillo couldn't have known the first volley was fatal. Im pretty confident forensics based on entry points, wound channels proved that. So even though he was going to be DOA, the 2nd volley was the "attempt to murder/execute" him and thus the guilty verdict.

Im wondering if he (Forcillo) regrets the 2nd volley. Not because thats what resulted in a conviction, but it, possibly more than Yatim being contained in the streetcar calls the entire shooting into serious question. Meaning if, if he had only fired the first three shots and killed Yatim. Quite likely there would still be outrage over the incident and whether or not thats a justifiable use of deadly force. Many will think in that situation, no it wasn't. Last I checked despite their jobs, they aren't handed licences to kill like 007 is.

The argument would be was it "justifiable", not "did he intend to kill him".

Not much different than hitting a pedestrian who runs out into the street. Your in a world of trouble but few will think it was with intent.
Back up and run over him again?

---

Very good point about the second volley bringing the first volley into question.
Without a doubt, if there were only the first three shots, there wouldn't have been to many questions asked.