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. .?
Printable View
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. .?
Bizzare. Maybe the point is to have it not hold up at appeal and he walks. I'm not a lawyer but this is strange.
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.
I predict.
A lot of trouble short term and long term trust in LEO and the system becoming even worse after this.
A lot would have I think, hinged on whether or not Cirello (or the public) was in any danger. I guess the jury bought arguments Yatim could have (hypothetical) despite being contained (inside) the streetcar. Flown down the steps, onto the street, covered the 10 feet or so and knifed him, despite the precence of a handful of officers...........................
As a juror, I wouldn't have bought any argument he was in danger, so long as he remained inside the streetcar. The public at that point certainly wasn't. Had he come down and onto the street. Too bad, so sad.
Shame the jury wasn't allowed to hear how often he has drawn his gun versus the forces average.
Haven't heard anything yet on the sentencing. If its not the harshest possible, look out imo.
Sooner or later Trimmer TPS is going to have understand that they are only shooting themselves in the foot and have been since the G20.
Who are you talking about ???? No officers by that name involved.....Quote:
Originally Posted by JBen
Scuze (Forcillo) am pretty sure everyone (or most) knew . But hey make it about something other than it is. Lets focus on that shall we
Other than a cop who intentionally killed someone when there was no reason to, has largely skated.
Don't know about skated JBen, Attempted murder has a min of 4 and a max of life.
Reading comments on various new sources, everything from the Sun, NP, Star and Huffington Post to a few others is very telling with respect to what the "public" thinks. Not hard at all to get a sense of the consensus.
Just one readers response on one new sources feed.
Personally, what could be more telling, more troublesome is the sentencing given his defense will bring in the usual stuff that plays well in our Liberal, soft on crime courts sentences ;)Quote:
Our judicial system again has let the community down
As a citizen I am disgusted by the this verdict
It goes to show police are above the law
They can shoot,kill,speed,rape,have child pornography is there possession and get away with murder
/edit add.
Fact of the matter is the public trust in leo here is eroding, slowly but surely. Has been getting worse since the G20 when only one fairly low level scapegoat was thrown under the bus. Hell just read threads here on these forums about LEO and the RCMP with respect to gun owners, rigfhts and GC.
And one only need look south of the border to see how bad things can become.
Give the illusion of justice to avoid a riot.Quote:
Originally Posted by dutchhunter
Excellent explanation. Thanks.Quote:
Originally Posted by trimmer21
I still don't get it. If use of excessive force, which is translated to attempted murder, leads to death, it technically
translates to murder or manslaughter. Are they saying he would have died from the initial gun shots?
You can't have attempted murder, then the guy dies, and say it's not murder. The attempted murder charge indicates
that murder was the intent.
Basically, the jury found that the first use of force was justified. Once Yatim was down, and the threat was eliminated (in their minds), the other rounds fired were in excess. This is only round one. There will be appeals and other motions put before the courts.Quote:
Originally Posted by MarkB
Cant imagine how much of a threat someone is once they comply (albeit unwillingly), and are near death, prone and inside a streetcar.......
If the shooter was anyone else.
A gang banger, a terrorist, or hostage taker, it would be called an execution, as that's what it was.
The charge of Murder and jurys acquittal.
People will debate this forever. Some will think he was within fine lines, others not. The fact he was contained in the streetcar says all that needs to be said as far as Im concerned....They could have maintained that indefinitely, with no threat of harm to anyone.
Nuff said.
The 2nd volley, really is what crosses lines, and is what makes the shooting (the 1st volley) all the more questionable.
Jury compromised on the verdict likely, for whatever reason.
Now comes the tired old dance .....the "Crown" trained him to do what he did to Yatim therefore the "Crown" cannot punish/sentence him for it, but they'll have to be quick before official sentencing, I believe.
Police UOF needs Ability/Intent and Opportunity on the part of the "armed suspect" to be justified.
Yatim has no opportunity to harm anyone until he moves to leave the seating deck and move towards Forcillo, 4 steps down to pavement. That never happened. He never left the seating deck 4 steps up.
It sounds like you guys are having the same problems with cops as we are down here - we have had many cases where cops shoot people without just cause - some were shot in the back while running away - there is a growing mistrust of cops and many people are filming their encounter with cops to protect themselves from cops violating their rights -
Not all cops are like this and there are a lot of so-called good cops - the only problem is that often times these so-called good cops stand by as a bad cop acts badly and then don't clean their own ranks of these bums
Good read.
http://news.nationalpost.com/news/ca...a-man-to-death
In the end (until sentencing and the defence will likely argue no previous trouble, good record, member of his community etc going for the lightest possible). It might be for the best.
Had they acquitted things likely would be a lot worse, and thus worse for leo. The "compromise" as many are now calling it gives them a way to get a conviction at the least.
Still think they got it "dead" wrong, as my thinking is exactly the same as Sky Pilots. The line in the sand if you will in this scenario for me is the exit of the street car. Had he put one toe on the pavement.....not much to say other than the eulogy. But he didn't and someone cut him down, then executed him.
Julien Falconer summed things up when he said to the affect that there's no excuse for the Police to use the fact a mentally ill subject has a knife where there's no possibility of that person injuring anyone other than himself. There's no way that person should be gunned down like a dog in the street. Way back when (I know :rolleyes:) we were trained that deadly force could never be used when someone had a knife unless circumstances were so dire that there was no other choice. We were armed with 24" night sticks and collapsables (Asps) and drilled continually during in-service training to disarm,control and arrest persons carrying edged weapons. We were also trained containment and de-escalation tactics and that we had all the time in the world,even days if need be,when no one else was in danger.
So,WTH happened to that raining model?
See... this is exactly what i assumed our police forces were trained to do. And judging from the reactions of most people I've ever talked policing stuff with had very similar assumptions.Quote:
Originally Posted by trimmer21
I don't think many regular joes are aware that at some point things changed within our Canadian police services.
Based on his " trigger happy" file I blame the employer for not removing him from the front lines earlier. It was a disaster waiting to happen.
http://news.nationalpost.com/news/ca...fatal-shooting
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by terrym
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.
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 sawbill
Quote:
Originally Posted by trimmer21
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...
11 cop haters all on one jury ?Quote:
Originally Posted by Brampton Mike
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
A bit convoluted logic - but here's what it is.Quote:
Originally Posted by dutchhunter
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?
Very good point about the second volley bringing the first volley into question.Quote:
Originally Posted by JBen
Without a doubt, if there were only the first three shots, there wouldn't have been to many questions asked.
Somthing to think about .he is now guilty of s crime c omitted with a restricted weapon .mandatory min sentencing is 5 years ..
Didn't the SCC overturn that?
Forcillo had completed Use of Force training AND stress inoculation 3 months prior to shooting Yatim.Quote:
Originally Posted by trimmer21
I talked to one(Toranna Metro), that had been out for 11 years(last year), eleven friggin years, drawing his pay over a car wreck IIRC.Quote:
Originally Posted by terrym
One should get an extreme max of 24 months, then pass a hard test for social security/Long Term Disability, whatever, and then if failed, be removed from the roster. If one screws up and is healthy, fire him.
A little bit of background on James Forcillo;
James Forcillo[edit]
James Forcillo was born December 30, 1982, in Montreal, Quebec. He is a second-generation Italian-Canadian.[14][15] He was a constable with six years on the force at the time of the shooting.[16] Forcillo graduated from a justice program at East Los Angeles College in Monterey Park, California, United States, and received a psychology degree from York University in Toronto. Forcillo worked as a security guard in Toronto, and then was employed as a court services officer for three years. Up until Yatim's death, Forcillo worked as a patrol officer for three years.[15]
Apparently he did not learn or retain what he learned from his psychology course.
Let's say an appeal is launched and turns in Forcillo's favour. Does that mean he can be reinstated?
Obviously,his training retention quotient needs work.Quote:
Originally Posted by skypilot
\
There'll be enough Police Services Act charges against him to have him sacked,but,in escence,yes he can.Quote:
Originally Posted by Birdbuff
If acquitted, there will be no PSA charges......Quote:
Originally Posted by trimmer21
You can get all the training in the world in a gym or classroom but when an officer is faced with a serious encounter for the first time in his career its going to be a crap shoot on how he actually handles the situation. Were the other attending officers who didn't shoot frozen into inaction, or waiting for someone else to take charge or were they on top of the situation and that's why they didn't shoot?
I know nothing of this officers personality but I doubt he started shift with the intention of actually gunning a guy down because he just wanted to fire off his handgun.
Justice department needs to hire English professor to explain and understand what attempted mean...idiocy that lawyers and judges, as well as the jury peers.
What to expect, which could include further charges under the psa.
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/...ick=sf_globefb
Assuming he continues to collect for another year ( recall the Stars expose about the number of suspended officers, and for some the length of time and the reasons). And $15mm lawsuit.
Taxpayers are on the hook large
Quote:
Originally Posted by rick_iles
Just because he may be acquitted doesn't mean he still won't face PSA charges. Thinking that a Police Service will let someone that caused all this trouble simply walk away and go back to work unscathed is completely unrealistic. Police Services have many ways of dealing with their "problem children".
This article explains the charge well.
http://m.thestar.com/#/article/news/...m-slaying.html
Basically they are saying post mortem that the first three shots were justified and those were fatal shots. The second round of shots apparently none of them would have been fatal. So the blame the first shots for the death and attempted murder on the second round as it wouldn't have caused death but were unjustified.
Kinda of the same lines as Markb. I posted it in another thread that is on the same topic.
Great explanation for one of Torontos top lawyers. His interpretation is pretty clear.
http://www.bttoronto.ca/videos/4721974578001/
WARNING GRAPHIC POLICE SHOOTING
https://www.instagram.com/p/BApXDElvKAg/
This shows you how a person being shot can cover distance. Goes back to what someone else said about that 21ft rule. Different circumstances for sure but it goes to show that bullets aren't magic like the movies.
First rule, don't draw a line in the sand. What was he thinking?! I have my own opinions, but I wasn't there. It's very easy to judge when taking video and audio, out of context.