https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gNdClmW9_bs - what is the matter with cops - don't they know the law -
Printable View
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gNdClmW9_bs - what is the matter with cops - don't they know the law -
No video!
YouTube says video not available. Gotta another link Joe.
just watched it ..seem to work ok here
Mine worked . This is 20 miles from my place
What a cluster eff!
Worked for me btw.
Not too professional that is for sure... Pretty cool he stood his ground, sad thing is...... I am not sure I would be able to.
What precipitated this problem with the police?
What was the purpose of their visit? Volume was poor so I didn't hear it.
Way too much verbiage. Either you have a purpose/right to be there as an agent of the State or you don't.
Not absolutely sure about Canada but there only a few times in the US that you don't need a warrant. That didn't appear to meet any I'm familiar with.
The trouble with these vids is that they only show part of the whole story. From the very little information I could get from the entire conversation,the Police were at the residence looking for a person that had an arrest warrant issued for them. If that was the case,the police were in lawful execution of their duty by simply asking if the person was there. Police do not need to be in possession of the warrant to affect an arrest when they're told that on reasonable and probable grounds and in good faith by sure information that the warrant exists and is valid. However,once they were told that he wasn't there and without actually seeing the person there,the Police were obligated to leave the premises when ordered to do so by the owner. There's many other investigative techniques those Constables could have used without getting into a useless argument with someone.
Man threatens a woman
Woman calls police
Police dont take it seriously
Days/ Weeks later she turns up dead
Happens way too often. Talk to any female friends that have had to deal with stalkers....Exs.
Guess its another damned if they do, damned if they dont
I didn't get that this was the issue,here,unless I missed it.Quote:
Originally Posted by JBen
I was surprised the officer was letting him bait him in to the point he was so upset he was cursing and not acting professionally. It must be discouraging when people aren't cooperative but I think the officer should of realized that he wasn't getting anywhere with this guy within the first minute of conversation. There is more than one video of this same guy with police encounters so he's had a little practice and seems to know his rights. In one video he speaks of a court date, he's going to subpoena half the police force!Quote:
Originally Posted by trimmer21
You see nothing interpretable in that video.Quote:
Originally Posted by JoePa
A DH quoting his interpreted version of law again and again
A cop denying the DH's interpretation again and again.
Highly likely both are flexing a shade to much testosterone and in the end-- what?
What a waste of time.
They should of tazed that A-Hole and thrown him into a cell and charged with obstructing justice...frigging 'law student' who thinks he knows everything!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Those officers showed GREAT restraint dealing with this obnoxious A-HOLE....this video needs to be taken off the net as it is bordering on been racist!
No, he has the right to leave it up, there are still some freedoms of speech etc. left in Ontario and Canada (slowly disappearing under libs**) and every police officer in Ontario has the obligation follow the full letter of the law and to ticket him when he breaks the law and is speeding, running a red light etc. .... :scream: :moose:Quote:
Originally Posted by Brampton Mike
** Canada dropped 10 positions in 2016 for Freedom of the press rating.
https://rsf.org/en/ranking
Thought it was??Quote:
Originally Posted by trimmer21
The vid quality as you said wasn't great and its only a fraction of what was going on. My interpretation from what he was saying was that he's having psychotic episodes, he's been trying to seek treatment for, that explained the threat and perception of threatening behaviour."No need to bust my chops".
I could have missed something, or misread something.
Down here there is a us versus them attitude - too many times cops overstep their bounds and illegally step on individual rights - I know a cop's job isn't easy especially when dealing with a lot of scumbags but - they are given authority and weapons and need to preform their duties in such a manner that recognizes a citizen's constitutional rights - many don't - and they get all bent out of shape when someone stands up to them - we need and should demand cops that are professional and know the law - if they can't live up to that standard then they should quit their job and work flipping burgers
Racist? sure the guy is an annoying chit but what did/does race have to do with anything said - the guy never mentions any minority, ethnicity or person of colour and makes no rude comments? Last I checked annoying is not a valid reason to taze someone. Perhaps there was some reason we don't know about but not anything shown in the video. There is no sign of any threatening or violent behaviour - just an annoying home owner.Quote:
Originally Posted by Brampton Mike
Sorry,JBen. I didn't mean to bust your chops.Quote:
Originally Posted by JBen
So there was an arrest warrant for someone that may or may not be in that house?
Much depends on the crime severity, timing, why the PoPo has reason to believe their suspect is in that house, what position the law student holds as a guest, stranger house owner, etc.
Never argue with the public for more than 2-3 minutes max before doing as you are lawfully allowed, leave, or have whatever paperwork you need delivered to your location, depending on the particular situation.
I had the same situation on an arrest warrant(felony) for a perp. that I knew on sight from previous arrests. Same BS from an accessory until said perp. peeked out the window and I saw him.
I was carpeted and threatened with discipline until I asked the State Attorney General for an Official State Written Opinion on the Entry to a dwelling house for the serving of a Felony Arrest warrant.
I prevailed and actually outlasted that Sheriff.
I agree with Joe. KNOW what you can and can't do and never ever back up from rhetoric.
Most coppers should do it for a living, not a hobby so know the frigging law and don't get caught stupid, like in the video.
Yup what he said.Quote:
Originally Posted by skypilot
In Canada,the only time Police may enter a residence (where the person is not the owner or at his/her regular domicile) to arrest someone is in the case of "fresh pursuit" where the person runs into the house in an attempt to allude while being chased. In every other case, a warrant to search the residence for the subject must be obtained. If the Police Constable in the video had have had a Warrant to Search,Mr. Motormouth Law Student would have found himself in hand cuffs and on his way to jail for "Obstruction of Justice" and anything else that he does because he's an idiot. I'm thinking the cop was a rookie.Quote:
Originally Posted by skypilot
lol.:)
meant, the guy was saying over and over. I need help, Im trying to see a phsycaristrist, I'm having these bad dreams and psychotic episodes and thats why sometimes it seems like Im threatening you/someone.
but see, I'm calm now, theres no yelling and screaming, no threatening behaviour, you don't need to "bust my chops"
:)
It must be different in the US. For example on a felony(indictable) warrant, anywhere the suspect is known to be, can be breached and the arrest made in general. In other words, wherever he is found. The warrant itself States... "We command you to delver the body off.........."
I can see having knowledge of a misdemeanor warrant(summary), talking to a homeowner and not pushing the issue. I would just say..."tell .......he/she has a warrant and it will be better on he/she to come down and take care of it rather than get traffic stopped, arrested, car towed, etc."
We can do the same on the hot pursuit, or known evidence being destroyed/flushed, or an emergency like a medical or impending danger(like a child alone, in a utility/washer/dryer room with a loaded firearm leaning against the wall.)
Probable cause or intervention for the occupant's benefit are generally the keys. No pun.........
Like I said I never argued or explained, talked more than say 2-3 minutes max, less with a drunk. One always gets into the stupid chit like the OPP guy. Either state why you are legally there, and take care of business or simply don't go where you can't fish.
Hard to deal with a mule if your more stupid than the mule.
Assuming that interpretation (from what I saw/heard) is correct or somewhat correct.
Classic no win situation for leo.
If they don't take it "seriously", and he goes postal later that day, next day.
They are torn to shreds for not taking it seriously.....
Do know, when my Ex tried to have me arrested, at home with my kids present while she was at the precinct. After a lengthy phone call with the officer who spoke with her, but was smart enough to check her phone, her text messages and subsequently gave her a lesson or 3 and slapped her on the wrist. He did say to me.
Your lucky Im a 40 something divorced man myself and know what it can be like. . The next time she sends you text like those, text with strings of profanity and verbal diaherria, and more, don't tell her to FO B, or "bark back".The next time she comes to the station it might be a 20 something year old cop fresh out of training looking to make his (or her) mark........
Again, with nowhere near enough to by ( by his own admittance) at some point he threatened someone..........
And these days, because all to often it's not taken seriously.......they do (sometimes).
RE warrants
Probable cause/public safety
If the threat he made...which we don't know about...might not that suggest someone is imminent danger?
Are you sure you watched the same video? All I saw was five minutes of repeated argument over a warrant. A cop acting unprofessionally and a "law student" who thought he knew what was what.Quote:
Originally Posted by JBen
Thats why I keep "questioning it".
When I hit the link supplied it took me to the cops arresting some guy who.....acted/said the things I'm relaying.
I still get . This video not available.
And it did a 2nd time..
A 3rd time I think I got the right one.
Trimmer
If they have reason to believe someone is in imminent danger or public safety, doesn't that supersede the need for a warrant as well? Not this situation apparently ( lol 3rd time the charm).
I hate to think they can't enter private property when say someone is being held hostage
The cop was a complete douche bag and should have been charged for trespassing and harassment. The other officers should of hand cuffed the out of control officer and put him in the cruiser and dropped him off at the psych ward.Quote:
Originally Posted by GW11
Yes,absolutely. If R&PG exists that someone in the residence is in need of immediate assistance as in the case of someone who has been injured or incapacitated (senior living alone for example),the law allows for Police to enter without a warrant.Quote:
Originally Posted by JBen
And what knowledge of law do you profess to have. Time for the old fogeys home for you.Quote:
Originally Posted by Brampton Mike
And you must be one of those snot nosed kids that had everything handed to you on a silver platter and never had to answer for anything you did wrong! I have forgotten more about the law than you ever knew! no wonder our society is going downhill so fast and that there is no respect for authority anymore!Quote:
Originally Posted by Fisherman
For 25 years I was a LEO, no I'm not a snot nosed kid and am quite aware of the requisites of entrance on private property in the line of duty. I will end it with that, I'm not about to continue with a person is ill informed.Quote:
Originally Posted by Brampton Mike
That's a good comeback, I like that "ill informed " :goodstuff:Quote:
Originally Posted by Fisherman
Some on here, speak often of defending peoples rights about various things. Why should this home owner not be able to defend his rights in this instance? Or are you saying he had no right to refuse,. The point of law to defend your view is ....?