Wrist broken during arrest

[twobits]

Theres an awful lot of people on here who are pretty gung ho for taking peoples rights away. Thats a slippery slope your on, you should be careful on your road to fascism.

And what the judge did in recognizing the claim of injury before passing judgment negates your presumption. As it turns out, the evidence showed it to be nothing more than a defence lawyer's "Hail Mary". Hardly a road to fascism that leftists like yourself like to throw out at every opportunity in the name of social justice. But seemingly always lacking the facts.

[RUEZ]

https://www.castanet.net/news/Penticton/214070/Wrist-broken-during-arrest

Ahhhh... boo hoo.. you were arrested for multiple things, included resisting arrest. You're lucky we don't live south of the 49th, cause your a$$ would have been shot.

Maybe if you hadn't picked a fight with the Police, they wouldn't have had to take you down. They are trained to do that, just so you know.

Zero sympathy with this dude.

He was taken to a hospital after a few days and then had to have surgery where the bone was rebroken. He might be a criminal but he's still a human being.

[twobits]

He was taken to a hospital after a few days and then had to have surgery where the bone was rebroken. He might be a criminal but he's still a human being.

The injury was not caused during his arrest. The judge determined that from the medical records. A wrist broken does have to be rebroken in a few days as it has not yet begun to set. The simple fact that it required re breaking should make it obvious that the injury was pre existing to his arrest. Get over it and understand this was a lawyer hail mary that the Judge was able to see through.

[Fancy]

He might be a criminal but he's still a human being.

Might be?

[CapitalB]

Theres an awful lot of people on here who are pretty gung ho for taking peoples rights away. Thats a slippery slope your on, you should be careful on your road to fascism.

And what the judge did in recognizing the claim of injury before passing judgment negates your presumption. As it turns out, the evidence showed it to be nothing more than a defence lawyer's "Hail Mary". Hardly a road to fascism that leftists like yourself like to throw out at every opportunity in the name of social justice. But seemingly always lacking the facts.

I was purely talking about the people saying he's a criminal and should have no rights.

[the truth]

correct, who cares about the victims lets give the criminals all the rights, some of you people kill me

[CapitalB]

correct, who cares about the victims lets give the criminals all the rights, some of you people kill me

No no no no you have it all wrong. People.

People have rights.

Its as simple as that.

Being a criminal does not remove you from being a human being and human beings have rights.

[Bsuds]

Being a criminal does not remove you from being a human being and human beings have rights.

They also have an obligation as a Human being to honor other Human beings rights!

That's why there are Laws to uphold those rights and if someone violates them they should lose their rights.
Or at least have their rights restricted for a period of time until they prove they won't do it again.

[CapitalB]

Being a criminal does not remove you from being a human being and human beings have rights.

They also have an obligation as a Human being to honor other Human beings rights!

That's why there are Laws to uphold those rights and if someone violates them they should lose their rights.
Or at least have their rights restricted for a period of time until they prove they won't do it again.

Ok but if you read through the thread you will see that the context of the discussion was; people that break the law should have no (at all) rights to the point of not having a right to timely medical care. 0 rights is no the same as being restricted to jail.

[Fancy]

Well, bottom line? RCMP didn't do it.

[twobits]

Well, bottom line? RCMP didn't do it.

Yeah, that is the bottom line isn't it. Yet we wasted how many tax payer dollars to verify it? And all for a waste of skin repeat offender. The money spent on his public defense lawyer, court time, and need to come back yet again for what should have been a slam dunk to begin with would probably housed a disabled or truly disadvantaged for a few years.

[the truth]

mr bell should have to pay the whole bill , now that the truth is out, f en useless criminal junkies