Mantler trial

[Trunk-Monkey]

You were right Roadie...And Trunk , it would be easier not to "paint all with the same brush" IF the good cops refutted the actions of the bad one instead of going with the status qou by looking the other way when they do "silly ,stupid or illegal things "...

It appears that some did in Mantlers trial...Kudo's to them.

So you make a comment that it would be easier if they refutted...and they did but yet the paint still gets "brushed"...

[crookedmember]

So you make a comment that it would be easier if they refutted...and they did but yet the paint still gets "brushed"...

I wouldn't paint them all with the same brush, but I will say I was a lot more impressed with Cst. Boffy's (the cute one's) testimony than the officer who in an earlier 'M' trial testified he didn't notice what 'M' was doing because he was busy wrestling with a bike.

Even the judge said that was BS.

[Roadster]

You're right we cannot. I will conceed that when members do silly, stupid or illegal things it makes the rest of the membership look bad...but why is that...because they do the same job as the member that messed up? Or is it because we are all part of the RCMP or are just cops in general? My point is exactly the same as yours that the gen pub cannot and should not paint all cops with the same brush just as all cops should not paint all of the people they come into contact with on a daily basis with the same brush as well.

The reason why is the same as the when doctors and mechanics wont do each other wrong even over a wrong. So if a mechanic is ripping people off and those cars are brought into another mechanic, chances are he will fix it but agree with the customer that Willy down the road coulda done the job better? Not gonna happen but he wont mind fixing it.

So think outside your box, ever yakked with the fellas and found some other organization to be of the protective type with each other? Club membership kinda thing, we dont like that old game with cops, mechanics or any other and we would see a thread similar if we we could expose a private business for being a jerk here but we cant. I know a mechanic who left me with my vehicle ready to fall apart and kill me. Wheels to come off, seriously. If I hadnt spotted the issue and went say a couple more Ks I woulda rolled it over on the highway so said the other mechanic before he was told it wasnt my fault but was how the vehicle was jusr repaired by another and was shown the bill for proof,,, help me create a case against the guy who tried to kill me? Not! Did the other agree with me,,, nope, not really, he just fixed it for three grand and got me back on the road, they have these membership clubs they stick to with some Understood rules, check it out, and yes the RCMP have that club thinking as well, or had it and so most wouldnt agree with the public, but the best ones in this case are those who might not agree but also wouldnt try to convince us how wrong we are in his mind for his buddys sake.
So tell me, once we cant see that cover would we change our way of thinking? You bet. Like I have said many times, let the bad guy go and save all the good spots for the good guys because thats what we are really hoping for. But I understand also, if a member was your friend and he went off on the wild side it would be hard to do so.
My best advice for any organization would be when you see your buddy go off, offer him some help, if that dont work take it to where help Will be provided before he hurts himself and your PR. But most of all Dont put yourself in his place with him if he screwed up, keep your spot as the good guy and support his needs, go against public fear and belief isnt gonna work anymore... Now I am not pointing this at you, I am pointing this at anyone who values their job and what they put into it.
We are to blame for using that brush to paint all but lets remember one action is usually from another and its human to react in a not so perfect way, the only thing that will avoid that is the other action is not known and couldnt be used as a trigger for such thinking. Really if we didnt know it as such then why would we think it?

And your comparison still doesnt figure in with me, you compared trained members with the general public who has none of what you have and are not in a tight organization of care and control like you are with the law behind you, we could be anybody, a crazed lunatic, a schitsophrenic, (sp) on some serious meds or uncontrolled drugs, drunk, angry about a bad day at home or work and ready to lose it when you pull up but you guys are "supposed" to be in top notch sound mind and spirit for the job you are given to control our public and keep us safe and if not the boss might not be seeing what he should. You just cant compare the RCMP ith the general public, never IMO. Its just not any bit the same when you hold responsibilities we could never be expected to hold, after all,,, Thats why you are there.

[xkite]

Trunk-Monkey wrote:
So you make a comment that it would be easier if they refutted...and they did but yet the paint still gets "brushed"...

I wouldn't paint them all with the same brush, but I will say I was a lot more impressed with Cst. Boffy's (the cute one's) testimony than the officer who in an earlier 'M' trial testified he didn't notice what 'M' was doing because he was busy wrestling with a bike.

Even the judge said that was BS

I'd be more inclined to say the RCMP were painting themselves with the same brush by way of their own actions in defence of wrongdoing in many cases right across the country. Like having a big billboard advertising that they will stick up for their members through thick or thin no matter what despite any public outcries. What sort of new recruit does that entice? Mantlers? There is a mass action lawsuit filed for abuse against female employees at the hands of their male counterparts underway right now. I could post a list of other inflamatory situations that loads the paint brush but will try to keep the focus on this one.

We saw a shift in the defence for Mantler as time passed but we also witnessed the first impulse for the RCMP to rally behind him too. Same at Dzekanski, same many other instances. When that happenes and the public witnesses it, the force tars itself. The members are human, they are not robot or machine and should be viewed as such. All members are trained tested and vetted through the same procedure. Seperate member from organization when something like this happenes for to defend is to condone not only the wrongdoing of the individual but the entire process that allowed him to slip through. It leaves doubt about all in the public mind and it hurts the entire force.

If there are lessons to be learned, that culture once defined as the blue wall of silence needs to be addressed more so now in this the information age. What once worked for the organization may need an overhaul. The current RCMP Commisioner has had to go to court just to obtain the right and the ability to fire any individual member. Its not like its a perfect organization that does not require some work be done, its how to address it without just causing more division. Public perception plays a role in bringing about change.

I was encouraged to hear the Commisioner state something to the effect, "the promotion process cannot be allowed to be abused in order to setup some sort of fiefdom in particular areas by individuals who have gained control of the system" They promote more of their own and defend each other for crimes no one else would ever get away with. Organized crime does the same. Not so long ago in this same town, another Police member was on trial for assaulting his wife in front of their children. His crime could be viewed as being worse and less justified than Mantler's yet he survived calls for his dismissal. Uniformity is not yet common place.

Sure Mantler is a minor incident within the scope of the big picture but public attention does help to keep it that way. We should watch for and heed the warnings of that fiefdom spoken of by the Commisioner. Less Mantlers not more, less condoning of individual members for their individual crimes. Scrutiny of the system by the public a very important part.

[Trunk-Monkey]

I'd be more inclined to say the RCMP were painting themselves with the same brush by way of their own actions in defence of wrongdoing in many cases right across the country. Like having a big billboard advertising that they will stick up for their members through thick or thin no matter what despite any public outcries. What sort of new recruit does that entice? Mantlers? There is a mass action lawsuit filed for abuse against female employees at the hands of their male counterparts underway right now. I could post a list of other inflamatory situations that loads the paint brush but will try to keep the focus on this one.

We saw a shift in the defence for Mantler as time passed but we also witnessed the first impulse for the RCMP to rally behind him too. Same at Dzekanski, same many other instances. When that happenes and the public witnesses it, the force tars itself. The members are human, they are not robot or machine and should be viewed as such. All members are trained tested and vetted through the same procedure. Seperate member from organization when something like this happenes for to defend is to condone not only the wrongdoing of the individual but the entire process that allowed him to slip through. It leaves doubt about all in the public mind and it hurts the entire force.

If there are lessons to be learned, that culture once defined as the blue wall of silence needs to be addressed more so now in this the information age. What once worked for the organization may need an overhaul. The current RCMP Commisioner has had to go to court just to obtain the right and the ability to fire any individual member. Its not like its a perfect organization that does not require some work be done, its how to address it without just causing more division. Public perception plays a role in bringing about change.

I was encouraged to hear the Commisioner state something to the effect, "the promotion process cannot be allowed to be abused in order to setup some sort of fiefdom in particular areas by individuals who have gained control of the system" They promote more of their own and defend each other for crimes no one else would ever get away with. Organized crime does the same. Not so long ago in this same town, another Police member was on trial for assaulting his wife in front of their children. His crime could be viewed as being worse and less justified than Mantler's yet he survived calls for his dismissal. Uniformity is not yet common place.

Sure Mantler is a minor incident within the scope of the big picture but public attention does help to keep it that way. We should watch for and heed the warnings of that fiefdom spoken of by the Commisioner. Less Mantlers not more, less condoning of individual members for their individual crimes. Scrutiny of the system by the public a very important part.

Lets be clear here, I wasnt defending anyone. My initial post was to someone who said something about all cops being as bad as...making a general blanket statement that has no truth to it what so ever.

[Lerfy]

Are we really still going on about this?

[xkite]

Ahh people keep bringing it back up..

re: trunk monkey quote-

Lets be clear here, I wasnt defending anyone. My initial post was to someone who said something about all cops being as bad as...making a general blanket statement that has no truth to it what so ever.

Actually to be clear it was portions of the response to your quote by crooked member that I was more responding to. From same post-

crooked member-

I wouldn't paint them all with the same brush, but I will say I was a lot more impressed with Cst. Boffy's (the cute one's) testimony than the officer who in an earlier 'M' trial testified he didn't notice what 'M' was doing because he was busy wrestling with a bike.

Even the judge said that was BS.

The defence alluded possible training deficiencies, alleging a new trainer involved, before changing the plea. There are indicators by that something a little unusual may have been going on in the background, on the scene and In "Mantlers mind. "
Questions were left hanging that would have gone to bigger issues than Mantler alone.

Officer Boffy did not attempt to justify Mantlers actions as much as did her organization. Hence the statement the organization tarred itself. She alone seperated herself and did not.

[Treblehook]

xkite wrote: "Officer Boffy did not attempt to justify Mantlers actions as much as did her organization. Hence the statement the organization tarred itself. She alone seperated herself and did not."

Enough already!! Where during this whole Mantler fiasco did you see or hear evidence that the RCMP [as an organization] either justified or otherwise supported Mantler's actions? You are full of it on that point. Surely you are not relying on comments by people posting in this forum, who purport to be RCMP officers? Even if some of those who claim to be RCMP officers are serving members, they are hardly spokespersons for the organization now are they? One final observation.... you quote a judge as having declared a members testimony as BS. Were you there? Do you have a copy of the transcript or are you just offering that up to support your position.

[Trunk-Monkey]

Enough already!! Where during this whole Mantler fiasco did you see or hear evidence that the RCMP [as an organization] either justified or otherwise supported Mantler's actions? You are full of it on that point. Surely you are not relying on comments by people posting in this forum, who purport to be RCMP officers? Even if some of those who claim to be RCMP officers are serving members, they are hardly spokespersons for the organization now are they? One final observation.... you quote a judge as having declared a members testimony as BS. Were you there? Do you have a copy of the transcript or are you just offering that up to support your position.

I second that...good post.

[crookedmember]

One final observation.... you quote a judge as having declared a members testimony as BS. Were you there? Do you have a copy of the transcript or are you just offering that up to support your position.

Actually, it was me, crookedmember, who made the BS charge. Which is basically what the judge did, albeit more eloquently.

The judge admonished Goodwin for failing to make proper notes, especially when the complaint against Mantler was so serious.He suggested his loyalty toward Mantler may have tainted his evidence.

"It's disappointing that a police officer who's part of an organization whose members are often touted as being trained observers and professional witnesses would meekly concede he could have been the one who caused the injury to Mr. Bhatti," Takahashi said.

http://www2.canada.com/calgaryherald/ip ... id=6999772

[xkite]

Good point crooked member, I second that. took three times before anyone noticed, if so even now. and...
You mean to tell me those weren't really RCMP members like they said who posted in support of Mantler on here? Where do I report them for impersonating police officers? They should be charged! Where was all the objection to those posts from within the organization? Where was the outrage from within? Like Buddy said, good thing they had that video. Silence is tacid consent.

News article, even Superintendenat Cullen noted the public outrage and called for change.
http://oneplusonedirect.com/police-recommend-charges-against-kelowna-rcmp-constable/852055/

Oranizer John Hewitson said that people are sick and tired of that kind of thing happening and they are growing intolerant of police officers receiving pay while they are under investigation.

Tavares appeared briefly at the gathering. He said he feels fortunate that his arrest was recorded on tape, and he said the experience was mind-boggling.

Meanwhile, two New Democrat MPs, Don Davies, public safety critic and Nathan Cullen, Skeena-Bulkley Valley MP, issued a statement saying that the brutal capture emphasizes the need for serious restructuring and stronger supervision of the RCMP.

When police brutality against an obedient and passive civilian happens, the community needs to recognize that strong and quick reaction will take place, Davies said in the statement.

Until RCMP supervision is reinforced, public assurance in the RCMP will persist in degrading.

Cullen said it’s very clear that some action has to be taken.

The occurrence in Kelowna ought to be an awakening to the administration that they have sat by and done nothing about RCMP reform for far too long, he said. The administration has been aware for years that the system is broken, but even their own inadequate restructuring bill is stagnated in Parliament since they decline to introduce it for debate.

[Treblehook]

[quote="xkite"]Good point crooked member, I second that. took three times before anyone noticed, if so even now. and...
You mean to tell me those weren't really RCMP members like they said who posted in support of Mantler on here? Where do I report them for impersonating police officers? They should be charged! Where was all the objection to those posts from within the organization? Where was the outrage from within? Like Buddy said, good thing they had that video. Silence is tacid consent.

You don't seriously think that the RCMP reads or would entertaining responses to posts that appear in this forum do you? That is definitely one of those "give your head a shake" notions. You have provided absolutely nothing to support any contention other than there have been and are a few members whose conduct has been deemed reprehensible.

[xkite]

Its the outcome and the total lack of anything else other that it began with and ends with Mantler I find objectionable. The Including the premise that there was nothing behind and beyond that involved. The RCMP were reading here at least the type who supported Mantler. If the town forum is a microcausm the views of the community and the organization, where are the rebuttals from within the RCMP? Only the bad cops post here? The rest remain silent? It was only the public who posted in dispute from what I can tell.

The trial ended before much of anything else could be addressed leaving the same conditions in place for next time. Did Mantler's dismissal solve all that? Are the Police addressing the issue even now?
from-
http://www.kelownacapnews.com/news/181618181.html?c=y&curSection=/&curTitle=BC+News&bc09=true

Mantler trial: Police training under fire
Share this story
[Pin It]
Published: November 30, 2012 6:00 PM

The training and experience level of the Kelowna RCMP officers involved in the Buddy Tavares arrest were under scrutiny as Const. Geoff Mantler's assault causing bodily harm trial continued Friday.

Mantler's charge stems from a kick he delivered to Tavares' head while arresting the man in relation to a shots fired complaint. Tavares has testified that he had been shooting to scare off geese at the Harvest Golf Club on Jan. 7, 2011 when RCMP were alerted to the gunshots.

Sgt. Jeremy Lane, an expert in the area of police use of force, told the court that experience may play a part in an officer's perception of threat cues present in a situation.

Your concern was that the junior officers had no experience to perceive threat cues, suggested defence lawyer Neville McDougall.

"That's possible," said Lane.

All five officers who eventually converged on the scene of the arrest had less than four years of experience and the court has heard no supervisor took charge of the situation prior to the completion of the arrest.

All of the officers had six months of on the job training after graduating from Depot in Regina; one officer's trainer had only one year of experience, the court heard.

[That's] basically a recruit training a recruit?" asked McDougall.

"Yes," said Lane.

"And that concerns you?"

"A great deal," Lane replied.
Earlier, Lane was asked if he believed the officers appeared to be well trained.

"Not in respect to code five vehicle stops," he said. Code five is the term used by police to refer to high risk traffic stops. "Generally, police officer's in Canada are well trained.... Every organization has their weaknesses."

Lane earlier testified that Mantler didn't follow his training in performing the vehicle stop, and that he put himself in harm's way by approaching Tavares' truck.

"A reasonable, well-trained officer would have remained behind cover," Lane added later.

Lane found that Mantler's kick to Tavares, which was caught on video, was "not appropriate, justified or reasonable" and that Mantler put himself in a vulnerable situation that could have created an "exaggerated perception of threat."

He based his finding on available information, which did not include a statement from Mantler.

He said his opinion "may not be" the same if he had heard from Mantler and agreed during defence questioning that if Mantler believed he was at risk of death or grievous bodily harm, the kick "could be justified."

"Was a threat of death or grievous bodily harm imminent to Const. Mantler?" Crown counsel William Burrows later asked.

"I don't see that," said Lane.

Mantler's decision to draw his gun in the situation, however, was deemed appropriate by Lane.

The trial continues next week.

[Treblehook]

I don't know where xkite is coming up with the notion that there have been RCMP members supporting Mantler's actions on the day he kicked Buddy Tavares. I know that some stated that people should let him have his day in court, the same as anyone else. That doesn't sound like supporting or approving his actions to me. I think you are interpreting the comments of others to suit your position, rather than interpreting them objectively. There were no police officers saying that Mantler's actions were justified, that they would have done the same, etc. I think that one or two might have weighed in on the issue of suspension without pay which is pretty understandable, and perhaps there was disagreement expressed respecting the withdrawal of legal expenses for Mantler as well. With a little thought, most people would be able to understand the reasons other members might be concerned about those two decisions. But, your contention that the rank and file supported his actions is blatantly wrong and you should stop trying to mislead others into believing that was the case.

[xkite]

Re:

I know that some stated that people should let him have his day in court, the same as anyone else. That doesn't sound like supporting or approving his actions to me

Not just, there is past history in all this to take into account. It was brought up at times past but dismissed. Even Buddy believed that Mantler would be acquitted.. Talk on the street was not of RCMP support for Buddy. News coverage dialogue insinuated the same. On the heels of Sgt. Wlodarcazk's trial who could blame them.

The past events-

In the wake of the Mantler video showing what seems to be blatant police brutality, two other Kelowna-area men came forward with their own complaints about RCMP Constable Geoff Mantler.

In one case the Crown declined to press charges against the rogue RCMP constable, but they moved forward with charges in the second case. In that case, despite the judge saying on record that he didn’t believe Mantler’s testimony and believed he was indeed responsible for the injuries sustained by Manjit Singh Bhatti, Provincial Court Judge Mark Takahashi acquitted Mantler on all charges.

Read the complete article at: http://christopherdiarmani.com/8770/police/police-brutality-2/buddy-tavares-cst-geoff-mantler-convicted-police-brutality/

The culture of silence, books have been written on the subject. The blue wall, where silence permeates where it shouldn't. A pervasive systemic problem was identified during the trial. It was never addressed. It isn't being addressed now. It appears it won't be addressed. Silence..

If not for that video, I suspect we may have seen a different outcome. The system shifted gears to protect itself, Mantler had to go given the enormity of the evidence. Did that solve the problem? Silence..

Removing Mantler did nothing to solve the problem.. We should all be striving to make our towns a better place. The trial heard testimony from experts. There was a problem identified other than just Mantler. Silence is acceptable?
til next time, Keep those cameras rolling