Mantler trial

[Trunk-Monkey]

What I know is someone who can kick a head like that may have some problems.

I would have loved to hear his explanation, but unfortunately he didn't want to give it.

Just because you know someone, doesn't mean you really know him.

Problems or possibly stress and pressure from the situation? I think the guilty plea explains enough though. You are right, just because you know someone does not mean you really know them. just as much as seeing one act on video..a split second in time...means he "isnt right". I am sure there are many reading this that have done something in a spit second that they would love to take back.

[crookedmember]

Problems or possibly stress and pressure from the situation? I think the guilty plea explains enough though. You are right, just because you know someone does not mean you really know them. just as much as seeing one act on video..a split second in time...means he "isnt right". I am sure there are many reading this that have done something in a spit second that they would love to take back.

I have a bus load of regrets. I've done many things I'd like to take back. I've never kicked anyone in the face, but if I did, it probably wouldn't take me two years to admit I was wrong. No matter how stressful the situation.

[Roadster]

Again an assumption...do you personally know him. I do..he is "quite right". Speak to what you know not what you assume. As I have stated and I am sure most can agree that people make mistakes in a split second and he has pled guilty for it.

The part yer not getting TM is that had you been there for example and Buddy moved and you threw a foot out to boot him to protect yourself we could understand, now lets look at what bothered people so much, he didnt seem to throw a foot out to protect himself, he was further away, so it didnt look like Buddy could grab a leg but yet in this video a cop is seen, looking like he took a running kick like is done on a soccer ball in sports, it didnt look at all like a defensive move but more of a "take that" kinda move.
Lets say you and me fight, neither of us has training, we are just dukin it out behind the bar and its a hard fight,,, you knock me down and then in victory you give me a last boot to the eye ball for the hellofit,,, or, possibly to make sure I wont get up again but you did already have me down. Remember we are both untrained here so it could happen that way.
Thats the difference people saw as compared to what they expected to see and expected it would be for... A running boot job to say "here's one for the road" is really what many thought it looked like rather then a defensive move.
So if he is an alltogether guy as you say then so beit and I believe you but Its not odd for someone perfectly sound to snap, problem is when they show signs of snapping which may have been the case here with previous possible complaints, at least one shown, then its time to yank him off for a day maybe and assess him and save him from this stuff becoming something worse,,,
I hate to see a good cop go off the wire and lose his job, so what went wrong that allowed this good guy to have that happen? Was he not being checked as a complaint came in? Could he have avoided this if he was assessed and given the help needed? Is there some measure that could be used to ensure a cop doesnt short his career?
I used to do first aid in a large work place and after an event where one of my fellow workers was hurt and I dealt with it and they were sent off in an ambulance I was called into an office, offered a coffee and asked if I was ok. I was but it was nice that some supervisors cared to do that. There was some casual discussion about the event, where I think I was being checked,,, and then I went back to work.
Many years ago I went through some weird type of fainting spells at work when I was about 17, 18 years old, one time cracking my head open on some machinery on my way down. The boss promised me a good chunk of paid time off. I didnt use it and was right back to work after more testing and a sewing job on the back of my brain but it was offered. What ever it was cured eventually but it was a scary time and knowing my work place cared helped a lot so wouldnt those kinds of care make you guys feel better? Save you the risk? Possibly help take you through to retirement like you probably want? Its a scary job you guys got there and you should be cared for right along with every bit you do that marks a serious risk in a shift.
Again I feel bad for him in a lot of ways but he got into a situation that he even knows now wasnt good and that has to be dealt with much sooner and much cleaner for the public as well. A year and a half, I am sure he is nothing like he was the last time you worked with him and its too bad for everyone, specialy his family. Thats kinda why I scream "do it now" "deal with it right away and stop the community from thinking about it and him taking the brunt of that",,, "just in case he was innocent of a wrong doing" how nasty that waiting must be on top of his main issue should he be found guilty and while he is trying to put bread on the table too.
Its the protective measures a member must hide behind that gets the public angry. Compare Buddy's court date and Mantler's for an event on the same day they both were gonna see a court over. Thats an old game, we all need things fixed and trust brought back to the RCMP, if one member should go off like anyone in any job could then lets see it done and over with be it he is removed for safety reasons or given his job back because he is actually proven innocent by a court of law as any other citizen would be.

And yes TM, I have done and said things I would like to take back,,, its human nature to screw up but we have to deal with it according to the situation. This was a serious error and people were left feeling unsafe about it a long time till yesterday. Best thing for anyone to do is man up or woman up to it and at least say sorry for it,,, much is done through a sorry.

[Trunk-Monkey]

And yes TM, I have done and said things I would like to take back,,, its human nature to screw up but we have to deal with it according to the situation. This was a serious error and people were left feeling unsafe about it a long time till yesterday. Best thing for anyone to do is man up or woman up to it and at least say sorry for it,,, much is done through a sorry.

Couldnt agree more. This part of the equation still puzzles me. As much as the gen pub felt unsafe, Mantler was taken off of the road right away. Now the rest of the cops that had to deal with upset people and people attempting to set them up was unreal.

[Roadster]

Trunk Monkey
Couldnt agree more. This part of the equation still puzzles me. As much as the gen pub felt unsafe, Mantler was taken off of the road right away. Now the rest of the cops that had to deal with upset people and people attempting to set them up was unreal.

And why??? Because you have to imagine, people saw it and due to how something like this can be covered up and has in the past people thought he was gonna be sent right back on the road once the bosses could turn the heat down over it., especially when it seemed like we were being pushed to believe Buddy was at fault for the kick not long after it happened.
As much as he may well have been a bad boy we knew then and we still know now the kick wasnt supposed to be a part of it all. It seemed to many like a heroic claim to fame for an arrest kinda kick in front of all watching. I am tellin ya, I was rooting for the cop right till he booted Buddy when I was watching it the first time. Then I saw what looked like many errors to me after watching it again and again. Was I wrong back then? Apparently not. And many others who felt this way werent wrong either.
Will he get back on and be a part of our law enforcment again? Some people still think he might and yet the wound is hardly healed yet for many who were wishing for his story why it happened. Some even think its possible he might get sent north and that to me is a bad thing, I have friends up there working with the locals and I'd hate to see any of them dealing with any cops who mighta went off the wire if there are any there, cos I really dont know if that happens.
So, a lot of the feelings some cops mighta felt from the public stems from a worry he might just get a small slap on the wrist and all is back to what it was. Now for me if I had heard he was being checked over, treated for his issues and would be back on the road after some monitoring and such I would be ok with that but instead it started off as what many feel is a paid holiday if you remember right and people werent willing to see that happen over what was looking like a criminal act on one of our citizens. I mean mistakes do happen, that truck being pulled over could very well have been the wrong truck, coulda been anyone of us pulled over, confused as to why and taken as "not fast enough to the ground", or a threat, or just maybe something to kick?
You guys hold a very serious position and all we want is that all members are taken care of properly and they take care of us properly. You let that look like its not happening and people get nervous. Its been that way a long time and people want it stopped.
On the news yesterday, a woman was given a cash settlement for a wrongful arrest, she said she will have a hard time trusting now... We have to fix that. We have to avoid people fearing you guys when you are dealing with non criminals,,, sure the bad guy should worry but not be dealt with on the street, he gets off easy that way and we havent solved his issues either,,,

[theyeti]

mantler is just one of the good old boys he will be back .

[crookedmember]

Couldnt agree more. This part of the equation still puzzles me. As much as the gen pub felt unsafe, Mantler was taken off of the road right away. Now the rest of the cops that had to deal with upset people and people attempting to set them up was unreal.

How do you define 'right away?' Was this the first complaint of this sort the detachment had received about the member? If not, did other members try to change his ways, or did they just look the other way?

What about officer 'B?' When he went chasing after the kid with the smart mouth, did other officers chase after him? Nope. They stood around and told the likely scared girlfriend that the dog would probably chew his leg off. Really professional, guys.

How about the female member who held a woman in custody for nine hours? Was she the only officer at the detachment at the time? Did other members intervene?

So now when a member FINALLY gets taken off the road for some mess, it's the public's fault for taunting other members?

[zzontar]

Good question. I have been waiting for someone to ask that. Some here may think I was defending the actions etc. Well I wasnt, as I said I was not there and the only person that can honestly answer the "why's" etc is Mantler. What I was saying all along was you cannot judge any situation from one video alone...period. There was a lot going on that was not caught on video and all I was asking was lets let ALL of the evidence gathered during the investigation be put before the courts and then a judge can decide. Thats our criminal process. Making assumptions was not the way to go...it never is. Further to that I have been in situations that go from low risk assessment to over the top in seconds. Its easy to be an arm chair quarterback and say "well he should have done this or he shouldnt have done that" this all may be true but no matter how much training a person has you cannot always make the right move when things unfold in seconds. No excuses...its simple fact. Humans are not robots...we make mistakes, especially when under stress and extreme pressure. This is all part of the equation...no matter what anyone may think.

It's as easy to say he shouldn't kick someone in the face no matter what as to say if you don't want to be wrongly accused of being over the limit when you're driving, don't drink at all.

all I was asking was lets let ALL of the evidence gathered during the investigation be put before the courts

Ah yes, ALL the evidence... makes me wonder why you weren't too opposed to the old appeal system where they didn't have to consider any evidence.

Making assumptions was not the way to go...it never is.

I hope you try that some day.

[goatboy]

all I was asking was lets let ALL of the evidence gathered during the investigation be put before the courts.Ah yes, ALL the evidence... makes me wonder why you weren't too opposed to the old appeal system where they didn't have to consider any evidence.

For the love of God, let it go Zzontar and please keep to the topic, your whining is driving me crazy!

[Trunk-Monkey]

So now when a member FINALLY gets taken off the road for some mess, it's the public's fault for taunting other members?

That is not at all what I was saying. What I was saying is what happened affected everyone, the gen pub and other members as well.

[Trunk-Monkey]

It's as easy to say he shouldn't kick someone in the face no matter what as to say if you don't want to be wrongly accused of being over the limit when you're driving, don't drink at all.
Ah yes, ALL the evidence... makes me wonder why you weren't too opposed to the old appeal system where they didn't have to consider any evidence.
I hope you try that some day.

Two completely different processes Zzontar...one is CRIMINAL one is ADMINISTRATION...when are you gonna get that straight?

[zzontar]

Two completely different processes Zzontar...one is CRIMINAL one is ADMINISTRATION...when are you gonna get that straight?

Maybe you could explain why you think that if it's administrative that you feel someone's rights should be any different?

Edit to add: Maybe you could also explain why you only think evidence is important if it's criminal and not administrative.

[zzontar]

For the love of God, let it go Zzontar and please keep to the topic, your whining is driving me crazy!

I'm trying find out why TM has different views for administrative and criminal actions. If you don't like it, put me on your "ignore" list. That way I won't have to expect your usual trolling either... win win.

[goatboy]

Maybe you could explain why you think that if it's administrative that you feel someone's rights should be any different?

Edit to add: Maybe you could also explain why you only think evidence is important if it's criminal and not administrative.

Well, it's fairly simple. The civil law process is completely different than the criminal process. One example is the burden of proof civilly is different than criminally. Your talking about two completely different avenues of dispute, so naturally they woudl have different approaches to their administration.

[my5cents]

How do you define 'right away?' Was this the first complaint of this sort the detachment had received about the member? If not, did other members try to change his ways, or did they just look the other way?

What about officer 'B?' When he went chasing after the kid with the smart mouth, did other officers chase after him? Nope. They stood around and told the likely scared girlfriend that the dog would probably chew his leg off. Really professional, guys.

How about the female member who held a woman in custody for nine hours? Was she the only officer at the detachment at the time? Did other members intervene?

So now when a member FINALLY gets taken off the road for some mess, it's the public's fault for taunting other members?

I guess, I'm fuelling the RCMP bashing component of this forum, but....

How long was Buddy kept in custody ? He was arrested on Jan 7th, 2012 a Thursday and was released on the following Monday ?

Was he released to a hospital for, perhaps a psychiatric assessment, as well as treatment for his injuries ? Nope.

Pretty harsh for someone that was injured being arrested, and the circumstances were so weak that crown later stayed the charges of careless use of a firearm, but is kept in custody the balance of Thursday, Friday, Saturday, Sunday and only after court on Monday ?

How long did Mantler spend in jail after being charged ?

What about the RCMP's release of information (Superintendent Bill McKinnon and Constable Steve Holmes) that the incident was connected to a "domestic violence situation". Has that ever been addressed. Did it involve domestic violence ? or not ?

We have TM spouting off that "you can't judge a situation from watching a video". But you can judge it from statements of witnesses, such as police, who have a major stake in suggesting that Buddy was a threat and needed a kick ?

Yes, a video can be interpreted different ways, but everyone knows, even us bumpkins (love that word) that statements from witnesses can be even less reliable. Especially if those witnesses are trying to justify that their or their co-workers assault was justified.

Isn't it funny how video is so reliable when it's a bank surveillance camera or a bait car camera, but when it's a video of cop wrong doing, it turns very suspect.

Wasn't it one of the cops on this forum that stated, "just wait til the evidence comes out, Buddy isn't an angel" ? First off, he was the VICTIM, and isn't it strange when someone reminds us that Mantler was investigated for assault on two other citizens, and was charged and beat the charges on one,,, that that isn't relative. But Buddy's history is ?????

and, some think it's OK for these same RCMP to convict motorist at the roadside for drinking and driving. Ya, Ya,,, it's administrative. My *bleep*.