Accountability Now

Argus posted a link to the very article that I was going to post today. See above. I am past the point of looking to Trudeau for an example. Unless that example is of what not to do

There were a number of experts on both sides. The thing that was interesting was that the shell of the fatal bullet was different than the other two in that it had a buldge which no one could definitively explain. Here’s as good of a summary that I can find: “Boushie was shot once. The fatal shot entered behind Boushie’s left ear and exited through the side of his neck. Stanley’s defence lawyer, Spencer, said during his opening statements Monday the shooting was a “freak accident that ended in tragedy.” The death was not solely a case of self-defence, he argued. A rifle, which court heard was missing its stock, was between Boushie’s legs in the SUV at the time of the shooting, but Stanley did not see the gun, according to Spencer. The fatal shot was the result of what Spencer believes was a hang fire, a delay between when the trigger is pulled and when the bullet fires. “Hang fires happen, and that’s what happened here,” Spencer said. Three spent gun casing found at the scene — two located outside the SUV and one found on the vehicle’s dash — matched to the Tokarev handgun seized from the Stanley home. One of the casings, the one found in the vehicle, showed what forensic firearms expert Greg Williams described as an “unusual bulge.” Williams, a witness for the Crown, told court last week a hang fire alone wouldn’t cause the bulge and also said the longest hang fire he knows about is .28 seconds, but on Monday, Spencer called two witnesses to the stand to dispute Williams’ claims. One witness, Nathan Voinorosky, told court he once experienced a seven-second hang fire while target shooting, and the other, Wayne Popowich, said he’s experienced delays between seven and 12 seconds. Popowich, a man who doesn’t know Stanley but contacted Spencer after seeing media coverage of the trial, told court he also once experienced a hang fire that created a bulge. However, he noted during cross-examination, that specific incident happened 40 years ago. He said he wasn’t sure if an issue with the gun or the ammunition caused the delayed firing and bulge. The Tokarev gun seized from the Stanley farm was tested by Williams and one other expert, John Ervin. Both experts testified last week the handgun fired fine when tested, but Williams noted one cartridge tested failed to fire. Williams tested 36 cartridges from 80 that were seized from the Stanley farm. The ammunition tested was Czechoslovakian army surplus ammunition from 1953, and Williams told court misfires with older ammunition like the ones he tested are not uncommon. Ervin said he couldn’t say if a hang fire occurred or not.” https://saskatoon.ctvnews.ca/mobile/stanley-says-he-thought-gun-was-disarmed-when-boushie-shot-1.3788046

Exactly right Squid. Down to the word.

The jury felt he did have reasonable suspicion or they would have charged him with manslughter. Intoxicated hooligans trying to steal your property while in possession of a gun. Ya...I would have fear for my life too! Of course like you said, this wasn’t the first time...

Clearly you don’t. You’re still chirping!

LMFAO!! You just admitted not knowing what was happening in this topic. Maybe you should take your own advice!

The judge said only three verdicts were possible: second degree murder, manslaughter or not guilty. Perhaps your reasoning got him off the second degree murder charge but then why not manslaughter?? Clearly having them tresspass and attempt to steal while in a drunken state (while they too were armed) was enough reason to say he acted reasonably. Hence the not guilty verdict

I want you to say the same thing when I am intoxicated, trespassing in your property and trying to steal your possessions while being armed and actually discharging that weapon. You honestly think it’s only Americans who would have done this??? It’s a rhetorical question because I have no use in trying to persuade a person of your bias

Nah. I’d rather work on a system here that doesn’t allow outliers like you to matter.

And you honestly think that the circumstances had no sway in that decision?

Oh...did you miss attempting to steal and firing your own weapon on the said property. I’d rather be an American than anything you’re associated to

First I have zero compassion for an intoxicated, trespassing thief who clearly was in the wrong and was found that way by a jury. Having your PM imply there is something wrong with that said system minutes after the verdict without basis is flat out wrong. By the way...Harper can’t hurt you any more. You can try to sleep at night

He shouldn’t be commenting at all. Do you not get that?

Here: https://mobile.twitter.com/JustinTrudeau/status/962176071201247232?ref_src=twsrc^tfw&ref_url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.cbc.ca%2Fnews%2Fcanada%2Fsaskatoon%2Fgerald-stanley-colten-boushie-verdict-1.4526313 I’m honestly baffled at this joke of a PM

Did you see Trudeau’s tweet about the verdict? I honestly can’t believe the PM of our country would even comment at this time. He is by far the most disgraceful PM ever to take office

Trial for 'attempted murder' or any other serious crime would also lead to being tried as an adult. I don't think it would be too hard to provide evidence that he attempted to murder any of the soldiers.

So what if he was here until 15 and then went over and still captured as a 15 year old. Would that change things?

At what point does that not matter though? As a previous poster stated, what if he was brought in when he was 10 and captured when he was 25? I think the only thing to consider is the age at which he was when captured. If a child in this country can be tried as an adult for murder here then there should be rules available to do the same in this case. So what's the youngest that a child was ever tried for murder? I believe the minimum age for this is 14 which seems to reflect the thought that many posters have stated in that at that age the person should have an idea of what they are doing.

I can appreciate that the laws we have in place have dictated this situation. But I feel the anger by those who oppose this outcome is driven by the idea that these laws should change. In other words, if someone leaves Canada to fight against Canada or its allies then they should risk losing these rights. I'm not saying you do or should agree with this but that's what this really come down to, IMO.

AG...maybe this helps. The quoted article was from June of 2007, but read Sept 2007 September 2007 A three-member appeal panel rules that the decision was in error and reinstates the charges against Khadr. Khadr's lawyers later filed an appeal, seeking to stop the U.S. military case against their client. A judge ordered in October that Khadr's trial proceed. June 4, 2007 A U.S. military judge drops all charges against Omar Khadr because he is an "enemy combatant," and the military commissions have jurisdiction only over "unlawful enemy combatants." http://www.cbc.ca/beta/news/canada/key-events-in-the-omar-khadr-case-1.1153759

The funny thing is that aboriginals are a part of Canada and therefore it would be going to them as well. The root of the problem in my opinion is that the continue to distance themselves from the rest of the country and then wonder why we treat them as distant!

You're right. We should be using 19th century technology all around. Tipis for houses, scythes and sickle for farming and only horses alllowed on reserve....none of those fancy automobiles!!

I'm fine with moving on from the First Nation to Municipality comparison as it was only preface to the point I was really trying to make...which is what Attawapiskat received in federal funding versus what other First Nations received. Again, you persist that the $12,000 per per person is 'normal' yet various surrounding First Nations show much lower numbers. You also confirmed that the $90M was for normal government services and excluded the capital costs for housing but now you are purposely throwing that back into the mix and saying its too complicated. Maybe for you it is. The reality is that the funding to a given First Nation in the area remained fairly consistent over the 2006-2010 period in discussion. (This is clearly noted on the Financial Transparency site if you care to look.) But to account for any irregularities, one can look at the five year average funding and you would still find that Attawpiskat had much higher per capita funding that surrounding First Nations. I didn't do the research on every First Nation in Ontario so it is quite possible that other First Nations receive as much or more however the point is that the complaint that Attawapiskat is underfunded just can't be taken seriously. I know....your assertion is that all First Nations are underfunded which again comes down to what the Treaties say. What is the government supposed to provide? But yet you steered clear when I asked about why is funding for housing or roads included when the Treaty covering this area says nothing about that. It seems very obvious that objectivity is not a strong suit of yours. The reality is that other reserves make it work because they have more 'own source' revenue which is the way is should be. The reserve system is not intended to provide EVERYTHING for these people but to supplement them. If a reserve needs the government to fully subsidize it then it shouldn't be in existence. You can use your personal insults all you want. In fact I love when you get to that point because it makes me realize that you don't really have any facts to argue instead you are arguing from emotion. I get it....you feel bad for these people and think that we should just hand over the bank accounts and let them do what they want. Unfortunately it can't and won't work that way. There needs to be objectivity and accountability which again by the audit done, there was neither accountability or objectivity to be found in Attawpiskat. So....instead of playing the victim role and making all other, lower funded yet still properly functioning reserves look bad, you should instead point out the poor leadership and issues that Attawiskat presented. But you just can't do that can you? And you wonder why all aboriginals get lumped into the bad stereotypes. Yeesh.

Where in the treaty does it say Canada will provide roads or housing? Nope. Not wrong jacee and they don't seem to be underfunded either. The info is right on their webpage listed on their financial statements....you know, in the spot you always tell others to look. Here are three more examples: Matachewan First Nation, with a registered population of 722, showed federal funding received of $1.3-million. In March 2014 the band reported that Chief Elenore Hendrix was paid $18,200 with expenses of $4,274, for 12 months. Moose Cree First Nation with a registered population of 4411, showed federal funding received of $16.8-million. In March 2014 the band reported that Chief Norm Hardisty Jr. was paid $154,340 with expenses of $53,000, for 12 months. Moose Cree deputy chief Earl Cheechoo was paid $112,809 with expenses of $52,000 for the same period. Wahgoshig First Nation, with a registered population of 318, showed federal funding received of $2.2-million. In March 2014 the band reported that chief Dave Babin was paid $102,550 with expenses of $58,750, for 12 months. http://www.timminstimes.com/2014/08/11/northern-ontario-first-nations-ignore-financial-demands This works out to $1800, $3800, and $6900 per capita for these FNs in those given years. Some are probably higher or lower based on what needs are present in a given year but based on the numbers presented do you not think it's obvious that $12,000 per person for five years is way more than any other reserve and yet they were the ones screaming about no funding? Can you now figure out why Harper was scratching his head on this one?? Can you now admit that in this example, the First Nation in question was responsible for poor management of said funds which caused the crises?

Do you think $18M per year is normal? That works out to $12,000 per person on that reserve. Most urban communities have total expenses around $500-1000 per person. The smaller, more remote ones are around $2500 per person. Even Kaschwechewan only received approximately $4M for 1700 people or about $2352 per person which is inline with my statement above about how much things cost for a smaller norther community.