A Canadian citizen is deemed guilty

[M.Dancer]

Here is a news flash for you Civil Libertarians have kids too. Although they can be your next group to villianize for sure.

And they might also be kidnappers....

[punked]

And they might also be kidnappers....

They might be saints so what. This is why you need evidence in this country to search someone, and to suspect someone. Welcome to Canada been here long?

[kimmy]

Being considered "suspicious" is not the same as being deemed "guilty".

If the police decide that your refusal to allow them into your house is "suspicious", so f***ing what? You still have all the protections afforded by Canadian law. The police can't charge you with "acting suspicious". All they can do is decide to investigate you further. They have that right regardless, and you have the right to be as cooperative or as uncooperative as you wish. As a Canadian citizen, you're certainly entitled to do just that, and as Canadian law enforcement officers, they can investigate you as long as they follow the rules of Canadian law.

-k

[M.Dancer]

They might be saints so what. This is why you need evidence in this country to search someone, and to suspect someone. Welcome to Canada been here long?

There has to be some cognitive disorder here...for the last time, no one is being searched.

....and as Kimmy just said, you only have to be suspicious, to be suspected. If you feel there is some charter citation that that forbids suspecting the suspicious....go fill your boots.

[xul]

The police service's methods mean "a Canadian citizen is deemed guilty until police are satisfied you are innocent," he said. "And a Canadian citizen who insists on exercising the rights of [a] Canadian citizen is immediately deemed a suspect."

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/toronto/story/2009/11/10/mariam-search-police361.html

I think you have misunderstood the meaning of the methods.

"Innocent until proven guilty" is a method which suits for judges not for police. On the contrary, "guilty until proven innocent" is a method which suits for police and many other professions which are responsible for finding a faulty component among lots of innocent ones.

A doctor for one, if a patient comes and tells him he has got a cold becasue he has a fever, he can not prescribe the patient some drug for a cold and simply kicks him out. He must look into every causes which would cause a fever and presume these causes may be responsible for the patient's symptom until he is satisfied by medical examinations and rules them out.

In the case you quoted, theoretically, it is no harm to an innocent if he is in the list of police's suspects. Of course, in practice, there may have some harm because some policemen or silly media "writers"(and our neighbours, bosses and colleagues) may also misunderstand and abuse the method. I remember in the 8 years girl Victoria (Tori) Stafford's case, medium prooflessly "reported" her mother was the suspect behind the abduction and some policemen came to her home threatening her mother with words like "we know it is you" even if she had passed the lie detecting test. As a father of a 6 years old boy, I know how harmful those deeds of the police and the medium was to a mother whose girl was missing. I believe in Canada Tori's mother has the legal right to refuse the lie detector. But if she insisted her legal right, I bet we would see more horrible things happened on her.

Edited November 12, 2009 by xul

[punked]

There has to be some cognitive disorder here...for the last time, no one is being searched.

....and as Kimmy just said, you only have to be suspicious, to be suspected. If you feel there is some charter citation that that forbids suspecting the suspicious....go fill your boots.

I love you say no one is searched in one breath then in another you go on about how you hope the police search and target everyone who refuses a search regardless of if have any connection in any way to this case or not. Classic. I have no problem with police questioning people I think that is their job, and even too some extent asking to "peep" into someone home. It the step after that scared me, the targeting of all those who refuse, that can be taken as intimidation and the is wrong.

[M.Dancer]

I love you say no one is searched in one breath then in another you go on about how you hope the police search yadda yadda yadda....

I love how you imagine I say things I didn't. Makes me feel warm.

It the step after that scared me, the targeting of all those who refuse, that can be taken as intimidation and the is wrong.

Someone whose profile is raise through their uncooperation is hardly worth the effort to whine about.

[punked]

Someone whose profile is raise through their uncooperation is hardly worth the effort to whine about.

Someones profile should be raised through evidence not through exercising their charter rights. This is my problem with this way of doing things. Yes ask questions of everyone do police work, that doesn't include searches of 6000 homes that is silly.

[xul]

There are a lot of differences between this police conduct in Canada and say..umm....Red China.

I believe bjre is a Canadian and according to Chinese law, he has been canceled his Chinese citizenship.

Since there also are other Canadians criticized the system with bjre's way and no one mentioned the countries they come from, I think there is no need to introduce caste and untouchable system into Canada to build a second class citizenship of Canadian.

[M.Dancer]

I believe bjre is a Canadian and according to Chinese law, he has been canceled his Chinese citizenship.

Since there also are other Canadians criticized the system with bjre's way and no one mentioned the countries they come from, I think there is no need to introduce caste and untouchable system into Canada to build a second class citizenship of Canadian.

I bleieve he is an immigrant of convience not a citizen, and will piss on Canada when the opportunity arrises. He doesn't like Canada, which is his perogative. Showing him what a tool he is, is mine.

[xul]

I bleieve he is an immigrant of convience not a citizen, and will piss on Canada when the opportunity arrises. He doesn't like Canada, which is his perogative. Showing him what a tool he is, is mine.

I remember in one of his posts of "law protect this/that/..." he said he is a Canadian citizen and I think he is not the first one speaking things like that and I bet some of them are not only Canadian citizen but also Canadian born.

In any case, your response is irrelative to the thread. For example, would it be decent if an Aferican Canadian or immigrant wrote to Harper complaining "my kids has not got a shot beacuse there is a vaccine lack and the vaccination is badly managed", then Harper replied him "You have not right to complain because the country you come from has not any vaccination yet!"

[M.Dancer]

I remember in one of his posts of "law protect this/that/..." he said he is a Canadian citizen and I think he is not the first one speaking things like that and I bet some of them are not only Canadian citizen but also Canadian born.

In any case, your response is irrelative to the thread. For example, would it be decent if an Aferican Canadian or immigrant wrote to Harper complaining "my kids has not got a shot beacuse there is a vaccine lack and the vaccination is badly managed", then Harper replied him "You have not right to complain because the country you come from has not any vaccination yet!"

If he's a citizen then we nade a mistake. No one as ignorant as him about our government and laws should be allowed citizenship. That distinction should only be for native born.

[xul]

If he's a citizen then we nade a mistake. No one as ignorant as him about our government and laws should be allowed citizenship. That distinction should only be for native born.

If you were a politician and I was a Canadian, I would like to vote you on principle or theory, though there are practical problems I have pointed out years ago that there is not a common acknowledgement on what kind of persons should suit being Canadian.

But the fact is you are not politician and I was not a Canadian, so it is not a mistake if he is a citizen.

Edited November 12, 2009 by xul

[Wilber]

I love you say no one is searched in one breath then in another you go on about how you hope the police search and target everyone who refuses a search regardless of if have any connection in any way to this case or not. Classic. I have no problem with police questioning people I think that is their job, and even too some extent asking to "peep" into someone home. It the step after that scared me, the targeting of all those who refuse, that can be taken as intimidation and the is wrong.

In my town there might be 15 patrol officers on a shift for an area that encompasses 350 sq miles and contains 125,000 people. Don't you think they might have better things to do than "peep" into every citizen's home when they are looking for a missing kid, when it is a known fact that the first four hours are critical in such searches? That if you don't find them in four hours the chances of them being found dead triple. That they have more on their plate than 125,000 idiots with an attitude? Do you think it would be reasonable for them to suspect that a person who won't let them have a look might have something to hide? Do you think a kidnapper would just say "come on in and have a look"? I went on a ride around with the local police one Friday night and one of the calls was for a missing four year old. Every available unit was immediately put on the the call and the last thing that came up was snooping on the local citizenry. During a busy Friday night where I saw them deal with some real assholes and some big guns come out, that was the most stressful hour for both myself and the officer I was with. When one of the units found the kid OK, it turned into the high point of the evening for everyone.

Perhaps you should think a little less about your rights in such circumstances and little more about the missing kid and the people who are busting their asses trying to find it.

[fellowtraveller]

If there was a reason they thought she was in my neighborhood I would want them to get out a phone call a judge tell them the reason and get a warrant it takes two fucking minutes. If there is no reason why they thought it and they couldn't get a warrant chances are they are just guessing.

The police don't need a warrant to search the neighbourhood, they do need a warrant to enter my home without my express permission which would not be given in these circumstances. And it takes a lot longer than 2 minutes, since the cops need probable cause to get the warrant.

The reason I would not let them is that I am quite certain that there are no corpses or spare teenagers on the premises. The cops can choose to believe that or not, and act accordingly.

[eyeball]

Being considered "suspicious" is not the same as being deemed "guilty".

If the police decide that your refusal to allow them into your house is "suspicious", so f***ing what? You still have all the protections afforded by Canadian law. The police can't charge you with "acting suspicious". All they can do is decide to investigate you further. They have that right regardless, and you have the right to be as cooperative or as uncooperative as you wish. As a Canadian citizen, you're certainly entitled to do just that, and as Canadian law enforcement officers, they can investigate you as long as they follow the rules of Canadian law.

-k

That's just it though, the police very likely will investigate these people and any other 'by-catch' their net sweeps up. They won't be able to help themselves. Like xul say, the attitude of innocent until proven guilty is really only something that judges need concern themselves with, not police.

If this business of peeping into people's houses becomes more commonplace, police and the state will only become more suspicious. I hate to think where we'll be after another 2 or 3 cycles of cracking down and getting tough on crime especially if more conservative judges are appointed to the supreme court. I sure don't expect the rules of Canadian law to stay the same for long.

[Guest American Woman]

American Woman, on 11 November 2009 - 08:38 PM, said: Shouldn't dogs be able to pick up her scent?

After this long?

I think as they say in the pulp westerns, The scent is cold.

I was referring to picking up her scent if she, or her belongings, is/are in one of these neighborhood houses. That scent would not be cold.

Well, you can't not visit because you assume they migt be smart, they also might be dumber than a bag of hammers.

I think instead they want to eyeball the person who is acting a little too something whenthe police come...too helpful, too nervous, too curt, too weird.

Might lead to nothing, or it might not. No stone unturned.

If they're dumber than a bag of hammers, one has to wonder why the police have not been able to pick up any leads.

People can act all kinds of ways when confronted by the police, and that includes innocent people. Furthermore, maybe they do have something to hide that has nothing to do with this case.

And what it might lead to is wasted time and resources, based on nothing regarding this case.

[M.Dancer]

And what it might lead to is wasted time and resources, based on nothing regarding this case.

It might. Police often search vast fields that don't have what they are looking for. And the only way they will ever know if the field hasn't what they are looking for is to search it.

Police cam to my door a few months ago. First thing I asked was "is everything okay?"....When they told me why they were making inquiries etc, I asked if they had time to meet my kids...

My reason for that is I want my kids to see the police as more than AUTHORITY. I want my kids to trust the police. I can't expect my kids to trust them if I don't.

[Guest American Woman]

It might. Police often search vast fields that don't have what they are looking for. And the only way they will ever know if the field hasn't what they are looking for is to search it.

This is true, but in this case, they are being invasive. Whether one agrees with what they are doing or not, knocking on people's homes, expecting to be let in to "take a peek" around their house, is invasive; and without a warrant, it is against the principles of our nations. Do you disagree?

Police cam to my door a few months ago. First thing I asked was "is everything okay?"....When they told me why they were making inquiries etc, I asked if they had time to meet my kids...

My reason for that is I want my kids to see the police as more than AUTHORITY. I want my kids to trust the police. I can't expect my kids to trust them if I don't.

I don't think it's a good idea to teach them to unconditionally trust any authority figure, and that includes the police. just because someone is a police officer doesn't make him/her automatically trust-worthy. I think that trust should be a guarded trust.

Edited November 12, 2009 by American Woman

[punked]

Perhaps you should think a little less about your rights in such circumstances and little more about the missing kid and the people who are busting their asses trying to find it.

If of all this girl who they are searching 6000 houses for went missing 2 months ago. Second of all I never think a little less about my rights ever. Again I would let them in my house too look around if it would help but if someone didn't that is well with in their rights and they should respect that. That is why it is waste of time.

[eyeball]

I don't think it's a good idea to teach them to unconditionally trust any authority figure, and that includes the police. just because someone is a police officer doesn't make him/her automatically trust-worthy. I think that trust should be a guarded trust.

My kid's uncle is an RCMP officer and even he tells them not to trust cops.

Above all else I think trust should be earned.

[Wilber]

The police don't need a warrant to search the neighbourhood, they do need a warrant to enter my home without my express permission which would not be given in these circumstances. And it takes a lot longer than 2 minutes, since the cops need probable cause to get the warrant.

The reason I would not let them is that I am quite certain that there are no corpses or spare teenagers on the premises. The cops can choose to believe that or not, and act accordingly.

I realize the particular case was well after the fact but what in the case of an Amber Alert? How many houses on your block and multiply that by two minutes. How many blocks in your neighbourhood? So I take it you would let them in if there were corpses and spare teenagers on the premises.

Edited November 12, 2009 by Wilber

[bjre]

I want my kids to trust the police. I can't expect my kids to trust them if I don't.

Watched too many TV show, include recent "Law & Order". Find the basic thing police do is make others to trust them and drive their emotion and try to take what they want, even if it is not truth, they can make use of it by their explanation. And they try to explain it like that even you have a good wish, your behavior can be fit in some law item that you never heard of. I hope your children will not be used to collect non sense things against you.

I always tell my children think before talk, think what others want before talk, because in Canada, I don't trust anyone except my wife and several friends. I don't 100% trust my kids because I don't know what they teach them in school.

Edited November 12, 2009 by bjre

[M.Dancer]

This is true, but in this case, they are being invasive. Whether one agrees with what they are doing or not, knocking on people's homes, expecting to be let in to "take a peek" around their house, is invasive; and without a warrant, it is against the principles of our nations. Do you disagree?

I don't think it's a good idea to teach them to unconditionally trust any authority figure, and that includes the police. just because someone is a police officer doesn't make him/her automatically trust-worthy. I think that trust should be a guarded trust.

I think that's silly. My children are pre teens, if they ever need the police, they must trust them..same goes if the police need them.

[M.Dancer]

I hope your children will not be used to collect non sense things against you.

Learn that in China did you? Maybe the Red Gaurd come pay Grand Mother a visit?