TTC Police Shooting

[Argus]

Hey Argus, that previous incident with the RCMP killing the Polish man in the airport it was as bad a thing as I have ever seen police do yes. Absolutely unforgiveable. But I won't turn on all cops because some are bad.

Hey Rue, I'm a conservative, remember, a law and order conservative. I fully support police when they're doing their job. But as a law and order conservative I think when they break the law they ought to be fired and put in prison. I don't have that forgiveness so many conservatives have for police who abuse their authority and commit criminal acts.

And shooting a guy six times while he's laying on the floor is not a legal act.

Edited July 30, 2013 by Argus

[Guest Derek L]

There were 2, 3, maybe 4 cops looking into streetcar at the kid at one time one point while one was shooting. All you'd need is 1 cop with a taser, and one cop with a gun beside him in case it doesn't work.

I know, that’s what I said , but as shown in the video, only two officers had their weapons out when the shots were fired, reason being, like I said prior, they have to aware of what’s behind their target, well also having a clear field of fire at their target. In this case, the front door of the streetcar and the location of the young man inside were the limiting factors.

As such, an officer with a taser would have to situate himself between the young man and the police with weapons drawn.

The standard taser needs either both contacts to hit the target, or one to hit the body and one to hit the ground to complete the circuit. However, other types of tasers also exist, like the

, which has all barbs needed for the shock located on a single round and is wireless with on-board battery needed for the shock on the actual round deployed (taking away the range limitation of the standard wired taser). Tasers can also be fired increasingly accurate, this shotgun XREP taser is accurate up to 100 ft (military wants to get it to 300 ft). This video shows a guy hitting a target 50ft and 100ft away.

Given the kid in the streetcar was just standing still virtually frozen, a taser shot very likely would have worked.

And what Taser do you think the Toronto police issue?

None other then the police standard M26....the taser I described.....

The thing is, the cops had the choice to stand wherever they wanted. They could have stood 50ft from the streetcar and had civilians stay that far back if they wanted, and the kid only had a couple exit choices from the car. The kid was trapped in a narrow space with only a couple exits, how much more control did the cops need here?

Only a couple of exits....Don't the Streetcars have pop-out windows?

Now as I asked several others, without an answer mind you, let's say the police sectioned off an area of 100ft around the streetcar, if the young man (armed) attempted to break that line, would the police be justified in shooting him?

Whether the technology exists today or not, it's well within today's technological means for cops (and military btw) to possess non-lethal (or even less-lethal) weapons/tools to handle a situation like this. There's NO excuse for them not to. Far too much research has been done on lethal weapons for police/military relative to much-needed non-lethal tech. If the kid was suffering from mental illness it makes it even more tragic & necessary.

So the police shouldn't have firearms?

[Guest Derek L]

And to further the story along, a witness that was on the streetcar and is able to comment:

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/story/2013/07/30/toronto-streetcar-shooting-fallout.html

So according to this witness, the young man tried to keep the passengers on the streetcar at knife point, and said witness fended him off with his bike.............

[Black Dog]

And to further the story along, a witness that was on the streetcar and is able to comment:

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/story/2013/07/30/toronto-streetcar-shooting-fallout.html

So according to this witness, the young man tried to keep the passengers on the streetcar at knife point, and said witness fended him off with his bike.............

And?

[Boges]

We have a name.

http://www.thestar.com/news/crime/2013/07/30/toronto_police_officer_who_shot_sammy_yatim_identified.html

The “devastated” Toronto police officer being investigated in the shooting death of 18-year-old Sammy Yatim has been identified as Const. James Forcillo.

On Monday, Forcillo was suspended from the force after he became the subject of a Special Investigations Unit probe into Yatim’s death on an empty Dundas streetcar early Saturday morning. No charges have been laid in the case.

It appears that even more than a decade ago, Forcillo knew he wanted to be a police officer.

On the website for a Toronto gym started with a high school friend, a James Forcillo, then a Grade 12 student who played football in 1999 for what is now the Toronto Grizzlies, was described as planning on studying law enforcement at a college in the GTA. When contacted by the Star, the friend refused to comment.

I imagine the fact that he's "devastated" indicates he knew he did something wrong.

[Black Dog]

We have a name.

http://www.thestar.com/news/crime/2013/07/30/toronto_police_officer_who_shot_sammy_yatim_identified.html

I imagine the fact that he's "devastated" indicates he knew he did something wrong.

Hopefully he has time to think about it during his long, long unemployment.

[Boges]

He was on the Sunshine List so it'll be tough to replace that income.

Perhaps that's why he's devastated.

[Black Dog]

He was on the Sunshine List so it'll be tough to replace that income.

Perhaps that's why he's devastated.

Now now, that kind of talk is liable to send AW to her fainting couch.

[Guest American Woman]

We have a name.

http://www.thestar.com/news/crime/2013/07/30/toronto_police_officer_who_shot_sammy_yatim_identified.html

I imagine the fact that he's "devastated" indicates he knew he did something wrong.

I would think that even when an officer knows he had no choice but to shoot, he's "devastated" that he took a life. I doubt that's ever an easy thing to reconcile with.

[guyser]

And?

The policeman who arrived on the bike should have taken him down.

Problem solved.

And yet.....they couldnt figure it out. Meh.....shoot him.

[Boges]

Least shocking thing ever.

The shooting cop is now getting threats according to the Police union head.

[Guest American Woman]

Least shocking thing ever.

The shooting cop is now getting threats according to the Police union head.

I knew that was going to happen. There's a reason his name wasn't being released by the force. I think it was irresponsible of the person who did release his name, and I think they should be suspended too.

It's so ironic, though, that those who criticize the police for violence turn around and react violently themselves.

[Boges]

I knew that was going to happen. There's a reason his name wasn't being released by the force. I think it was irresponsible of the person who did release his name, and I think they should be suspended too.It's so ironic, though, that those who criticize the police for violence turn around and react violently themselves.

From what I hear, if you listen to the video closely you can hear them mention his name. Reporters figured that out.

[Guest American Woman]

From what I hear, if you listen to the video closely you can hear them mention his name. Reporters figured that out.

I read that someone within the police department gave out his name. I don't think reporters could release his name without confirmation under such volatile circumstances.

[guyser]

The shooting cop is now getting threats according to the Police union head.

Nothing he says can be contrued as the truth

And like most cops, he has got off when charged woith serious crimes.

Nothng but a scumbag Association head. His brothers trial is still pending , shaking down club owners in the Entertainment District, still a cop.

Cops wonder why the public distrusts them more and more? Man they have to be the dumbest people alive then.

As for naming the cop , big deal, he did it , he gets identified.

Do cops keep the names of other perps a secret even when they know releasing it may cause harm? No they dont, so screw 'em and welcome to the club

Edited July 31, 2013 by Guyser2

[On Guard for Thee]

I guess Toronto cops need to go to school in montreal to learn how to handle these types of things. They managed to wait 20 hours with a man in a house, (not quite as easy to see into as a streetcar) and eventually bring the guy out alive in the end. And this guy actually fired a couple of rounds from the house but the cops were able to keep there heads and not "Go Rambo" like the TO guy. Don't you agree that's a better outcome?

[Moonlight Graham]

I know, that’s what I said , but as shown in the video, only two officers had their weapons out when the shots were fired, reason being, like I said prior, they have to aware of what’s behind their target, well also having a clear field of fire at their target. In this case, the front door of the streetcar and the location of the young man inside were the limiting factors.

As such, an officer with a taser would have to situate himself between the young man and the police with weapons drawn.

What exactly are you arguing...that the Toronto police shouldn't have tried shooting the kid with the taser first? That what they did based on the video was the correct protocol? I think the Toronto PD & even the cop who shot the gun would disagree with whatever you're saying:

The Toronto police officer who is being investigated in the killing of a knife-wielding teenager on an empty streetcar called for a taser before opening fire, according to a source.

Constable James Forcillo requested assistance from an officer with a taser before allegedly shooting Sammy Yatim, 18. In Toronto, only sergeants and members of the Emergency Task Force are permitted to carry tasers. The stun gun appears to have arrived a few minutes too late.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/toronto/toronto-police-called-for-a-taser-before-firing-on-yatim-source-says/article13537694/

Now as I asked several others, without an answer mind you, let's say the police sectioned off an area of 100ft around the streetcar, if the young man (armed) attempted to break that line, would the police be justified in shooting him?

Maybe, but I don't understand the relevancy of this hypothetical.

So the police shouldn't have firearms?

As far as I know, given today's technology, the police still need guns. However, a goal for researchers and for police/government should be to invent and equip police with technology where they can subdue people (like the guy on the streetcar) using non-lethal force, to the point where they wouldn't need firearms except in the most extreme circumstances or better yet, never. The non-lethal options police have today seem to be inadequate.

[On Guard for Thee]

"The stun gun arrived a few minutes too late" but apparently they decided to go give him a zap anyway, after they pumped him full of lead. Let's tazer a dead man. If that doesn't scare the hell out of you...I don't know what would.

[Guest Derek L]

What exactly are you arguing...that the Toronto police shouldn't have tried shooting the kid with the taser first? That what they did based on the video was the correct protocol? I think the Toronto PD & even the cop who shot the gun would disagree with whatever you're saying:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/toronto/toronto-police-called-for-a-taser-before-firing-on-yatim-source-says/article13537694/

Sorry if I wasn’t clear……..As I said, the correct protocol was followed, a combative person with a weapon advanced on officers and was shot……….Would you think correct protocol would dictate officers allow an armed person to advance on them if a taser isn’t present? What if the taser malfunctioned? Or as in this case, for an officer to deploy a taser, they have to put themselves in a unsafe distance ( police tasers are limited to 12-15 ft) of the armed person, well also putting themselves in front of their armed supporting officers.

Maybe, but I don't understand the relevancy of this hypothetical.

No more, or no less relevant then yours I should think.

As far as I know, given today's technology, the police still need guns. However, a goal for researchers and for police/government should be to invent and equip police with technology where they can subdue people (like the guy on the streetcar) using non-lethal force, to the point where they wouldn't need firearms except in the most extreme circumstances or better yet, never. The non-lethal options police have today seem to be inadequate.

Define inadequate………a study a few years ago from the American’s DoJ (I’ll look up the link later if you wish) put the success rate of Taser use by Law Enforcement at just below 70%, and the use of chemical agents (Tear Gas & Pepper Spray) at (IIRC) 64%……..In my view, not too shabby considering the restraints of each type of device……….None the less, the most successful non-lethal method is still by far four-legged………..Unfortunately many have an aversion towards the use of police (attack) dogs as a means of less than lethal Use of Force…….

[dre]

Im wondering.... if the guy who filled this clown full of lead was doing his job properly...

Where the 8 guys that DIDNT failing to do their duty? Maybe we should be going after them!

Edited August 1, 2013 by dre

[dre]

Least shocking thing ever.

The shooting cop is now getting threats according to the Police union head.

Yeah well... for whatever reason some folks dont like it when the governments henchmen gun down a guy for no good reason. Go figure.

[Moonlight Graham]

Sorry if I wasn’t clear……..As I said, the correct protocol was followed, a combative person with a weapon advanced on officers and was shot……….Would you think correct protocol would dictate officers allow an armed person to advance on them if a taser isn’t present? What if the taser malfunctioned? Or as in this case, for an officer to deploy a taser, they have to put themselves in a unsafe distance ( police tasers are limited to 12-15 ft) of the armed person, well also putting themselves in front of their armed supporting officers.

If the police were armed with a few taser X12's, accurate up to 100 ft, the kid would likely be alive. A guy trapped on a bus wielding a knife died, protocol FAIL. If you think that couldn't have been prevented you aren't being very creative.

Define inadequate………a study a few years ago from the American’s DoJ (I’ll look up the link later if you wish) put the success rate of Taser use by Law Enforcement at just below 70%, and the use of chemical agents (Tear Gas & Pepper Spray) at (IIRC) 64%……..In my view, not too shabby considering the restraints of each type of device……….None the less, the most successful non-lethal method is still by far four-legged………..Unfortunately many have an aversion towards the use of police (attack) dogs as a means of less than lethal Use of Force…….

Cops are still killing far too many people, cops are still using guns beyond a certain limited range. Cops are killing people with knives. Completely unacceptable.

[GostHacked]

Sorry if I wasn’t clear……..As I said, the correct protocol was followed, a combative person with a weapon advanced on officers and was shot……….

What protocol calls for deadly force followed by a tazer?

What protocol calls for a cop to knowingly put himself in danger by coming into range of a person holding a knife?

How do we know protocol was not followed? The fact we are discussing this is enough proof in my view.

[Rue]

I guess Toronto cops need to go to school in montreal to learn how to handle these types of things. They managed to wait 20 hours with a man in a house, (not quite as easy to see into as a streetcar) and eventually bring the guy out alive in the end. And this guy actually fired a couple of rounds from the house but the cops were able to keep there heads and not "Go Rambo" like the TO guy. Don't you agree that's a better outcome?

I agree with you but I want to qualify that agreement.

The Montreal police force has had numerous complaints proven against it for out and out brutality against people from Haiti and other visible minority groups.

It is mired in corruption.

So here is the point. If you are referring to the recent tactics used by the Montreal police to wait out a mad man and that is what the latest shooting in Toronto also called for, I would agree.

I agree with you its a stark contrast to what Toronto police appear to be doing. I totally agree with you on that and using it as an example of the tactics as to what we would hope Toronto police do as well.

All I am saying is Montreal police have a reputation for being brutal, corrupt and undisciplined far worse that the

Toronto force.

When the public sees such a tape, it turns into an us (public) against them (any police officer with

a uniform) trust issue. We suddenly move off of the actual issue (the questions as to the need to use a gun to kill

an individual as opposed to other tactics to contain him that would not have killed him).

In these discussions people are making quite a few assumptions such as:

1-a police officer can aim his shots selectively at a hand or foot;

2-a police officer in the line of potential immediate danger sees, hears and senses what we do when looking at the tape:

3-a police officer is capable of using hand to hand to disarm a person, let alone in a confined space while climbing up stairs towards the assailant.

To me there are two crucial issues none of us know that need to be answered and are not shown on the tape"

1-Did the individual lunge or make any menacing movement towards the officer who shot him right before

the shots were fired?

2-After the individual goes down on his back after the first initial 3 shots, why after another 7-9 seconds there

was a need for another 6 shots at him?

Those are the two crucial issues.

The above two are the key crucial ones in determining the shooting officer's liability or excessive force (internal discipline) or a criminal charge of criminal negligence.

Other issues will then arise as to the overall question of the training tactics given to Toronto

police and whether there are tactics to use other than shooting a gun to contain a deranged

or angry person who is NOT in a hostage situation.

The first question in that regard will come from asking should the officer in charge have

done something OTHER than repeat, drop the knife 7 times?

Would it have made a crucial difference if he said something else such as:

" Stay calm, we aren't going to shoot if you won't come forward...stay calm

you be cool, we'll be cool...no one wants to shoot you....what's your name...

what's going on...talk to me.."

The above dialogue is part of training to other police forces and is referred to

as establishing rapport or non adversarial connection or dialogue.

It can be quite successful in containing a critical life and death situation if the

violent person can hear it. Obviously it might not work for people in certain

mental states but the person establishing dialogue can quickly get an idea

whether he's connecting from the body language and verbal responses and

quickly know if its not working.

Questions will also be asked whether the officer with the gun should have held

his position and not fired until the taser weapon was brought in assuming the

individual with the knife did not lunge.

All that said, if the individual did not lunge, there is a huge problem.

I told you my personal bias is to use water hose,foam fire extinguishers and

quick encasing spray foam as containment weapons before a taser or even

a canine. I hate the taser. I also like tranquilizer darts being shot at knife holders who are not lunging.

Different police forces use different weapons or have different weapons at their disposal.

I do not know why in today's model they do not use any of the above but use the gun as the only primary

weapon of defence.

I do appreciate though and urge anyone just for their own curiousity to go on the web and look at

knife training videos to see why it is a myth to think a police officer can simply pull a Batman and

magically aim a kick at the knife or wrestle the person to the ground.

All that said, huge questions remain and we can not allow them to fuel prejudice against all police officers.

If one black man commits a crime it is human nature to think all black men did it. They feel it in their community

everytime a black man commits a crime or shoots another.

We do the exact same things with police officers, negatively stereotyping them all for the actions of one the same

way we do with black men or other visible minorities-to us they all look the same so we stereotype in that manner.

We all do it. Its human nature but we have to stay calm and detached from the anger that arises and colours what

we see.

The tape available to us does not show all the angles. It blocks being able to know if the individual lunged at the

officer before his first shots. In regards to the second round of 6 shots-that is a HUGE question.

The limited dialogue to only saying drop the knife is also questionable.

If that had been a black man shot, everyone would be crying it was a racist crime not an issue of excessive force

or questionable training. At least that emotional issue has been avoided on this one. The next?

By the way if you go on the web, you will be amazed by just how many incidents across North America there

are of police shooting dead people with knives.

Please understand many police trainers will tell you its easier to deal with an assailant with a gun then a knife,

Go find out for yourself why.

One other thing. As I have been talking about this in class many students ask, why did the police not go in the back door.

They could not. If they rushed in the back door, they would have cornered the suspect. If you leave an angry person

feeling he is trapped it can trigger a violent reaction, in this case to rush to the front or back-then what-there would have been potential cross fire between the back and front officers.

So they deliberately did not enter the back for that reason. That is why they simply stood by the back. Had he moved that way they would have waited at the bottom of the back door only.

The police were also on one side only because there was no movement by the individual towards a window to climb out the other side and they stood where they had the most visibility towards his movements.

By the way you notice the sirens that remained on at the scene? The officers rush out and have no time to turn off the sirens.

Ideally in such a situation a back up officer should go over to the cars with the sirens on and turn them off. The siren noise makes it difficult to hear and causes a constant state of alarm and stress counter-productive to talking one down. All things easy for me to point out after the fact but should be considered and revisited in training.

This tape will be used to show what not to do in future training programs.

It will be turned from perhaps a regrettable and unfortunate incident into a lesson that may save lives in the future.

Edited August 1, 2013 by Rue

[Guest Derek L]

If the police were armed with a few taser X12's, accurate up to 100 ft, the kid would likely be alive. A guy trapped on a bus wielding a knife died, protocol FAIL. If you think that couldn't have been prevented you aren't being very creative.

No, He`d still likely have been shot:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2039738/Raoul-Moat-inquest-Police-shotgun-Tasers-ineffective-non-lethal.html

More doubt was thrown on police tactics used against murderer Raoul Moat today after a Home Office weapons expert declared that the X12 shotgun Tasers used against him were 'ineffective'.

The hearing at Newcastle Crown Court was told that in testing ‘more often than not’ the experimental X-Rep cartridges did not achieve their purpose of incapacitating the target.

Officers fired twice at the 15st 7lb (100kg) fugitive as he prepared to kill himself with the sawn-off shotgun he had already used to blast his ex-girlfriend Samantha Stobbart, execute her new lover Chris Brown and blind Pc David Rathband.

And of course:

http://www.taser.com/support/x12-xrep

This product is no longer supported by TASER International. No units are under warranty.

Cops are still killing far too many people, cops are still using guns beyond a certain limited range. Cops are killing people with knives. Completely unacceptable.

But shouldn’t the more prudent question be why are their people with knives that the police kill?

Perspective I suppose.....