Ex Cop writes a letter bragging how he abused the system.

[Boges]

And people wonder why the Public Sector is hated.

http://www.thespec.com/news-story/5717533-ex-waterloo-cop-thanks-service-for-paying-him-to-play-golf-while-suspended/

WATERLOO REGION Former police officer Craig Markham said Police Chief Bryan Larkin "had no business" making his email public at a Region of Waterloo Police Services Board meeting on Wednesday.

"I think it's disgusting that Bryan Larkin released my email," Markham said.

"He is using me as a scapegoat."

The email sent on March 27 to a police services solicitor thanked police for his continued salary while he sat at home, played golf, travelled and took a course to become a firefighter.

It was seen as "mocking" and sarcastic by Larkin and board members.

"I am very thankful and fortunate to have received such as a nice gift from WRPS over the last three years. You have opened up others doors for me and have paid me to sit back and watch. What a dream come true," Markham wrote in the letter.

But Markham said he sent the email to "try and make the best of a bad situation."

"My intention was never to mock the system," he said.

Markham, 37, was suspended with pay for three years. Markham received almost $350,000 for the three-year period.

So Ontario is the only province that keep paying suspended cops FULL pay. Hopefully this get the ball rolling to change that. Innocent until proven guilty is the excuse advocates give. Well if that's the case then if it's proven that the cop is guilty he has to pay back a good portion of the money received while on suspension. That will get the ball rolling in trying to resolve these issues.

This toolbag had no urgency to resolve the issue because he got 3 years of paid vacation.

I pray that SJWs find out what Fire Department hired this Ass Hat and pressure them to change their mind.

Edited July 14, 2015 by Boges

[Argus]

I don't think he was bragging so much as trying to get his last licks in at the department which fired him. Given the time it takes to resolve these issues I can understand why it would be grossly unfair to be able to suspend someone without pay that long because you are, in effect, severely punishing them before they have been determined to be guilty.

[Boges]

I don't think he was bragging so much as trying to get his last licks in at the department which fired him. Given the time it takes to resolve these issues I can understand why it would be grossly unfair to be able to suspend someone without pay that long because you are, in effect, severely punishing them before they have been determined to be guilty.

It's funny when you're caught speeding 50 km/h plus the Cops don't presume innocence when they take your car away.

Why can't they get a reduced salary? Or if they are presumed innocent then if they are found guilty, they'd be on the hook for a portion of the money they made?

[Argus]

It's funny when you're caught speeding 50 km/h plus the Cops don't presume innocence when they take your car away.

Do they take it away for several years? And even then, taking a car is not the same as taking a livelihood.

Why can't they get a reduced salary? Or if they are presumed innocent then if they are found guilty, they'd be on the hook

for a portion of the money they made?

There is a principle involved which says you don't punish people if you're not sure they're guilty. A reduced salary would still be a punishment. The real solution is to not have these damn things take so long. This wasn't even a legal case. It was an administrative one heard by a civilian commission. Why did it take three damn years?

Edited July 14, 2015 by Argus

[Boges]

Do they take it away for several years? And even then, taking a car is not the same as taking a livelihood.

A traffic violation can most certainly take away someone's livelihood.

There is a principle involved which says you don't punish people if you're not sure they're guilty. A reduced salary would still be a punishment. The real solution is to not have these damn things take so long. This wasn't even a legal case. It was an administrative one heard by a civilian commission. Why did it take three damn years?

Then you'd have no problem with the Cop repaying every cent of money he received should he be found guilty, as this one did. OR they should have to work administration duty and not go down to Florida.

It probably took 3 years because there was no urgency from the accused because he got a paid vacation.

[The_Squid]

There are people who also rip off the private sector.... do you hate all private sector employees when one of them is found to be behaving badly? Or do you reserve your blanket hatred for only the public sector?

[Boges]

There are people who also rip off the private sector.... do you hate all private sector employees when one of them is found to be behaving badly? Or do you reserve your blanket hatred for only the public sector?

Yeah because public sector employees are paid by the public.

Also a private sector employee gets fired on the spot, not put on paid leave for 3 years.

[hitops]

Do they take it away for several years? And even then, taking a car is not the same as taking a livelihood.

Yes it certainly can, especially if you live somewhere where you are car dependent for employment.

There is a principle involved which says you don't punish people if you're not sure they're guilty. A reduced salary would still be a punishment. The real solution is to not have these damn things take so long. This wasn't even a legal case. It was an administrative one heard by a civilian commission. Why did it take three damn years?

I agree that it should not take that long, that is unjust. However I also echo the above poster in that the police certainly don't presume you to be innocent when impounding and vehicle or issuing a ticket, they presume guilt.

There are many great police officers, but they are also sometimes the biggest hypocrites. How many times have I seen a police officer abuse their authority to run red lights, make illegal U-turns etc? I see this probably every single day, and then as soon as they have gotten through the light, around the turn etc, the lights go off and they continue on their way. But the rest of us, of course have to obey every law.

[Queenmandy85]

A ticket is not a presumption of guilt. It is a statement of evidence. This is what the officer saw did and heard. ie. I saw a vehicle of this make and model, colour with this licence plate number and in the case of a traffic violation, operated by this person with this operator's permit. The vehicle in question was observed travelling at this rate of speed in this location, or parked in this location under these circumstances. In her notes, the officer may record the number of passengers and perhaps a brief description of each. It is up to the court to determine guilt or innocence.

In the case of impounding a vehicle or a roadside suspension, remember that use of the road is a priviledge, not a right. The best way to avoid sanctions is to drive leagally.

Edited July 17, 2015 by Queenmandy85

[Boges]

A ticket is not a presumption of guilt. It is a statment of evidence. This is what the officer saw did and heard. ie. I saw a vehicle of this make and model, colour with this licence plate number and in the case of a traffic violation, operated by this person with this operator's permit. It is up to the court to determine if this was illeagal or not.

In Ontario, if you're caught going 50 kms over the limit you immediately get your car impounded for 7 days. Sounds like a presumption of guilt to me.

[Guest]

If you're caught hitting someone with an axe, they'll take the axe away too.

Edited July 18, 2015 by bcsapper

[Queenmandy85]

Duplication of previous post. Operator error.

Edited July 17, 2015 by Queenmandy85

[Queenmandy85]

In Ontario, if you're caught going 50 kms over the limit you immediately get your car impounded for 7 days. Sounds like a presumption of guilt to me.

What kind of demented maniac drives 50 Km. over the speed limit?

If you wish to avoid sanctions, drive legally

[Boges]

What kind of demented maniac drives 50 Km. over the speed limit?

If you wish to avoid sanctions, drive legally

And if you want to keep your job as a cop, don't share info with a member of the Hell's Angels like this toolbag did.

[kimmy]

In Ontario, if you're caught going 50 kms over the limit you immediately get your car impounded for 7 days. Sounds like a presumption of guilt to me.

errr.... if you're caught driving 50kn/h over the speed limit, aren't you by definition guilty?

-k

[WWWTT]

In Ontario, if you're caught going 50 kms over the limit you immediately get your car impounded for 7 days. Sounds like a presumption of guilt to me.

Damn straight it is!

A breathalizer can also act like a judge and jury and take your license away. Guilty until proven innocent!

WWWTT

[WWWTT]

If you're caught hitting someone with an axe, they'll take the axe away too.

Bad example because when you hit someone, you will actually hurt someone.

WWWTT

[Guest]

Bad example because when you hit someone, you will actually hurt someone.

WWWTT

What about if you're caught trying to hit someone with an axe?

[Queenmandy85]

It doesn't make a lot of difference whether you hit someone with and axe or with a car doing more than 50 km.over the speed limit.

[WWWTT]

What about if you're caught trying to hit someone with an axe?

You have a victim/witness.

As well, now you're getting into an complicated involved event where the police would be investigating and interviewing more than one person before laying any charges.

WWWTT

[WWWTT]

It doesn't make a lot of difference whether you hit someone with and axe or with a car doing more than 50 km.over the speed limit.

Nobody said anything about an car accident where one of the vehicles was traveling at more than 50km of the posted speed limit.

That is another event.

WWWTT

[Boges]

This is also thread drift. I'm just giving an example of when police presume guilt. This officer had evidence against him but kept getting paid in full. Same with the dude who was caught on video shooting Sammy Yatim 9 times on a street car.

Again Ontario is the only province that has this deal. What's wrong with other solutions? Partial pay with the promise of back pay if you're found innocent or making the officer pay back money if found guilty?

[Wilber]

Damn straight it is!

A breathalizer can also act like a judge and jury and take your license away. Guilty until proven innocent!

WWWTT

No it can't, the police can give a roadside suspension but only the court can take your licence away. The law does allow the police to get drunks and dangerous drivers off the road before they kill someone.

[Boges]

No it can't, the police can give a roadside suspension but only the court can take your licence away. The law does allow the police to get drunks and dangerous drivers off the road before they kill someone.

In Ontario cops can also take your car away (at the drivers expense) for 24 hours for blowing 0.05 BAC even though that's not a criminal offence.

But the biggest example of being guilty before being proven innocent is the idea that you have to pay money to get out of jail after being arrested. You know Posting Bail? Why should you have to pay money to get out of jail if you're innocent until proven guilty?

Edited July 20, 2015 by Boges

[Wilber]

In Ontario cops can also take your car away (at the drivers expense) for 24 hours for blowing 0.05 BAC even though that's not a criminal offence.

But the biggest example of being guilty before being proven innocent is the idea that you have to pay money to get out of jail after being arrested. You know Posting Bail? Why should you have to pay money to get out of jail if you're innocent until proven guilty?

They can in BC as well. The reason it is a 24 hr suspension is to get you off the road until you sober up and to dissuade people from drinking and driving at all.

Courts impose bail, not the police and it varies according to the seriousness of the charge and how much risk the court thinks you represent when it comes to not showing up for you trial date. Most cases do not involve bail at all, people are released on their own recognizance. Of course the alternative would be to just keep you in jail until your trial date.