Corrupt Cops Again

[BayLee]

Seems once again cops have been exposed for the liars and criminals they can be.

A mans life is ruined because of them...

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

"An inquiry's report into the James Driskell case blames Winnipeg police and prosecutors for his wrongful murder conviction, saying "what happened in this case is just plain wrong."

'Mr. Driskell is innocent in the eyes of the law.'—Attorney General Dave Chomiak

Driskell, 48, spent 12 years behind bars, convicted of first-degree murder in 1991 after his friend Perry Dean Harder was found shot to death in Winnipeg. Driskell always maintained his innocence and his conviction was eventually quashed by the federal justice minister.

James Driskell, shown in 2006, says he is happy with the conclusions of the inquiry into his case.James Driskell, shown in 2006, says he is happy with the conclusions of the inquiry into his case.

(Wayne Glowacki/Winnipeg Free Press/Canadian Press)

The inquiry's final report, released Thursday, says the jury in Driskell's trial was "seriously misled" on issues including the reliability of a key Crown witness. The report also said the failure of the Crown to disclose information to the defence was "careless indifference."

The inquiry's commissioner, former Ontario chief justice Patrick LeSage, said in the report that members of the Winnipeg Police Service failed to relay important information to Driskell's lawyers before, during and after his trial.

LeSage also said Winnipeg police Chief Jack Ewatski contributed to the miscarriage of justice by not releasing a report that he prepared as an inspector in 1993 once he became chief in 1998. That report contained information that raised doubts about Driskell's guilt, but it was not made available to Driskell's lawyers for a decade.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

If right wingers had their way,Driskell would have been executed years ago

[Army Guy]

Baylee:

If right wingers had their way,Driskell would have been executed years ago

Why is it that just right wingers are for the death penality. here are some facts about the death penality.

1967 the death penalty was only used to execute those guilty of murdering of police and prison guards

1976 in was abolished altogether.

1987: When the motion to reintroduce capital punishment was announced in February of 1987, popular support for reintroduction stood at 73% . By June (when the parliamentary vote was taken), popular support had slipped to an all-time low of 61%, following widespread discussion of death penalty issues in the media.

A motion to reintroduce capital punishment was debated in the House of Commons in 1987. On June 30, the motion was soundly defeated on a free vote (148-127), despite public opinion polls indicating majority support for the death penalty

1995; A national poll conducted in June, 1995 found that 69% of Canadians moderately or strongly favoured the return of the death penalty, exactly the same level of support as 20 years ago. However, other surveys suggest that this abstract support is 'a mile wide and an inch deep'. In 1996, a cross-section of 1500 Canadians were asked to name the major concerns and issues facing the country; not one named reinstatement of the death penalty as a priority

i guess in 1987 and in 1995 there was alot of right wingers around. either that or your accusation is BS, which is it...

[Canadian Blue]

Reported, if you want to go on a forum were you can hate cops go to copwatch.com. They routinely joke about police officers getting shot and killed and killing police officers so you might feel right at home if you believe all police officers are "pigs" as you eloquently put it.

Either way, I simply reported the post since it was only meant to be derogatory towards law enforcement. I had no problem reporting Roberts tirade against minorities, and I've got no problem reporting someone who only provides hatred on this forum.

As well it's interesting that Baylee doesn't hate the lawyers as well.

Two extremes on this forum, Baylee is extreme left.

[Figleaf]

The litany of wrongful convictions coming to light proves there are (or were) serious problems with our criminal justice system. Considering the gravity of sending someon to prison for years or decades, it seems to me that it is high time to make the prosecutors and investigators found to have contributed to wrongful convictions personally liable for some part of the recompsne costs. These dangerous bastards have gotten off scott free for too long.

[jdobbin]

It certainly is disappointing when it looks like a travesty of justice has been committed.

There has been a lot of talk about the courts being soft on crime. I think we have seen several cases where the book has been thrown at someone despite obvious flaws and outright lack of evidence in the case.

I wonder if we will see more of these cases happen in the future.

[White Doors]

If right wingers had their way

I'm probably more right of centre and I don't believe in the death penalty. Also, you forgot to mention that the federal justice minister is conservative.. that's right! a real right winger!

haha

[Wilber]

No one knowingly convicts an innocent person. They believed in the persons guilt even if their methods have been suspect. Disclosure rules have changed drastically in recent years. Now there is very little that can be presented in court without it being disclosed to the defense beforehand. That is a big reason why it now takes much longer for cases to get to trial than in years past.

[Army Guy]

Figleaf:

The litany of wrongful convictions coming to light proves there are (or were) serious problems with our criminal justice system.

I would be the first one to agree with you our justice system needs an over haul. but on the same token no system is going to be 100% fool proof. So wrongful convictions will remain in any system. Are wrongful convictions high when compared to the actual number of cases tried.

Considering the gravity of sending someon to prison for years or decades, it seems to me that it is high time to make the prosecutors and investigators found to have contributed to wrongful convictions personally liable for some part of the recompsne costs. These dangerous bastards have gotten off scott free for too long.

Do we really want a system where this happens, i think it's an extremily slippery slope, have the prosecuters lossing cases because they do not want to be held accountable...Criminals already have to many advantages, do they need another...

[jdobbin]

If right wingers had their way

I'm probably more right of centre and I don't believe in the death penalty. Also, you forgot to mention that the federal justice minister is conservative.. that's right! a real right winger!

It should be of note that Vic Toews was once a Crown prosecutor and former Justice minister in Manitoba and he that he made no effort to look into Driskell or any of the cases that that had been bungled in the province during his tenure.

A law and order advocate should be an advocate for putting the right person in prison. Many of the cases that were worked on when Toews was Justice minister are now possibly going to be re-opened.

[jdobbin]

No one knowingly convicts an innocent person. They believed in the persons guilt even if their methods have been suspect. Disclosure rules have changed drastically in recent years. Now there is very little that can be presented in court without it being disclosed to the defense beforehand. That is a big reason why it now takes much longer for cases to get to trial than in years past.

This is the reason why Driskell's case stands out. It was known from 1993 on that they mishandled the case and withheld information.

[PolyNewbie]

Lawyers are very corrupt as well, working with criminals in laundering money and that has been in mainstream news. Naturally the law society handled it so that lawyers couldn't be arrested. The law society does not report criminal activity of lawyers to the police as a matter of policy. Its a culture of corruption in the whole justice system.

[jefferiah]

People in any field make can make a mistake. Mistakes in some fields may not have any drastic effect on anyone and in some fields a mistake might have a huge effect. But I dont think people should be legally punished for doing their job honestly and making an honest mistake. It is a prosecutor's job to prosecute. So if he happens to be very good as getting prosecutions but is proven wrong on a case years later, you think he should be punished for doing his job?

[jdobbin]

Lawyers are very corrupt as well, working with criminals in laundering money and that has been in mainstream news. Naturally the law society handled it so that lawyers couldn't be arrested. The law society does not report criminal activity of lawyers to the police as a matter of policy. Its a culture of corruption in the whole justice system.

There is no corruption in the field you work in?

[guyser]

People in any field make can make a mistake. Mistakes in some fields may not have any drastic effect on anyone and in some fields a mistake might have a huge effect. But I dont think people should be legally punished for doing their job honestly and making an honest mistake. It is a prosecutor's job to prosecute.

It is a slippery slope but frankly some of them should be prosecuted for "doing their job".

Most mistakes are not honest in police work investigations.

I know of two off the top of my head. Guy Paul Morin, and Karla Homolka. Granted the Prosecutors should not suffer , but I do know a few of the cops on both cases should pretty much been charged and stripped of all police duties.

Guy Paul Morin, police purposely withheld evidence (cig butts for one-even tho GPM did not smoke)

Homolka, if Niagara had talked to Toronto police, Karla and Paul would have been caught earlier...much earlier. And just how , given one whole month, can a team of experts not find some tapes above a light in the cieling on an 1800 sf house.

[Wilber]

This is the reason why Driskell's case stands out. It was known from 1993 on that they mishandled the case and withheld information.

And this is why he is now free, not because he is necessarily innocent but because his guilt was not proved. Certainly the police were wrong in doing what they did but they didn't knowingly railroad a man they knew to be innocent. That doesn't justify what they may have done but it is an important distinction.

[myata]

... if you believe all police officers are "pigs" as you eloquently put it.

Canadian Blue,

on this note, can you please point exactly where the word "pigs" was used in the post? Or perhaps, you yourself should be reported for "misrepresentation"? Not to mention making rules on the forum.

P.S. If no one has already done so, please consider reporting yourself.

[guyser]

Certainly the police were wrong in doing what they did but they didn't knowingly railroad a man they knew to be innocent. That doesn't justify what they may have done but it is an important distinction.

Police are not judge nor jury. They withheld info on a man thus moving closer to a favourable conviction to their way of thinking.

What other reason would they have to withhold info, if not for getting a conviction?

[guyser]

can you please point exactly where the word "pigs" was used in the post? Or perhaps, you yourself should be reported for "misrepresentation"? Not to mention making rules on the forum.

Already done on another thread.He (baylee)was shown the pig reference.

[LesActive]

There seem to be multiple levels of liability when it comes to "justice" in this country. Sure, it's the prosecutors duty to use all the tools available to them to pursue a conviction of an alleged perpetrator. The problem occurs when those tools are jerry-rigged to skew evidence and quite often procedure in support of a seemingly predetermined outcome based more on assumption than the preponderance of evidence. If it's discovered that the prosecutor has been misled by police testimony or either party is found to be purposely misrepresenting the evidence in question then those who are responsible for the fallacious information (or the withholding of salient info) should be held commercially liable for their actions if a tort is committed against the accused. It's for the spectre of this very real possibility that I would never support granting a "governing body" the entitlement of taking the life of a human being for ANY reason. That's just MHO of course, because I believe that equity is paramount before and under the law.

The comment about giving more tools to the criminals is disingenuous, I think. That assumes that everyone ("person" or otherwise) is brought into court because they are guilty of the "offence" regardless of prima facie evidence. Perhaps some will 'get away with murder', but I think that is still far preferable to making an error of the magnitude of Guy-Paul Morins case. Has anyone here ever faced a crown prosecutor? They are not happy people.

Power does corrupt.

[jdobbin]

And this is why he is now free, not because he is necessarily innocent but because his guilt was not proved. Certainly the police were wrong in doing what they did but they didn't knowingly railroad a man they knew to be innocent. That doesn't justify what they may have done but it is an important distinction.

This issue was about railroading. Driskell was not a nice guy but the cops knew that testimony given against him was false. That was the basis of the Jack Ewatski report that was withheld all those years.

[PolyNewbie]

jdobbin:There is no corruption in the field you work in?

Of course there is but its not officially sanctioned. Lawyers can commit crimes whenever they want and the system is designed to prevent anyone from ever reporting it.

You cannot report a crime committed by a lawyer unless you get another lawyer on board with you. If the accused lawyer is found innocent he has recourse to sue the lawyer that helped bring the charges forward.

I've been extorted and threatened and abused publically by one of these weasels. I tried to report it. You can't unless another lawyer gets on board with you and they will not evn hear you because they are afraid of their coleagies because they have so much power.

[jdobbin]

Of course there is but its not officially sanctioned. Lawyers can commit crimes whenever they want and the system is designed to prevent anyone from ever reporting it.

You cannot report a crime committed by a lawyer unless you get another lawyer on board with you. If the accused lawyer is found innocent he has recourse to sue the lawyer that helped bring the charges forward.

I've been extorted and threatened and abused publically by one of these weasels. I tried to report it. You can't unless another lawyer gets on board with you and they will not evn hear you because they are afraid of their coleagies because they have so much power.

I guess likewise could be said about the police and doctors. You need one to go after another in their field.

Does it mean those professions are corrupt?

[BayLee]

Certainly the police were wrong in doing what they did but they didn't knowingly railroad a man they knew to be innocent. That doesn't justify what they may have done but it is an important distinction.

Well yes they did,and its not the first time either.

This is not about cops making a mistake or the justice system failing.

This is about police deliberatly witholding eveidence,having their main witness lie on the stand to get a conviction,about the cops out and out lieing.

A man spent 13 years in jail because of these lies.

As for the death penalty?

Who cares about stats.

The fact of the matter is that if we had the death penalty as right wingers demand,this man as well as others would now be dead.

As for Canadian Blue who says...

"if you want to go on a forum were you can hate cops go to copwatch.com. They routinely joke about police officers getting shot and killed and killing police officers so you might feel right at home if you believe all police officers are "pigs" as you eloquently put it."

I have never heard of that site but it would appear you spend some time reading a website that hates cops as this is the second time you have brought it up.

You mention someone spreading hate( sorry that is reserved for right wingers) but look at you,lieing about what I said,and again it is the second time you have done so.

So an apology is expected from you

[guyser]

Of course there is but its not officially sanctioned. Lawyers can commit crimes whenever they want and the system is designed to prevent anyone from ever reporting it.

You cannot report a crime committed by a lawyer unless you get another lawyer on board with you. If the accused lawyer is found innocent he has recourse to sue the lawyer that helped bring the charges forward.

I've been extorted and threatened and abused publically by one of these weasels. I tried to report it. You can't unless another lawyer gets on board with you and they will not evn hear you because they are afraid of their coleagies because they have so much power.

Please pass the doobie down the line will you?

Man you are some piece of work. Do you stay up all night trying to come up with plausible scenarios and hope that the residents of MLW are asleep at the wheel?

So a lawyer punches you on the street. You cant report the charge?? Your lawyer friend robs a bank, cant report him?

Did the lawyer who "extorted threatened and abiused you" do so in writing? Hmm maybe not .

Maybe the nice policeman read your posts here and decided....naw, got enough fruitcakes left over from christmas.

Are you still in high school?

[PolyNewbie]

Outside my apartment there was a gang of police with one of their steroid enhanced security guard buddies pushing people around just inside pretending to be a cop with a blue POLICE T - shirt on.

He was clearly with them and impersonating a cop and just generally being a stupid thug but when I complained to the cops about what he was doing they just laughed and said the POLICE T-shirt was really for the rock band called "The Police" - which you would only believe if you are stupid.

On another occasion a cop that was off duty and in uniform assaulted me then he said he was going to call his buddies and habve me arrested for assault - this after I told him what I thought of the gratuitous law breaking. When his friends arrived the woman officer (officer #7797) told me to go away or she would make something up to arrest me. I could not file charges aginst the cop that assaulted me because of these pigs. I wrote a letter to the police services board but that was a waste of time because I never even heard back from them.

Yes, it is a criminal culture.