--------

Wow. Premeditated CEW. No need for facts, or on-site assessment, or human relations. Just non-thinking brutal force.

Shame.

Why wouldn't they have discussed how to deal with a madman, someone smashing computer equipment, breaking glass (it was reported)throwing furniture in a secure area in an international airport. There were 300 passengers off a flight due at that spot within 5 minutes. When the Polish man armed himself he brought on the taser application. This is really very simple but there was "video" and everyone loves video. If the Polish man had not fought until the end, he would not have killed himself. Remember hear Pritchard say" gee, I can't believe he is still fighting them off". Grow up and get over it, none of the RCMP wanted it to turn out this way but when meeting force with force stuff hapens.

Based on the reaction of the government lawyer who noted that the e-mail hadn't originally been disclosed, I would tend to accept that it was indeed an oversight. I'd also agree with Braidwood's assessment of the oversight and I'm sure the government lawyer would as well.

That being said, I can only imagine what is going on at high levels in the RCMP behind closed doors and in Ottawa. They had better figure out how to cleanse themselves of this type of junk (and do it quickly and firmly) because they are making it damn near impossible for the 95% of the force who are good cops, to do their job effectively. At soon as the public loses faith in the integrity of the institution, they've pretty much lost everything. Game over. It will take decades to get that back. That would be a damn shame for the members of the force out there who do care about doing the right thing and show it in their actions everyday on the job.

They probably should have talked about it. They probably shouldn't have lied about their actions in front of a Commission (assuming that the e-mail is accurate of course). That is the problem and it's a BIG BIG BIG problem for folks that are entrusted to work in the justice system and act with integrity in their duties.

It would have been simple human nature for the members to discuss what level of intervention would be used if Dziekanski, a large and violently acting man, kept on acting the same once the police arrived. The members had the information that Dziekanski was in the process of destroying property and barricading himself within the area. They also knew he was a bear of a man.

Why the media is fanning the flames to the enth degree on this aspect is because it sells papers and gets hits on the websites. This one included.

The RCMP isn't perfect, but don't blame them. The e mail was obviously turned over to the inquiry in the first instance and would have been disclosed to the powers that be had the lawyers been on top of the situation.

By the way, I think NMG's comments are fair in that yes, the RCMP brass are really screwing things up for the guys who do go out and do a good job everyday. Bent is now supposedly going into retirement and guess who is now doing his job???? Perhaps a certain ex top cop of PG?

The officers testified under oath that at no time did they discuss any plan or idea of tasering (before the victim was tasered) amongst each other.

The email seems to indicate that in fact the did do the very same thing that they denied having ever done under oath.

That would be a big problem.

They also all testified that at no time AFTER the event did they ever discuss the details of the event amongst each other.

Hmmm.

wisewon,

"When the Polish man armed himself"????

The only thing he ever "armed himself" with was a stapler. Anybody who feels a need to use weapons against someone armed with a stapler needs to find employment outside of law enforcement.

"If the Polish man had not fought until the end, he would not have killed himself."

He didn't kill himself. Four RCMP officers killed him.

This was a situation that could almost certainly have been defused simply by talking to the man. The RCMP's first mistake was to approach him in a threatening manner, attempt to surround him, and demand that he surrender to them. That is just the thing to set off somebody who is already upset, confused, and frightened.

Anyone who has spent any time in an international airport knows that some passengers are going to be upset, crazy, sick, exhausted, confused, unable to speak English, or some combination of these. In addition to the RCMP's overly aggressive approach and excessive use of force, the problem here is that the airport has such poor services for passengers with a problem. There is far too much emphasis on selling expensive goods and too little on providing services to passengers.

I don't give a shit what happens I seen the video and it was murder plain and simple. Nobody can change my mind.

These cops, and the lawyers that represent them, are unmitigated a**holes.

As Greenday would say, 'a hurricane of f**king lies'.

The whole mess is sickening.

Let the top brass at the RCMP be investigated now... IMO they are the source of this shame on the force... all organizations get bad apples, its how you deal with them and the situation as it arises in an ethical manor.

Lets put the top brass on trial now and get some real answers.

I can feel your passion billposer and chrislivingdowntown. I believe that your words portray your feelings and potentially hold the truth.
My biggest question and concern in this whole unfortunate issue is, how many other cover ups have there been in past years and how many more will there be in future years with the RCMP still holding the law enforcement rights of our province?
The enforcement agency we have right now does not work and I completely disagree with the statement that the so called other 95% of the force who are good cops are doing a great job. Is this statement based on the thought that the other 95% have not yet fatally injured someone and then lied about it? Is that all it takes to be a good cop? In my mind the RCMP very strongly portrayed themselves as manipulators of the truth and have also portrayed themselves as having the ability to be premeditated in their actions and real truth does not fit into this world.
How is it that a woman/man who wants to become a police officer (who has been screened for their ability to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth so help them god) can pass the lie detector test only to lie when the need arises to protect or suit themselves or fellow members. Worse yet, how is it that they can be allowed to get away with it? How is it that they also have the brass of the RCMP supporting them by lying to protect them. It also appears when you read between the lines that they have the right to literally bend the law in their favor regardless of issue or consequence.
I am beginning to strongly believe that the people who make up the RCMP are unstable and do not possess the honesty or integrity required to properly enforce the law.
A man was fatally injured in an incident where it appears all that was required by our trained law enforcement professionals to resolve this issue was some patience, caring and a willingness to listen and understand.
I do not know how the rest of you feel but in my opinion the trust in this organization is gone and this organization will not regain this trust back any time soon.
As far as I'm concerned the e-mail incident is just one more nail in the RCMP organizations coffin.
It is easy to twist the truth when you are the only one who knows what the truth was supposed to be.

This is the first time I believe that It's an absolute requirement to throw out the baby with the bathwater and begin anew.

"I completely disagree with the statement that the so called other 95% of the force who are good cops are doing a great job. Is this statement based on the thought that the other 95% have not yet fatally injured someone and then lied about it"

No, it's based more on an simple guess. If you looked at ANY occupation group (lawyers, nurses, loggers, pulp mill workers, fishermen, reporters, Overwaitea prodce managers, etc.) you would find that there are crack pots in all of them. The difference is that those groups aren't under the same intense scrutiny that the RCMP is under right now (justified scrutiny mind you).

Right now this particular commission is dealing with how many cops? Five to ten? Fifteen to twenty maybe? Throw in the incidents in Vanderhoof, Houston and some of the other places and we're talking what, 100 "bad" cops? Based on the RCMP website, there are 9,500 people working for the RCMP in BC alone. Based on your day to day interactions with the RCMP (unless you are a criminal I suppose), do you honestly get the impression that there are 9,000 crooked people running around all over BC? I sure as heck don't. On the contrary. I'd say that the VAST majority I've had to deal with were reasonable people doing a thankless job.

There is no humanly way possible that you will ever weed out ever single bad cop in an organization as large as the RCMP. What you can do, however, is make a damn harsh example of the bad cops when they do get caught and be accountible to the people of Canada when stuff like this does happens. That is the failing of the RCMP right now IMHO.

I simply can't tarnish the average cop in the RCMP with the same brush as the guys being plastered all over the news. Doing so doesn't pass the sniff test for me.

You can't tarnish them with the same brush? Why not? I know of an incident on 5th Ave where a cop gave a parked driver a ticket for a seatbelt infraction while there were three or four drunk 'street people' staggering across the street right in front of his car. The officer didn't answer when asked why he didn't arrest them instead of writing a ticket for the driver. They 'serve and protect' their own.

Imorge said:
“Why the media is fanning the flames to the enth degree on this aspect is because it sells papers and gets hits on the websites”

Fanning the flames??? This thing is barely hours old. Before the media even got to it the Braidwood inquiry was adjourned until mid September. There has not been time to fan the flames. The adjournement and the length of it is explanation enough of how serious this is from Braidwood’s point of view. He will now need to go over all the testimony to date in detail, relate it to the new evidence that has come forward, and decide what action to take with respect to perjury, withholding evidence, conspiring to cover up, and a myriad of other interrelated matters. The outcome after his retrospective look will be interesting.

Should the RCMP have talked about what they would do when they entered the scene? Of course! But that discussion should have dealt with a staged approach which includes making their own assessment of what they saw versus what they were told by others they would see. There is every reason in the world why they should have observed from a distance with their own eyes what was going on. If a security camera was not available, they could have taken the same vantage point as the cameraman and others sitting in the adjacent room. Next they could have sent one or two officers in. They could have observed that they were not about to be shot or stabbed.

Again, this stuff is not rocket science. Anyone with a degree of any kind, and I understand those going through depot typically or always have a degree these days, and some good quality conflict resolution training would know that the approach taking by the four was wrong from the beginning. It is against that type of knowledge base and training background that the words described in the e-mail have to be and will be measured by any good defence lawyer.

There are other parts to the e-mail which may be considered to be more important than the fact that the 4 who went in decided to go to the taser if things got tough. Quite frankly, that is no big deal to me if they also discussed waht it would take to get to that point. The concern is that they did not mention that under oath. Thus, likely there is perjury there but it will have to be based on goign over the transcritps and the nuances and context of the words.

So let us look at these words: "Second, as we’re going to have someone speak to this, he suggest that it should be someone other than Dale Carr OTHERWISE WE MAY LOSE THE PERCEPTION OF INDEPENDENCE."

It does not say "loose the independent position we have". It says the "perception" of independence.

Basically that is an admission that they do not have an independent position. They have a subjective position. Obviously a position which will do whatever it can to protect not only the four who were at the airport, but the integrity of the RCMP to be able to independently and objectively conduct its own equitable, just inquiry into possible wrong doing by members of its force.

*Basically that is an admission that they do not have an independent position. They have a subjective position. Obviously a position which will do whatever it can to protect not only the four who were at the airport, but the integrity of the RCMP to be able to independently and objectively conduct its own equitable, just inquiry into possible wrong doing by members of its force.* Gus you are spot on with this comment.
Along with this e-mail, it stated on the news tonight that there was a large number of other evidence not turned over to the prosecution. I'm thinking that e-mail may be just the tip of the iceberg. If it becomes too messy, I wonder if the federal government will step in and shut it all down. (Or at least try)
I think the first person that will have to go is Elliot. Robert's killing, and yes I mean killing not accident, has opened up a can of worms that may expose more corruption than we ever dreamed of. In this incident alone, we have seen how one RCMP (Robinson)was in trouble with the law himself including domestic abuse, and instead of being demoted or helped, he was transferred to Vancouver where he was the supervising officer in charge when Robert was killed. He then went on to drinking & driving with his children in the vehicle, leaving the scene of the accident and killing an innocent young man. For punishment, he was allowed to stay home for Christmas with his family while on paid leave for months while RCMP investigated. All this has done nothing to endear RCMP principles and policies in the hearts of the everyday citizen. Unless the RCMP undergoes a complete overhaul from top to bottom, then citizens will demand it's disbandment all together. Canadians are only apathetic to a point, no matter what any politician or persons in power may believe.
In our home, we were taught that love comes free but respect and trust must be earned

My point exactly gus and b00bear, just in different words.
Based on all I have heard, watched and read, there is an urgent need to gut the fish so to speak to find out exactly what has been eaten over the years. We now need to know just how unstable this organization really is....what else has been lied about or covered up.

RCMP = Paid Liar and Tax Guzzling Parasite

The key point is not whether they discussed possible plans of action it is the fact that they lied under oath. It only makes sense they would discuss a response for a couple different senarios. If they did not plan for multiple possibilities they would be negligent in their duties. The statements under oath that they did not plan seemed incredulous and have now been shown to be lies. Much of what they said under oath seemed equally incredulous and self serving. It is now known that they were willing to lie about some things so it is fair to say the much of what they said could also be full of untruths.

The key point is not whether they discussed possible plans of action it is the fact that they lied under oath. It only makes sense they would discuss a response for a couple different senarios. If they did not plan for multiple possibilities they would be negligent in their duties. The statements under oath that they did not plan seemed incredulous and have now been shown to be lies. Much of what they said under oath seemed equally incredulous and self serving. It is now known that they were willing to lie about some things so it is fair to say the much of what they said could also be full of untruths.

Lying under oath comes with a whole list of new charges as well. I'm willing to bet not one of those cops ever faces any charges.

I think they waited until the last minute hoping Judge Braidwood would say the evidence was being presented too late and therefore would not be considered.

Well Windingo...does the name Ian Bush ring a bell?

ahh Bush, smush. The fact is, the email is from one officer to another alledging a conversation that the members may or may not have had.

Get Bent on the stand to clarify the email. It is just hearsay unless proven correct.

Res ipsa loquitur .....

very true Lmorge.......but the fact remains that the testimony offerred by the 4 cops was so incredulous that it was totally unbelievable. The email add more wieght to the lack of believe.
It is all adding one piece at a time that I believe is going to lead to the truth. Based on the actions of the 4 and on the actions of the force to date, I strongly suspect the truth is not going to be at all favourable to those 4 or the force!

Wisewon has to be a cop to make such uninformed statements that are not supported by the facts!

The Pritchard video contains evidence of the officers saying "May I taser him ?"...."Yes". This is clearly before they could even see Robbie D.

Including the observation that he is "a bear of a man" has absolutely no bearing on the level of response that is appropriate.

This leads back to my much earlier statement of "Just kill everything that scares you".

This is people's natural psychological tendency. It takes a much better person to assess level of threat and respond accordingly.

You cannot make an accurate determination of level of threat, based on your own fear (whether it is warranted fear or you are just a naturally scared person).

In layman's terms...you cannot escalate the level of physical response based on the fact that you just peed yourself.

A fact for thought:
I have had many more problems with average sized people (some very well conditioned athletes, some with incredible combat skills). I have been 4th man in, on a man that was half my size.