And if it had happened to a Canadian there would be no justice and never would be.... I hope the Polish governemnt does get their man for this even if it takes 30-years. The RCMP have proven they can not be trusted to investigate and discipline their own.

Wow! I sure hope this does not inconvenience
those officers too much! Everbody knows Tasers do not kill?

I say let them take them away. R.C.M.P can't be trusted

B.C.’s police complaint commissioner was involved in the decision to exonerate those Mounties. Last December, in his previous job with the Criminal Justice Branch, Stan Lowe took part in that decision.

Lowe stated that the five Taser shocks and other treatment cops inflicted on Dziekanski were “reasonable and necessary.” Lowe also used the irrelevant information that the RCMP dug up in Poland to smear Dziekanski.

Just one week later Lowe was appointed B.C.’s police complaint commissioner. Now he can make similar decisions on behalf of municipal police.

His staff is made up entirely of ex-cops.

This isn't comparable to Roman Polanski. Switzerland is acting on a warrrant for Roman Polanski that has been issued by the country in which he committed a crime. I'm not sure how Poland can lay charges against foreigners in a foreign country, where the alleged crime wasn't even committed in Poland. If they can do that then I guess we had all better be careful what we do.

well said ruez. Give your head a shake there Ben. Do you really want other countries to try canadians because they dont like the legal procedures here? If you want to go after the RCMP then do it in a rational manner. Being cheerleaders for international pick up lists is nonsense and clearly an example of the end justifying the means.
This isnt persuit of justice here. It is a little sad, actually. Kind of like when people take comfort in the fact that a child molester is likely to get killed in prison. Its not reason or justice, its revenge. I dont (or at least i shouldnt) have to tell folks what vengeful thinking leads to.
Poland isnt going to issue arrest warrants for the RCMP officers unless it wants trade and treaties drying up all over the world. NO self respecting nation (does that include canada?) would allow such a thing to go unchallenged. Like it or not, our review system and judiciary are ours to administer. Only a fool would offer to have them second guessed and then overturned by other nations just to get the last laugh on people they feel have escaped justice.

How about the pot seed sellar in vancouver. How come the americans can take him and the canadian govt wont do anything about it. Five on one is fair seeing the RCMP had a taser dont kill. LOL

the guys name is mark emery

Canadinas ask their government to aid Canadian citizens who travel to foreign contries and sometimes get into (deserved or undeserved) trouble there.

Mr. Dziekanski was still a citizen of Poland when he got into trouble after landing at Vancouver Airport.

The government of Poland may very well decide that extreme unreasonable harm (resulting in death) was done to Mr. Dziekanski, a citizen of Poland.

Canada cancelled its cooperation agreement with Poland in February of 2009, after the RCMP sent officers to Poland to dig up stuff on Mr. Dziekanski.

If the whole incident at the Airport was above board and no mistakes were made, why does Canada refuse to cooperate with Poland anymore?

I wonder how Canadians would scream if a Canadian citizen was killed at the airport in Puerto Vallarta, Mexico in the manner this Polish citizen was rushed, overpowered and dispatched in just a couple of minutes.

We have all seen the video, haven't we?

The whole thing was mishandled from the start and not only the RCMP is at fault.

Canadians can, and do fall prey to crime and mischance all over the world. WHile the canadian govt oftens concerns itself with thte facts of the cases and may even make strong comments on the case, we dont issue arrest warrants for the accused (or the lawyers , say). Screaming is one thing, charging foreign nationals for alledged crimes committed abroad is another. It is a big difference.
Mark emery committed crimes in the US (via the US postal service), thus he, like famous movie directors and mass murderers was subject to extradition.

The Polish government acting on behalf of Robert Deizkanski’s mother could in fact swear out a private prosecution charging all four of the officers as we speak in BC, in Canada.
That would leave the provincial and federal government with the option of letting the charges go foward or staying the charges. Now that would raise a few heads if they set about to stay the charges.
The Poles in fact, could if they so wish, have the last say.

I have not seen the video of Robert Dziekanski's last moments. I avoided the temptation of watching another's agony.
Same with that young lady who was shot to death in Iran (?) Can't watch that stuff. I did however, happen to see on the t.v. news on the week end the story and video of those five ( or was it seven ? ) Edmonton cops who dog piled on that unfortunate who did not instantly kowtow and obey their every command. Brave dudes, those Edmonton Fuzz. Must have been one almighty tough student to have that many policemen on top of him.
metalman.

So Meisner, if the Polish government could go forward with private prosecution. Those charges would still be laid in Canada using the Canadian court system.It doesn't really have much to do with the Polish government other than them acting as the instigating party.

Nor would it entitle the poles to arrest or otherwise harass canadian citizens vacationing abroad.
Once again, what difference does it make how many policemen dog pile onto someone who is resisting? Some folks watch too many westerns and chuck norris movies. We dont pay the RCMP to fight one on one with criminals (that is what you are if you resist, by the way). It isnt an arena out there, where police men and women face the bad guys one on one. You use as many folk as are handy. that way no POLICE OFFICERS are hurt. As for the 'student', well he ought to have obeyed their every command since that is the law. Kinda like the speed limit if you know what i mean. Oh right, some folks think they ought to be allowed to drive fast enough to keep themselves awake.
Why is it that we are always having this rediculous hypocritical discussion? In some cases people are clling for strict lawfulness (trespass was the last issue i remember) and on the other hand they are falling all over themselves to protest the treatment of people who only broke the law a little bit?
Ben Meisner wants property rights defended to the hilt but doesnt want to respect the process regarding this tasering case. I can see people having their problems with the process but this is the 2nd column at least extolling the possibility of the polish doing some sort of end run to get at the RCMP officers in question. If you respect the laws of this nation then work within them to seek justice. Dont turn to some foreign nation to get your slice of payback.
As for all those slagging the RCMP, give some facts to support your statements or shut up. It is in no way admirable, or compelling to throw out statements like: 'the RCMP cant be trusted', especially when it is the RCMP that you will go running to when you need help.

I suppose the Polish gocvernment and police are entitled to apply their own laws in Poland any way they want, just like the Canadian government and RCMP do in Canada.

The difference with several police officers going after one student who is resisting arrest is whether they used excessive force in doing so. They are not entitled to do that, the force they use has to be suitable for the occasion. If not, the police are breaking the law themselves, like it or not.

Your comments about one on one is a ridiculous straw man. Nobody suggested that but you.

As to people shutting up, absolutely not. It is called freedom of speech. You may have heard of it. Everybody should make whatever statements they like as often as they like as long as they are not libellous or obscene. If you don't like it, don't read it.

"Once again, what difference does it make how many policemen dog pile onto someone who is resisting? Some folks watch too many westerns and chuck norris movies. We dont pay the RCMP to fight one on one with criminals (that is what you are if you resist, by the way). "

Right on the money. At least some people get it.

No, actually metalman implied a man limit for take downs by mocking the cops for using 5 to 7 men. Where did the man turn to straw? Would 2 on one be a straw man? How about 3? Metalmans post was about numbers, not the force used. Read it again. Or try reading a lot of the posts on this issue. How many comment on the FIVE ploice men it took, etc etc. That implies there is a ratio of cops to robbers that is appropriate does it not?
The whole idea of excessive force is subjective and, on this board usually bandied about by people with absolutely no training or experience. Such opinions, while everyone has one, are worth nothing. The fact is, when cases are reviewed for excessive force all the armchair experts weigh in and start the condemnations when the results dont agree with them. It doesnt matter what the real experts say, the armchair crowd saw it on youtube.
For the record, no one suggested the cops are above the law, that would be your rediculous straw man.
As for everyone saying whatever they want, just so long as it isnt libelous or obscene, well thats the internet mantra isnt it? For me i would suggest that while it is your right to shoot your mouth off, it might be better if you wait until you have some sort of expertise/experience/facts to relate. When people just say whatever comes to mind it doesnt contribute to intelligent discourse. It just clogs up the internet with nonsense.

The concept of excessive force may be subjective, sometimes, and extremely clear on others. It depends very much on the situation and what society is willing to accept. Clearly, some of the posters on this site think that the number of officers who piled on the young man was excessive, and it is people like those posters who make up society. Notice that I did not say they had used excessive forece. Rather I answered your question, "what difference does it make how many policemen dog pile onto someone". The difference it makes is whether the number that "dog pile" onto him constitutes excessive force. Was it? I have no idea, but I do believe an investigation is required to determine that and, among other things, determine what part of his body was the recipient of the numerous punches and whether there was any damage done as a consequence.

The free speech issue precedes the internet by several decades. I think of it as the Hyde Park mantra, as it is a British social institution for people to meet at "Speakers' Corner" in Hyde Park, London, to spout off about whatever they want, including rank criticism of the police while the police are standing there to ensure nobody attacks them for saying it. I'm sure other countries that respect freedom of speech have similar social practices, decorating vans for instance. Requiring people to know what they are talking about before having the right to speak freely is just another name for censorship, besides, who will authorise another person to speak on an issue, you? As to it being nonsense, well, as the proverb says, "One man's meat is another man's poison."

Well said Ammonra!

Well i dont know. If you think arsenic is meat then fly at it. I, and everyone else for that matter am aware that the concept of free speech predates the internet. However, the internet has afforded people with unprecedented opportunities to excercise their right to vent. Even before the internet it was necessary to actually know something about what you were talking about if you were not to be considered a fool. I support the rights of folks to expose themselves as fools, I just counsel them to do otherwise. If you really think that endless one liners contributes to the general discourse then fly at it. I look forwards to long lines of 'the gov't sucks' or the 'RCMP cant be trusted' in response to every news article.
By the way,I never suggested that i should be the judge of what should or should not be posted. I suggested people decide for themselves whether they can actually support what they are saying before they post. Granted, i didnt say it so politely but I have been saying essestially that same thing in a polite fashion for some time now perhaps i was a little cranky. Still, telling people to back up their rhetoric cant really be a bad thing.
On the other issue i would like to thank you for supporting my straw man. If people are defining excessive force in terms of the number of officers involved, and if the definition of excessive depends on the general consensus, then it is a subjective definition and there is justification in asking just how many cops can be involved. I dont think you can tell me that NOBODY out there thinks the cops ought to duke it out one on one. I am sure that if the criminal is small, or female, or older that there will be people who say 'why did it take two cops to take him down? thats excessive'. Of course, that would be a stupid thing to say, but like you say, they have a right to say so (and i agree with you).

Excessive force is just that, four policemen, two security guards, and a guy holding a stapler that they have tried to suggest was wielding a weapon.
Four policemen, first tazering a guy 5 times, then are putting their knee into his neck, even though he lay dying.
No, that was not excessive force. If a cop comes along as says beat it, of course we should all say yes sir three bags full, because he is the ultimate authority, because he says so. By the way what makes him or her have that ultimate authority?
When police officers, politicians, or even your grandmother uses those tactics, it is excessive force that is why we have laws in Canada that must be obeyed by everyone, and not subject to the interpretation of what a police officer deems what he thinks the law should be.
When we have police officers doing that as they did in the polish guy’s death, they have slipped from being the protectors of the people to the occupiers of the people.
The polish people and their authorities know full well what it is like to live under that occupation, and that is why they guard their freedoms so much

Well done.

If anyone want more information related to charges in Poland, please visit our website or contact me at zriddle@shaw.ca tel 604-868-7070.

The best from Zygmunt Riddle
www.civilrightsmovement.ca

I would love to see all the armchair critics walk the beat for a few weeks, and take on some drunks, addicts and just downright aggressive people. Their tune would probably change then.

MrPG makes the ultimate putdown, but what would it prove? How would any untrained person's inability to deal with rowdy elements have any relevance to whether some police officers used excessive force? Surely you don't expect any rational person to accept that police officers have carte blanche to do whatever they want to any citizen or foreign national for no reason other than they are police officers, do you? Surely police officers must also follow the law, must they not?

I would love to see all the armchair kneejerk defenders of the police be on the bottom of several police officers who are all punching them in the face. Their tune would probably change then.

"I would love to see all the armchair kneejerk defenders of the police be on the bottom of several police officers who are all punching them in the face. "

If I got myself into that situation (which I wouldn't), then I likely deserved it.

My point is that people think they know what excessive force is, but it's a very hard thing to measure and determine. Police sometimes have to make life and death decisions in a split second often based on little information. Police, like the rest of us, are human. They might err on the side of excessive force, and I can't say I wouldn't do the same thing.

The authority of the RCMP comes from the criminal code of canada. If you dont want to obey that code, leave or face imprisonment. I should have thought that was obvious. If you have issues with specific actions, as in you suggest they fall outside policing authority then you are free to bring that up, but dont ask why cops can tell us to beat it. The circumstances under which they can do so are spelled out. If you choose not to obey them then you have the same rights as those who, for example, refuse to cease killing someone when the RCMP tell them to do so.
I thank Billm for the definitions of excessive force, but somehow i dont think these particular definitions are going to be very useful in all but a very few scenaarios. The concept of excessive force is a subjective one. It has to be as there is no way an objective rule could be written out to cover every forseeable circumstance. However, that doesnt mean that just anyone can decide whether something was or was not excessive. Let me rephrase that: it doesnt matter what you average joe might think is or is not excessive. The determination has to be made by people with expertise in the area. I know there are some folk out there who believe in reviews doen by private citizen groups but these would be so subjective as to be whimsical. MrPG's point is a good one and i will go it one further. People think they know what excessive force is but (with the possible exception of some extreme example) they really dont. Worse, many of the folk out there, including a fair number we could name are biased to the point of grunting out two or three word condemnations of the RCMP regardless of the issue. Their opinions on excessive force are perhaps going to be a little biased, no?
IF you have a problem with the actions of the RCMP or the review process then work to have them changed, or be disgruntled. The issue of the thread was the views of Mr Meisner over the possiblity of Polish law authorities trying to charge Canadian citizens (thereby ruining their holiday plans). It seems that mr meisner, the polish govt and several contributors think that the review into mr Dviekanski's death did not agree with their own so they are thinking they should try to get justice/revenge their own way. Bravo. Nothing fuels my pride in my fellow canadians than a selective view of upholding the laws of the land.