http://www.opcc.bc.ca/Reports/2001/POLICE%20CULTURE%20AND%20THE%20CODE%20OF%20SILENCE.pdf

It is possible to be optimistic when the Police Association will back a stand up guy like Slemko. Obviously there are those in Policing that think there are limits to the Code of Silence.

This should not come as a suprise to anybody.
Slemko contradicted evidence that we were all supposed to accept as the gospel truth.
Bad idea I guess.
Sounds like he made some enemies and that is unfortunate.
This entire case stinks and there are far too many questions left to be answered.
I sincerely hope we have a politician with the cajones'to protest this farce.
I won't be holding my breath, but I WILL remember come the next election and hopefully so will many others!
If we ever needed people power,it is now!
This scares the hell out of me!

What next? I can't believe that they want to disipline the honest upstanding officers but not the ones that do wrong. This kind of behavior is scary. And these are the people we are supposed to trust? Not this girl. I think they are all playing out of the wrong code book.
I'm behind Slemko all the way, he should get an award.

The R.C.M.P. are a closed society that has been allowed to run without any outside oversight for years. This action against Slemko is typical of an organization that has been all powerful for too long. Absolute power corrupts absolutely. With all the public outcry over the lack of accountability by the R.C.M.P. you'd think this is the last thing they would do but, it would appear that the leaders still think they can get away with murder whenever and however they want. I hope Slemko sues them for defamation and improper disciplinary action. We stand behind you Slemko.

"Slemko contradicted evidence that we were all supposed to accept as the gospel truth."

Looks like the Middle Ages are being re-visited...in those days heretics were burned at the stake for questioning the gospel truth and its interpretation by men who pretended to know everything and who were determined to hang on to their absolute power no matter what!

Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely.

Supt Dwayne Gibbs says that since the Crown and police are, "indivisible" (incapable of being divided) in a prosecution, Slemko was in conflict when he gave evidence that disputed the Crown Theory.

It was an inquest, not a prosecution.

Cops are expected to tell the truth, not tell the "approved by management" theory.

All the way to Superintendent without an education....impressive.

This whole deal is like a bad episode of Trailer Park Boys.

Where is the park supervisor when you need a real officer of the law ?

Joe Slemko is facing a disciplinary hearing because he has the b*lls to tell the truth? Kinda tells you who's running the show.

Where are we ... in a communist country? Or are we in Canada? Or is there a difference?

And Mr. Campbell, our Premier, who gets charged with a DUI in Hawaii and gets off scott free, ... of course he doesn't want to get involved ... he wants to remain in good standing with his buddies. Bah, humbug!

I've e-mailed all three MLA's and the Premier a week ago and not one of them has responsded.

From that I deduce that they are all in support of a fascist state where the rule of law only applies to some and not to others.

This whole epesode really needs a judicial inquiry to find out why the rule of law no longer applies in Canada.

Supt Dwayne Gibbs seems to support the Ministry of Truth theory of policing. That is scary for Canada's democracy.

Chadermando, when they received your e-mails containing one of your kooky theories involing steroids and Zionism it probably went straight to the trash bin.

According to the accounts I read of the inquest, Slemko did not receive a fee for his testimony. He therefore was not testifying as part of his side business as a forensic consultant. I doubt that it is proper to consider him as having been engaged in "outside work" that needed to be cleared anymore than he would have needed clearance to serve as a juror or testify as an eye-witness to a mugging.

I agree, Chadermando, what is good for the goose should be good for the gander as well.

Our system truly sucks. (Can I say that?) It has to change, hopefully in my lifetime.

And them, not returning your emails really shows how much they care about our opinions ... not!

We're only the 'little people' but maybe if we make a big enough stink, they'll take notice? (ha, good luck!) ... sorry, I'm trying to be optimistic here but not quite making it.

Don't you get tired of being ignored?

When I was in school (many moons ago) I was taught that 'government' means 'we, the people'.

Boy, have I learned different throughout the years. I've learned that 'government' means 'they, the people who will do whatever they d*mn well please, just vote them in and scr*w the rest of the world, no matter what they promised to do for us'. (With the exception of a few.)

Kind of makes me wonder what other kind of garbage they fed us when I was in school.

Just getting old(er) and getting p*ssed off at the way things work (or don't work). I'm really getting tired of corruption and coverups most of all.

Good for you for making the effort to email these MLAs, even though they didn't reply, at least you tried. :)

Troll, I knew you'd show up sooner or later ... I mean, it would be too much to ask for, to not see hide nor hair of you for a day or two to add your snide remarks.

How exactly do you know what Chadermando wrote in his/her emails to the MLAs?

Did they email you and give you the inside scoop?

...and speaking of the illustrious Mr.Campbell,our faithful Premier,this entire case should be dumped right in his lap!
He is the head honcho at the top of political food chain and yet he has seemingly disappeared.
So what is his take on this?
Does he not care what his people are thinking and feeling about something as important as this?
Is he not supposed to be a leader?
Obviously not.
Corruption is corruption wherever you find it, and he has a moral obligation to be involved.
He needs to get off his overpaid ass and do just that!!

Joe Slemko is facing discipline from the Edmonton police force as he is an Edmonton Police force Constable.

If you wish to complain, your e- mail should be directed to Edmonton Police Chief Mike Boyd, the e-mail address is

eps@police.edmonton.ab.ca

make note in the subject line that the e-mail is to go to the Chief, and that it is concerning Constable Slemko.

You can write to Solicitor General John Les in BC on matters concerning the inquest, and Attorney General Wally Oppal about the legal side.

If you really want to send a message, try sending an e-mail to Premier Gordon Campbell, he is in charge of ALL departments!

Ben Meisner

sounds like the police force upper ranks act like those communist governments

There are 2 types of evidence: inculpatory and exculpatory. The first incriminates; the latter exhonerates. As I write, Vancouver cops are using the media to colour a man whose wife was murdered, as guilty. He could be but they are trying for trial by smear. Think back to the Ian Bush case, cops spun self defence, the next day after the fatal shooting. And Koester's identity was covered up until a Houston blogger Thom Barker, disclosed it. RCMP never acknowledged that Koester was the killer. It was formally disclosed when the coroner produced a witness list.

Only the morally bankrupt would defend the selective use of smear, as a means to inculpate cop targets and exculpate suspect cops. I lived in Ontario during the Guy Paul Morin atrocity. And I attended the Kaufmann Hearings into that judicial-prosecutorial-policial fix.

Be aware that the 3 sectors, are prohibited from acting as co-dependents. The Supreme Court of Canada clarified prosecutorial neutrality, as distinct from strict adversarial orientation. Similarly, each member of the 3 sectors is under strict obligation to be open to all relevant evidence, whether or not it effects careers of their colleagues. See this case:
http://www.canlii.org/en/ca/scc/doc/1954/1954canlii3/1954canlii3.html

What kind of sick mind would defend the type of partiality and subjectivity that would put innocent people behind bars?

After the Ramparts Division scandal in Los Angeles Police, the people had to fork over $100,000,000 to compensate the victims of criminal cops. In one case, one blue animal crippled an unarmed man, with a gun shot, and then planted a gun on the man. The type of extra legal policing didn't correct a so-called imbalance between criminals who benefited from light sentencing; it led to cop crime. Scandal arose when a cop stole $1,000,000 in cocaine from a police evidence locker, by using a fake name. After he was caught and sentenced, he made statements as to his motive. Scroll down to Raphael Perez' statements at sentencing:
http://injusticebusters.com/index.htm/LAPD.htm

"There is no justification for my misdeeds, either on or off duty. I can only say that I sucummbed to the seductress of power. Used wrongfully it is a power that can bend the will of a man to satisfy a lustful moment. It can open locked bolts to facilitate theft. It can even subvert justice to hand down a lifetime behind bars. On the latter, I apologize to the courts and the juries that were my unwitting accomplices on those occassions that I wanted to secure convictions. Beside the exoneration of the innocent persons, I most want at this time is to remind the greenest rookie cops that they too have this power.

Used wrongfully.. . .[that power] can plant the defendant's feet firmly on the path to the death house. They need only to look to me and my impending prison sentence, to remind them that for whatever reason they might have to consider placing a finger on the scales of justice, it is morally indefensible and contrary to our constitution. I will ask rookie and young police officer alike to periodically revisit their oath and the reason they entered law enforcement. I will ask that you use me as an example of who you will avoid becoming. Do not let the pressure of status, numbers and impressing supervisors dicate the type of officer you become. The moment you cross that first line, it will be impossible to step back. To the young officers, I want to leave you with some admonishments: Listen very closely because these are words that I wish someone would have shared with me. I want to admonish you that you will be enticed by fancy models and places that will make you believe that there is a purpose and a reason for what they want you to do and what they want you to be. You will hear such things as: solid, can be trusted. . .hunt for the big elephant, special chosen group. I admonish you to closely evaluate what you are being told with those words. I asure you that they will pale in comparison for what you will eventually be: shameful, regretful and disappointed. Above the threshold of doors that lead to CRASH offices, you will read such flip, awful statements as: "Some rise by sin and some by virtue fall." As well as "we intimidate those who intimidate others." To those mottos, I offer this: Whoever chases monsters should see to it that in the process he does not become a monster himself."

Ben Meisner:

The Liberal government is on pins and needles after hints of broader obstruction and influence peddling arose at the first segment of the Basi-Virk case. They were not even explored, let alone proven. Now Crown attornies have delayed proceedings until September. I suspect that there will be no Fall session this year (as last) because they don't want Basi-Virk disclosures to be spoken of in the Legislative Assembly.

In any case, I am aware of a related case before the Ombudsman that will be embarassing to the Attorney General. That office deals with service refusals, contrary to statutory obligation. Deniability is not available to the AG, and the matter involves BC judicial officers. Oppal gave up a $257,000 a year salary as an Appeals Court judge, to work as AG, I think.

Something cannot be denied: the record of Bench appointments reveal that those - Defence and Tort Litigator Bar - or MOST likely to apply natural justice to legal-factual material before them, are LEAST likely to get a judicial appointment. Those are going to members of the: the Administrative Law, Appelant, Crown Attorney and Prosecutor Bars. Consequence: 100% of suits against the government and government ministries and organizations, are being lost by Plaintiffs. And in many cases, there is plain and obvious abridgement of probative evidence. Judicial determinations do NOT always follow facts in this province. And injured persons are being bankrupted in pursuit of justice.

Remember the tearful apology given by federally appointed justice, Peter Leask? Leask was a rare Defence Bar appointment, who once petitioned against a Provincial Court judge (Leask v Cronin)(on Westlaw). Leask used profanity during a Trial. Even though his language was neither partial nor prejudicial, Crown prosecutors put the trial transcript in Oppal's hands within hours, and the AG made a preliminary finding for the evening news. Leask was pressured into apologizing at the altar of the Government-Bench. Oppal is a close friend of Donald Brenner, the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court. Both were Administrative Lawyers. Both are contributing to an extreme imbalance in the justice system in BC.

Be aware that the Basi-Virk case wouldn't have seen daylight except for the fact that 2 police services were involved. That removed deniablity. Watch for the Crown to suddenly invoke the lost evidence
defence ("Carosela") against proceeding. If there is no ship, nobody goes down.

The Provincial Court website released today, yet another case where cops concealed evidence from defendents. BC cops can be trusted as far as you could spit against a hurricane:

http://www.provincialcourt.bc.ca/judgments/pc/2007/02/p07_0226.htm

Ya, I was just thinking all of that too.

billposer - good argument, well made

qwaszxter - another good point

diplomat, et al - more good points

Truth - I'm gonna get you a bucket of water, I think the pages of your legal dictionary caught fire.

;-)

Hey Truth: *yawn*

Slemko will be alright as long as he has good representation. The internal investigation will be just starting at edmonton's point so i doubt he has even been interviewed by his superiors yet.
I think that in the first matter, it will be withdrawn. With regards to number two, and as long as he has his bases covered: ( ie: took vacation time, or had no edmonton court appearances to deal with) then he should be ok.

This next small phrase if full of "truth" and "the school of common sense" ....ready?
Love you Joe!!!

I'm losing my respect for police forces more everyday whether they are RCMP, VPD or any other city police.

Re-Closed Society (Realist)

Show me who isn't part of a closed society? How often do you see a Doctor rise up and criticize another Doctor? How about Lawyers? Judges? Firemen? Nurses? Unions? Ambulance Personal? Engineers? or most other tight knit organizations?

Unfortunately, I think most people will keep silent rather than criticize another person in their organization.

Those who do speak up, are often run out of town or out of their workplace. It comes down to doing what is right, what is the truth and standing behind your values and integrity. You must also be willing to suffer the consequences. Chester

But the point of the matter is that there shouldn't BE "consequences" for doing what is right.

Not all professions have a Code of Silence. Only the girly-men trolls have never heard of this hero:

http://www.holmesonhomes.com/

Just for the record: I am tougher than him.