Good for you Linda! I know Mr. Rubin will do good by you. The members involved in all these types of cases that are still working on payroll have danced long enough on our loved ones graves. Stay strong!

She had better file soon. She only has two years before she can file a civil action or its out the window.

Way to go! I hope you never give up your fight Linda, then maybe there can be some justice. You have allot of people cheering you on. The best of luck!

dgdiggler:

The 2 year window for civil actions can be varied, especially where fact-finding investigations delayed exercise of rights.

Proving wrongful death would have to be based on the blood evidence. And Koester would be faced with plaintiffs who would use models to demonstrate that his story was fiction. Then there is motive. The notion that Ian Bush, who faced a $100 fine - to which he knew he had no defence - would fly into a homicidal rage is laughable. In contrast, cop-rage is real and endemic. All of us must have seen how cops react when their perceived authority is challenged. I believe that Bush and Koester had words, and Koester lost it. Any arrested person, would want to get out of police custody ASAP. Cops want submission and abjection before they release someone. Personality entered into Koester's judgement.

Those of us who do NOT deny inherent cop-rage, should recall a key piece of available evidence that the Coroner (100 days of training makes you one) whitewash missed. The security officer at the arena where illegal drinking went on had to take off the next day, because she was so upset after a senior cop berated her over the illegal drinking. However, Ms W wasn't guilty of anything; Ian Bush and friends brought in liquor from a neighbouring apartment building, after the landlord complained of noise. Cops created a volatile atmosphere by going into a tangent over mere civil violations.

Other than giving joke names, Bush co-operated with police, supplying his ID (his wallet was found on the floor of the station) and complying with the arrest. General chest-beating by cops might have given the subordinate cops an indulgence to use excessive force.

By the way, it is NOT Obstruction of Justice when someone gives false information to cops. They have to have a clear intent, and present ability to defeat justice. Initial non-compliance does not found clear intent. And, the fact that Ian Bush carried wallet ID, negates present ability. Koester didn't care because he was acting under orders of a hothead supervisor who berated a woman who he thought allowed illegal sales of improperly used liquor. He thought so, because he didn't ask Ian Bush and friends where they got the liquor.

I hope the Bush family wins. I hope their lawyers don't conduct a long trial like the Kvello-Miazga matter in Saskatchewan. Over 14,000 pages of documents arose out of that event. Cop-rage + inculpatory blood evidence + lack of air of reality in defence = Victory

Truth: Speculation, pure speculation on your part.
If someone gives false information to police on purpose they CAN be charged with obstruction. Its up to the courts to decide if the charge is proven. The courts or a judge determines intent. Bush did not give "joke" names, he provided FALSE names in order to evade a liquor ticket and it wasnt until after he was detained that his true identity was known to Koester.

I don't see it as cop rage if a senior officer gives a little s**t to a security guard who isnt doing their job correctly by not being able to prevent the illegal consumption of liquor in the arena. Perhaps she doesnt have the wherewithall to do the job if she can't handle the stress.

dgdiggler;

In BC, New Brunswick and Quebec, cops cannot register criminal charges; only Crown prosecutors can. Koester didn't offer Bush the opportunity to present ID, after Bush stopped goofing on him. I listed reasons why "defeat of justice" was unfounded. Koester had 24-7 access to Crown prosecutors who could have informed him of the elements of the offence. Correct information appears in Carswell's "Police Officers Manual" which many cops carry.

At the Coroner' hearing Koester claimed that he accidently left his ticket book at the station, thus had a reason to take Bush there. However, correcting his own error is insufficient cause for deprivation of liberty. Bush was arrested for "contempt of cop," which is the #1 offence to cops.

I have never goofed on a cop and don't condone that conduct, and I admit that doing so is cause for investigative detention. Frankly, if Ian Bush refused to present ID then the arrest would have been lawful. He wasn't given that opportunity until he was ticketed at the station.

There isn't much speculation in my account. Only Koester and Bush were at the shooting scene, thus forensic evidence is essential to truth determination. And the stereotypical cop-rage context is obvious.

As for speculation, why do you support the view that a hard working man in a tight family unit, chose to attempt to choke a cop to death, over a $100 fine? Isn't that far fetched?

That's the thing isn't Truth. The officers involved always come up with the most "far fetched" story and wonder why we have a problem with it. The guy that mostly came up with this story should have his head examined behind bars. They need cameras on them at all times like Britney Spears.

That's the thing isn't it* Truth?? (Correction)Where's my coffee?

Truth: police can try to lay a charge, crown has to approve it. I believe that is what I said. That doesn't mean Bush wouldn't have been served with a promise to appear for obstruction at the detachment that night. That is why BUSH went balistic: he was looking at a criminal charge instead of a simple liquor ticket. He was known as a small town bully, wasn't he? I think the rage came from him mixed with excessive alcohol comsumption rather than Koester.

As a police officer, Koester had the authority to arrest and detain BUSH once Bush provided a false name to him when he was looking at a liquor ticket. If one has no ID on him, then provides a false name to a police officer during the course of his investigation, they cross over from a provincial statute ticket to a criminal code offense.
And that, is the TRUTH.

Police produce "Informations" which prosecutors assess prior to registering a charge. One report found that 28% of police charge recommendations in BC are sent back to police for "more information."

Ian Bush gave several false names to the cop, as a goof. As I said, as he carried ID with him, there was no present ability to defeat justice. He did comply. There was no evidence that Koester had prepared an Information, viz Obstruction. Koester cited Bush with a lawful ticket; his claim to have left the ticket book at the station would be laughable, if tragedy wasn't involved. The cop only had grounds for an investigative detention. Ian Bush did not face a criminal charge, and Koester knew it when he arrestd him. The Supreme Court of Canada has consistently applied the reasoning in this Ontario Appeals Court case, on detentions.
http://www.canlii.org/en/on/onca/doc/1993/1993canlii3379/1993canlii3379.html

>>>

The "Crown Counsel Policy Manual" can be viewed at the Vancouver Law Library. It should be posted on the internet to lessen confusion about the elements of offences, and the limits of police power to constrain liberty. The fact that there are those who accept police accounts as gospel, is testimony to the general lack of vigilence in defence of liberty. The Vancouver Sun omitted to cover the BC Civil Liberties Assn meeting on deaths-in-custody, and they are the biggest newspaper West of Toronto.