Howard Rubin Proceeding With Civil Action In Death Of Ian Bush

Tuesday, October 09, 2007 03:59 AM

The Lawyer representing the family of Ian Bush, (the young man who was shot to death while in police custody) is proceeding with the civil action.

Howard Rubin is seeking to have a Judge appointed in the matter so that a civil action can go forward.

Rubin says a recent ruling by the Suprme Court would have no impact on the Bush Family’s move to bring forth a civil action against Constable Paul Koester. The Supreme Court ruled that police officers are liable to civil action. The Supreme Court effectively stripped the police of their immunity from lawsuit for conducting a negligent criminal investigation. In that decision, Supreme Court Chief Justice Beverley Mclachlin said "police officers owe a duty of care to suspects."

Rubin says the decision opens up an area that many litigants had been unable to proceed with.

Rubin says at present, he does not know the exact date that he will file the civil action seeking damages for the death of the young man. He is the same lawyer who represented the Bush family at the Coroner’s inquest into Ian’s death.

Constable Paul Koester said Bush had a choke hold on him and he feared for his life when he pulled his gun and shot the young man in the back of the head in October of 2005.

Previous Story - Next Story

Email |

Print |

Facebook |

Twitter |

Digg |

Del.icio.us

Posted on Tuesday, October 09, 2007 03:59 AM in News by 250 News

Return to Home

Comments

Posted by: heidi1555 on October 9 2007 8:55 AM

Howard Rubin you are a good man.

Posted by: YamaDooPolCat on October 9 2007 2:41 PM

Supreme Court Chief Justice Beverley Mclachlin is an activist judge that seems to delight in dismantling or "reading in" rather than following the intent of the law.

The police are not perfect and there is no percentage in acting as if they were/are. People complain when the police don't show up or don't do much when they do. If you think it is bad now, just wait until Judge Judy adds her foot to trip them up some more.

People are going to follow their own paths, and you can't legislate away the Darwin Awards. Drinking and hockey doesn't make anyone a superman.

I wouldn't want to lose my son either, but on the other hand I would not want to be the one that makes the RCMP stay in their cars from now on.

Posted by: Palopu on October 9 2007 3:26 PM

I think if people would look at the statistics between say 1965 to 1985 and 1986 to 2007 you would see a huge increase in the number of people who have been killed by police officers, between 1986 and 2007. This tells me that something has changed.

Police officers used to be able to restrain criminals and arrest them without killing them. What has happened to make a difference.

A lot of the people who have been shot were not even armed.

There is a definate problem here, has anyone got an answer????

Posted by: Harbinger on October 9 2007 5:24 PM

Sue their asses off!

Posted by: heidi1555 on October 9 2007 6:59 PM

It really does come down to character doesn't it? At all levels. Looks like a few bad boys beat the system and went to work for it.

Posted by: steeliepete on October 9 2007 7:21 PM

Sue who's asses off? The tax payer? Oh yeah, that's me and in the off chance you work, that's you too.

The RCMP or any police agency needs to be accountable, however, the individual public servant (the cop) should not be held personally responsible unless there is absolute clarity around the issue of "good vs. bad faith".

I don't want to pay the bill.

Posted by: Harbinger on October 9 2007 8:50 PM

I am certainly sure that if my government did not get to pay a lawsuit on anyones behalf I am quite sure I wouldn't notice a decrease in my personal income tax.

Posted by: Raparee on October 10 2007 5:44 PM

"Police officers used to be able to restrain criminals and arrest them without killing them. What has happened to make a difference."

Remember when people used to respect the police? Time was that the police could take a smart-alec like Bush to the edge of town and lay a beating on him. They can't do that anymore (rightly so, btw), due, in part, to the fear of law suits. Fear of a beating tends to make people more compliant with the police.