The Vancouver Police Department must be the dumbest bunch of coppers around

[HEyHEY]

Years of scandals, they know they're being watched and yet still pull this kind of shit. I'd of thought cops would at least be better at petty crime.

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/british-columbia/story/2010/07/22/bc-civil-liberties-police-push-ms-woman-video.html

[Name removed]

1. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Art_from_Ark]

2. Maybe they figured that since it was Hastings Street

nobody would give a crap.

[HEyHEY]

3. That's pretty well exactly it n/t

[slampoet]

4. Exactly what i was going to say.....

[Bobbieo]

5. Is she a First Nation woman?

[Festivito]

6. No, I don't think so. He could even be reaching to catch her fall.

He might have reached out to keep her away from his side by his gun holster. (Odd walking can be distraction leading to a setup.) He also might not have. He might even have been reaching to help her pass.

Yes, it might have been a push. But, I would still contend that fall would have been harder.

His arm move quickly outward as she falls. If he were pushing that fast, she'd have fallen harder and further away. He might have been trying to catch her.

She's immediately attended by someone on the street and there is no reason that a cop needs to usurp that helper.

He walks away before she gets up. Was she saying she's okay, especially to the helper helping her up already? If so, it's over and he can move on.

I'm assuming here that he apologizes for not helping her up, maybe including that he did not mean to nudge her if he did so nudge her, and he's not apologizing for pushing her on purpose because he did not do that on purpose.

She might have hit him with her walking and after falling it is not uncommon for people to blame someone else quickly and setting that thought into a remembered reality. She may feel she was pushed and not want to admit her own disability did cause it at least at just that one notable moment. I add this because if she does think she was pushed, it could be she was, or it could be she was not pushed, this is not provable from the video.

Finally, he reports the incident. That clinches it. That is probably how the footage comes to light. That is not the act of a cop hiding something.

Are her friends telling her she has a case because it is "the thing to do," rather than letting her blame herself, making a simple innocent accident into a unnecessarily contentious altercation.

ON EDIT: This does not warrant DU attention and is a misleading headline.

[Sanity Claws]

7. Did we watch the same tape?

You call the kind person who helped the woman up a "usurper?"
If I knocked someone down, I wouldn't leave her for someone else to help up. Remember this police officer is supposed to represent the public. He should have helped her up and made sure she was okay.
Also, why are they walking three across? They took up the entire sidewalk. They should know better than that -- they were preventing people from passing them, regardless of which direction they were walking.

[Festivito]

9. You address nothing I said about the video, you reverse a subject and state falsehoods.

No one was called a usurper, and the subject of the verb usurp in "there is no reason that a cop needs to usurp" was the cop, not the helper. You reversed the subject from cop to helper and for some reason objectified the verb into a noun at the same time.

You seem to ignore what I already said in the very post to which you respond. The cop may not have pushed her. You assume he did and therefore he should help her up. You do not address why you would stop someone else from helping her which I did take time to address.

Your assertion that they "took up the entire sidewalk" is false. Your assertion that "they were preventing people from passing them" when the video clearly shows people going around them is also false.

It may seem haughty that they walk three abreast. You can complain to the police department and even write the city and try to get a law passed. But, I think the outrage comes from piling on, and the piling on comes from not having much of a case to argue.

[Name removed]

13. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

14. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Festivito]

16. I did not defend pushing people down, I say the video does not prove such.

And it is also worrisome that some people do not seem to see the difference between defending something and defending the need for better proof of something.

[Name removed]

10. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Festivito]

11. Better have that eyesight checked. /nt

[Name removed]

12. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Festivito]

15. Are you implying you're like Helen Keller, unable to see and hear?

Your lack of addressing what I said does not put you alongside the shoulders of giants.

[Name removed]

17. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Festivito]

19. So, you're saying she could not have shifted direction and his arm followed her.

Her MS has her stumbling. If someone stumbled near me, I would instinctively attempt to help that person. My arm would move toward them. A video would have my arm moving in concert with the persons shifting, which if they shifted further away from me would have my arm following faster and faster as the shift went faster and faster. It would look awful if I was not as fast as the shifting and especially if I would be unable to catch the person before the fall.

Also, if I someone was stumbling possibly into my side I might also put my arm out to catch that person and curb the close contact. If that person then, even untouched by me, shifted to the opposite direction, it could look bad to a camera even though I did not touch her. It would certainly also look bad if I did touch her while attempting to curb the contact.

I'm just saying that it might have been innocent.

[Hannah Bell]

48. it's not MS. you didn't even get that much right. it's CP. i have a relative with CP.

said relative has been mistaken for drunk, retarded, by police & others, & treated as such.

you don't have a clue.

the cop *admitted* he pushed her. what are you defending him for?

and the way they were walking they made it impossible for people to get past them. that's what brought the whole thing on in the first place. a person with CEREBRAL PALSY is trying to walk down the street & they don't make room for her to pass. then when she tries to squeeze between them they push her.

fucking creepy assholes.

no, it's not that easy to "shift direction" on a dime when you have CP (not MS). because depending on how you're affected, you're walking on only the balls or heels of your feet, with your leg perhaps turned in. out, or up, with uncontrollable twitches running down your leg & upper body, affecting balance. it can be hard even to stay afoot in the best of circumstances.

and you're blaming her for not immediately scuttling out of the way of the fucking cops walking three abreast covering half the sidewalk.

bullshit.

[Festivito]

54. It was reported both ways, MS and CP. I used MS, it's probably CP.

My point was that she might have shifted position and fallen because of it.

Now, in an update, she says she was pushed, so my initial thought is less likely albeit not misspoken with the conditionals I used.

I DID NOT in any way shape or form say shifting should have been easy for her. My point was that shifting was, indeed, difficult for her, difficult enough that it could have lead to her fall. You got that backward, and the rest of the projections you made would follow as invalid.

[Hannah Bell]

57. it was reported as CP in the article posted, & is obvious in the video - her walk is the distinctive

jerky, spastic CP walk.

what made her fall was when the cops forced her to squeeze through their bully three abreast walk, then FUCKING PUSHED HER.

[Raineyb]

18. No but I'm saying flat out that YOU can't.

That was a shove plain as day.

[Festivito]

20. Are you a sock puppet? And, I can't what?

As for the plain as day shove, are you saying that a woman somewhat randomly shifting from side to side could not possibly have shifted to the side at that moment? Why could she not have?

[Raineyb]

23. What are you illiterate? Incapable of following a thread?

You asked if someone is incapable of seeing and hearing. While the hearing part isn't really germane since there is no audio it certainly would stand to reason that if you talk about the inability to see and I say I'm saying you're incapable of doing so that it would refer to your ability to SEE.

I watched the video and that cop shoved her. And while she was randomly shifting she certainly was not shifting in such a way that she would have toppled over without help.

Really the lengths some people will go to to make excuses for bad police behavior is sickening.

[Festivito]

25. Ah, so you're saying I can't ask if someone if they can see and hear.

Oh, no, you're saying I can't see.

Well, ... yes, I can see. I can follow a thread. And, sometimes I can read and write so that would count me as literate. However, there is argument that I might be functionally illiterate, but let's not go there.

Back to the topic.

I don't think the video necessarily showed a shove and you do.

[Spazito]

21. It state clearly in the article....

"McGuinness said the officer apologized to the woman a short time after the incident, expressing regret for his initial action and for not helping her up."

To repeat "his INITIAL action AND for not helping her up."

The initial action was the push, it is clear from the video and confirmed by his apology.

[Festivito]

24. "Initial action" is vague. Something to say to someone stuck in their thinking.

His initial act might have been to curb her fall into or even away from himself. He might have pushed her in that action, but again he might not have touched her and was merely apologizing for being near enough to confuse her already apparent lack of motor control by being close to her, thus a vague "initial action."

The video seems to be down now, which bodes badly for the police department.

Some posts have disappeared which seems unnecessary.

[Spazito]

27. It wasn't 'vague' enough because it did initiate an apology from the cop...

after the video went public and not before. The shove seemed quite clear in the video to me and, it seems, to many others.

[Festivito]

28. Not being done before the video went public more shows my point.

She seems unstable. She falls. She's okay. She's being helped by someone who cares. ... time to move on without statement.

Before the video goes viral, the cop cannot apologize because the police would not know where she was.

Then the video goes viral.

She comes forward? I guess.

If someone appears angry at me, I would offer sympathy in the form of apology if that would help, and the cop did this.

If just being there caused this, he simply called it an initial act. If some brilliant video experts want to get together and figure the physics to prove she must have been pushed, then that might happen and prove the video does show that.

I looked at the video and I don't think it necessarily shows a push and I would be surprised if it could be shown. In fact, I'd like to check that work.

I notice that you do not say that it CANNOT BE that his arm was just following the fall. SunnySong(sp?) is gone.

[Spazito]

29. Your posts have been 'reaching' for anything to exonerate the cop....

in defiance of the video. Sometimes a cop does a stupid and hurtful thing and gets called on it, this is a case in point. I see no need to go over the top in trying, beyond all reasonable measure imo, to defend him.

It is a case of thou "doth protest too much, methinks".

[Festivito]

39. Perhaps you're reaching in order to not see beyond what you decided too quickly.

I am not responding in defiance of the video. I addressed the video .. at length. I am at defiance with the presupposition that the cop is certainly in the wrong by viewing that video.

If I have been over the top, I have been over the top with woulds and ifs.

No, I'm not unduly connected with cops except that I live near many. I only know a few. Don't even have one to wave at any more.

Your mention of Shakespeare makes me wonder if you have an opposite reaction with police that makes you "protest too much."

I see you hail from Canada. Toronto's X-bottomed-shoe-police sticks in my mind and remains at the ready when that story needs repeated dissemination. It remains a story of injustice that sticks to my memory.

I can understand a bit of cynicism.

This case, however, looks like an accident to me.

[Spazito]

46. A couple of points...

Nowhere in any of my responses to you did I state you were connected, unduly or otherwise, with cops so I find your need to clarify that somewhat baffling.

It is interesting you bring up the Canadian "X-bottomed-she-police" as I certainly have not nor did I participate in any of the threads about the incident so attributing cynicism to me from that incident is, again, somewhat baffling to me.

To assume one is anti-police because they are Canadian and they commented on a video showing a cop shoving a disabled woman which is contrary to you view of the incident is the epitome of broadbrushing, imo.

Getting back to the central issue: the video/news article about a member of the Vancouver Police shoving a disabled woman and knocking her down, I stand by my previous remarks based on the video and aided by the fact the cop in question apologized for his actions.

[Festivito]

53. Are you easily baffled?

Nowhere in any of my responses to you did I state that you stated that I was connected with cops. Sometimes these things can be inferred as when some poster puts into a post: 'a case of thou "doth protest too much, methinks".' But, then I think I'm far less baffled.

Perhaps you have no reason whatsoever in order to jump to conclusions. None is needed. Not baffling to me.

Wondering about a particular person's thinking by what happens in that person's country is nearly the opposite of broad brushing, let alone its epitome.

And, again, the apology was too generic, the video not a certainty (at least to me), but, the subsequent article that has her saying (/charging) that he pushed her, that says that the officer in question has a lot of explaining to do.

[Spazito]

55. LOL...

So, saying in a post "a case of thou "doth protest too much, methinks" equates to you are a cop lover, connected to cops, etc? Wow, quite a leap there.

I think it is quite clear, given our discussion was strictly related to the incident in the OP as opposed to our discussion being on a broader discussion of cops in general, I thought your defense of THE cop in question as being overly defensive, over-the-top.

As to "wondering about a person's thinking by what happens in that person's country', you did not pose your comment in a question, instead you assumed I have taken the position I have on THE incident in the video because of 'what happens in' my country. That is indeed, broadbrushing, ie Canadians don't support cops because of "what happens in" their country.

I did not add the updated information because it would be unfair of me, imo, to use that in our discussion based only on the original article. I am pleased you have raised it and agree the officer in question does have a lot of explaining to do. It is under investigation which is as it should be. The officer in question is relatively new to the force and that should be taken into consideration when or if discipline is recommended. I don't think he should be thrown off the force, I do think it needs to be noted in his permanent file along with some sort if sensitivity training providing a greater understanding of the people with whom he will be interacting in the Downtown East Side, most of whom are destitute, substance abusers, those who are mentally or physically handicapped as well as destitute, etc. If such a course is deemed to be needed in this officer's case and he completes it successfully, that, too, should be noted in his record.

I hope by reading, the above paragraph you will see I am NOT what you perceived me to be when it comes to my thoughts on law enforcement officers.

[Hannah Bell]

62. he shoved her, & he should be thrown off the force. fascist bullyboys who pick

on the handicapped have no place on a police force whatsoever.

neither do cops who walk three abreast down the sidewalk & don't move to let others by.

neither do cops who think they can get away with bullshit so long as the people they're messing with are poor & powerless.

[Spazito]

63. I disagree and have stated why previously n/t

[slampoet]

56. As the Son of a Detroit cop, i agree.

[HEyHEY]

31. I know your kind. If the cops beat and raped her you'd still defend them.

[Festivito]

37. You're wrong about me. Many cases I've not sided with cops, this one is not clear enough. /nt

[asdjrocky]

33. He clearly shoved her.

If you can't see that, you're not watching with honest eyes.

[Festivito]

36. Or, you're not. /nt

[asdjrocky]

41. If 4 people see a dog, and one sees a duck.

It's a dog.

[Festivito]

44. Even if it's a platypus in the school for the blind? /nt

[asdjrocky]

45. Clearly you don't read.

I used the word "see" and the word "dog" and the word "duck."

Do yourself a favor and read a book.

[Festivito]

52. Ah, you used words: "dog" and "see." Okay. I used words: "blind" and "platypus."

I'll go read another book if you read what's in front of you.

[Prometheus Bound]

38. WTF?

[Festivito]

40. Not quite astute, but, perhaps heartfelt. /nt

[Prometheus Bound]

42. Do you really think you're amusing?

The deleted posts here probably give you a good idea of the complete disdain people here have for you.

[Festivito]

43. Same poster lost post #1. I don't really know why.

They were short posts. Oh, well. Seemed neither closely starlike or lyrical as the moniker suggested.

As far as amusing goes, I like amusing.

Sai-gen.

[Hannah Bell]

47. ...pfft

McGuinness said the officer apologized to the woman a short time after the incident, expressing regret for his action and for not helping her up.

Read more: http://www.cbc.ca/canada/british-columbia/story/2010/07/22/bc-civil-liberties-police-push-ms-woman-video.html#ixzz0uc7lYfyl

[Festivito]

50. In the update she says he pushed her. He'll have to answer to that.

I saw no reason to rush to judgment. It was under investigation.

The apology was non-descript, the not helping her up can be understandable.

I took from the original story and video now taken down:

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/british-columbia/story/2010/07/22/bc-civil-liberties-police-push-ms-woman-video.html

In the update:

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/british-columbia/story/2010/07/22/bc-woman-shoved-sandy-police-downtown-eastside.html

She says: "...but the tall guy pushed me down ..."

That's a charge. He'll have to answer to that, and perhaps include a new apology on why his first apology was overly generic.

[Hannah Bell]

58. His apology was in the original story posted, and it was clear in the video HE PUSHED HER,

& the only reason he probably apologized in the first place was BECAUSE THERE WAS VIDEO.

Had there been no video, she's just be another "crazy, drunk" street person making false accusations against those nice officer friendlies.

God, that pisses me off. PUSHED HER & LET HER LAY IN THE STREET. WALKED THREE ABREAST SO THAT IT WAS IMPOSSIBLE TO GET BY THEM.

FASCIST BULLY BOYS. No difference from what they did & fucking nazis.

Had that happened to my relative i'd probably be in jail now. Disgusting, disgusting, disgusting fucks.

[awoke_in_2003]

64. To know that...

would require open eyes and the ability to read. I am not sure that one possesses either.

[fishwax]

51. lol n/t

[JonLP24]

66. BS

She was still standing and passed the officers where he pushed her. He clearly shoved her. The reason why his arm moves quickly as she falls is because he is the one that knocked her over. If he was trying to "save" her, he would be kind of falling down with her trying to catch her. No he just stands there after he knocks her over.

[JVS]

8. I don't know, that's a very hotly contested title.

[Bluenorthwest]

22. There should be a sort of

pageant to determine who are the dumbest coppers around, it could be a long, close contest.

[Festivito]

26. And, if there was one to showcase the great ones, you'd ignore that?

I think you know there are cops who do really brave and wonderful things. Are you predisposed to focusing on the negative?

[HEyHEY]

30. Hey, I got in an argument on this site saying the exact same thing you are not a week ago

SO don't give me that BS.

[HEyHEY]

32. update

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/british-columbia/story/2010/07/22/bc-woman-shoved-sandy-police-downtown-eastside.html

[EmeraldCityGrl]

34. The difference between B.C. and the U.S.

"Many of the answers are going to come from the investigation and we need to allow it to run its course. We recognize that those who view this video are going to find it unsettling and concerning," she said.

McGuinness said the officer apologized to the woman a short time after the incident, expressing regret for his action and for not helping her up."

Can you imagine a cop in the U.S. apologizing? At the very least they find the shove "unsettling and concerning," an expression that would
rarely be used when reporting police brutality in the U.S.

[HEyHEY]

35. That said, it's lip service. Canadian police are in a cred crisis like never before

There seems to be a police brutality case every week now, including murder.

[Darth_Kitten]

49. I'll take them over punks and gangs anyday.......

Sure, there are a few bad apples in EVERY organization, but come check out North Winnipeg.

[Hannah Bell]

61. you'll take fascist bully boys who walk three abreast to intimidate 100-pound

women with cerebral palsy, then push them to the ground at the drop of a hat?

really?

you think there's some difference between that kind of fascist bullyboy & the kind on the other side of the law?

not a damn bit of difference.

if there hadn't been video the cops would be calling her a crazy drunk.

[Darth_Kitten]

65. Did you even read my post?

:shrug:

[liberalhistorian]

67. Wasn't it the Vancouver police who shot the Polish

man at the airport, the one who got confused and lost and couldn't speak English enough to understand them so they thought just shooting him would solve their problem? Or was that another Canadian airport?

[HEyHEY]

70. they tazered him four times and he died. That was Vancouver

But it wasn't VPD it was the RCMP.

[Hannah Bell]

59. because he found out there was video. period. nothing to do with bc cops being better than us cops.

it's because he found out there was video.

[Liberal_in_LA]

60. what a coward. Kudo to the woman who comes immediately to help the woman

[Bozita]

68. I don't like what I saw.

And I watched it five times.

[Liberal_in_LA]

69. interview with pushed woman

http://philosophers-stone.co.uk/wordpress/2010/07/canadian-cops-push-woman-with-cerebral-palsy-onto-the-pavement-then-walk-off-without-helping-her/

[HEyHEY]

71. thanks for posting that

It reminds me why I quit CBC Vancouver talk about shit reporting. Horrible delivery, shit writing, sensationalist style and they still have interns working on-air.

God, I'm glad I left. Anyway, that's just my critique of the professionalism of the report, the story was still good.

Fuck, I'm glad I'm outta that place.