RCMP murder of Robert Dziekanski

The RCMP murder of Ian Bush is another example that was whitewashed by both the mounties and the public complaints commision. The public complains commision doesn't do it's own investigations. They simply rubber stamp RCMP versions . It takes only one person with a rubber stamp to do that. So what are the rest of the parasites of this bureaucratic empire building effort being paid for?<br /> The big dissapointment is, they shot the wrong Bush.<br /> Brent

Wow Brent, you've bitten off quite a chunk here. Trying to show that Dziekanski was murdered is quite the effort, especially if you're going to use the video from the airport. Perhaps you can enlighten us on both of these "murders"? Are you sure you have all of the Ian Bush facts straight too? Let's see you take either one from stem to gudgeon showing how it was murder.

The RCMP said that Bush held the cop in a rear naked choke hold and said that the cop was passing out, and shot him in the back of the head, the bullet lodging in his forehead. They refused to do a re-enactment at the inquest.
If you want to try a re-enactment with a friend, you will see that it is nearly imposible to get your hand behind the guy's head, let alone a gun, and even more impossible to point it straight foreward, especially during a struggle. That is why they refused to re-enact it.Other forensic evidence showed the RCMP version of events to be impossible . That was why they took weeks to cook it up.
It would blow their claim entirely.
They played a tape of the cop on the radio having a panic attack, to try gather sympathy , but only clearly proved the cop was far to emotionally unstable and immature to be trusted with a gun and , or, the authority to use it.
Of course, being an RCMP murder, there is no way they are going to do anything to threaten his immunity . Their immunity would be reduced in the proccess.
Robert Dziekanski was putting up no resistance , clearly shown in the tape. The cop made it clear he was excited about being given permission to use the taser, depite there being no jusification for his doing so.
CBC radio , this morning ,said Dziekanski's mother was deep in debt from legal fees, tryin got get justice. For the legal industry's old boys network , simply outspending a complainant into poverty is standard practise.
A trust fund has been set up for her.
It is called
Zofia's Victim Trust
205-174 Paul's Street
Kamloops BC
V2C 2H9
Is it not worth the trouble of sending her a few bucks in the hope of preventing you , a friend, or one of your family members from suffering the same totally arbritary execution style tactics? Even if it is just a few bucks? What is a more important use for a few bucks? Are you willing to put a few bucks of your money where your mouths are?
Given the RCMP's frequent deliberate lying and fabricating of evidence with the full support and encouragement of their friends and colleagues in the legal industry's old boys network( prosecutors office), we a can't afford not to support her.
Brent

Brent you need to start talking the whole pill........not just half to save money.

Regina, which part of any of these posts is incorrect? Ian Bush, Kevin St. Amaud, and now Robert Dziekanski were all killed by the RCMP and all of the killers are still in the force. Dziekanski was an accident, the others were not. You have read the posts, instead of insulting people why not tell us what is untrue?

The thread title claims murder and now you call it an accident? Which is it? As of yet I've not seen a conviction of murder in any of those cases. That leaves only you with an opinion based on a lack of knowledge of the outcome. You see where your case folds like a cheap lawn chair?

Nice try, but what facts are wrong, incorrect or lies based on the evidence given? The witnesses, both scientific and eye witnesses, in the Kevin St. Amaud case said the RCMP officer lied about every aspect of the murder, yes I said murder, and even the RCMP have suspended the officer for lying and yet no murder charges. The witnesses in the Ian Bush said the science does not support the claim of the RCMP officer that murdered Bush, yes I said murder. The officer would not re enact the murder, yes I said murder. The cops had 3 months to work with the officer to get his story figured out till they even questioned him, with questions that the officer had been given before the interview. Would you or I be given three months to work out a story of a shooting before being questioned?

Come on Regina, get you head out of the sand, the cops murdered, lied and got away with it. Nice try but I still challenge you, again, to say what facts given are wrong, incorrect or lies.

You can call it murder all you like but until someone is found guilty of that crime, you're just a kid on the internet typing untruths.

Once again, for the third or fourth time, what part of my or Brent Swain's posts, what part of our posts are wrong, incorrect or lies.

Once again in order to be considered a murder, you'll need to be convicted of such. If not then all you have is a short soap box.

ok lets try it this way, did it take three months for the RCMP to interview the killer of Ian Bush? Were the questions he was asked given to his lawyer ahead of time?

Was the scientific testimony at the only hearing about Ian Bush's killing told that the blood splatter did not support the story that the officer who killed Ian Bush gave at the hearing?

Was the scientific testimony at the only hearing about Kevin St Amaud's killing told that the path of the bullet did nto support the story that the officer who killed Kevin St Amaud gave at the hearing?

Was the testimony of an eye witness at the only hearing about Kevin St Amaud's killing not support and contradicted the story that the officer who killed Kevin St Amuad gave at the hearing?

Is the officer who killed Ian Bush still patrolling at BC town's street with his gun?

Has the officer who killed Kevin St Amuad and lied at the only hearing about the killing of Kevin St Amuad been suspended by the force?

And what part of my or Brent Swain's posts, what part of our posts are wrong, incorrect or lies.

What has made me angry is your insult to Brian Swain, a man I do not know, but you felt free to insult rather than trying to engage in a dialogue or to even address any of his statements.

You are a bully and you owe him an apology.

You need to be convicted of such? Like Millguard, Neepoose, Marshall, Guy Paul Morin, Sofano, etc etc. The legal industry's ability to determine guilt or innocence is abysmally poor, and a conviction of anything by a system that allows cops , prosecutors and judges to to lie and fabricate any evidence they need, with no consequences whatever for doing so, makes it largely irrelevant in determining guilt or innocence.Cops have told my brother that they estimate that for some crimes 40% of the people in jail are innocent.
A good example of this was Campbell River's lying mountie Wayne Tannahill's abilty to claim in court he spent 40 minutes trying to find the accused's lawyer's phone number and couldn't find it, a number that was clearly listed in both the phone book and directory assistance. I filed a criminal information against him and was told that the chief regional prosecutor was accepting his excuse that he didn't know how to dial directory assistance and ask for the number. The chief regional prosecutor ,Bob Gillen , another major embarrassment to the credibility of the system , refused to send the case to Vancouver for a second opinion, as was required in ministry policy. I complained to then AG Gableman and he had then deputy minister Earnie Quantz send me his excuse. Quantz said ministry policy didn't apply in this case because he ( Quantz) was on holiday at the time.To our great embarrassment Quantz is now a judge, passing judgement on the honesty of others.
I asked a long time federal Justice critic if he had ever heard of a prosecutor facing any consequences for witholding evidence which would have aquitted anyone who ended up wrongfully convicted and spending a long time in jail and he said "Never."
Pointing a gun at the head of someone and pulling the trigger is a deliberate execution. The claim that he was in a choke hold at the time is demonstrably impossible.
I have been involved in mixed martial arts, and I am unaware of any choke hold that will allow the the victim to hold a gun behind the guys head and shoot him.
Lack of a credible excuse for deliberately killing someone makes it murder.
Lack of credibility in the only excuse given makes it murder.Does the system allow him to keep trying new excuses until he gets one that works?
As for Dziekanski, using a weapon that has killed in the past, on someone that represents no threat to anyone , without even trying to communicate with the person , is a pre meditated assault with a weapon, causing death .
Don't be so naive as to expect his friends and colleagues to do anything but cover his ass any way they can, to insure in future that their asses will likewise be covered if and when they decide to execute someone on the spot.
In Ontario a cop confessed to a crime , and was put on paid leave for three years, at full pay. Another , thanks to his buddies in the prosecution dragging out the proccess long enough , got the charges against him throw out due to unreasonable delay by his colleagues in the legal industry's old boys club.WHAT DID ANYONE EXPECT THEM TO DO? In the public complaints commission rules , no action can be taken against a mountie more that one year after the complaint was filed. That is why it took a few days past a year before I got their excuse for what my complaints were about.
Read the story in Victor Malarecks book "Gut Instinct , about similar RCMP beatings in Gibsons and the mountie who got promoted as a result.
I was recently told that Huey, of the APEC pepper spraying incident had worked in Kimberly , a peacefull town of about 4,000 ,where the locals were so motivated by his abuse that they blew his car up with a case of dynamite. I was told he left his mounties free to beat up anyone they please, with no excuse needed. As a result of the APEC incident he was promoted.
I guess the shortage of good recruits forcing them to do their own paperwork and work long hours is some form of payback. No sympathy.They don't get enough good recruits because they won't convict and fire the psychos and they won't convict and fire the psychos because they are short of staff because they dont get good recruits.The psychos are millstones around their necks , totally out of porportion to the work they do. Duhhh!!!
What kind of animal has an asshole in the middle of his back? A mountie's horse.
Brent