You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!
The banners on the left side and below do not show for registered users!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.
Vancouver Off-Topic / Current EventsThe off-topic forum for Vancouver, funnies, non-auto centered discussions, WORK SAFE. While the rules are more relaxed here, there are still rules. Please refer to sticky thread in this forum.
[b]Vancouver police defend pace of riot investigation[b/]
Spoiler!
Faced with taking two years to analyze more than 1,600 hours of video footage in order to identify those involved in the Stanley Cup riots, the Vancouver Police will spend $160,000 to have the job done in about three weeks by experts at the University of Indianapolis.
Police Chief Jim Chu announced Wednesday that the 50-member riot-investigation team will be working with the non-profit Law Enforcement and Emergency Services Video Association (LEVA) at the National Digital Multimedia Evidence Processing Lab at the University of Indianapolis.
Sgt. Dale Weidman, who is in charge of the riot-investigation team, said using the processing lab could save the department millions of dollars in officers’ time.
So far only two people involved in the riot have been charged. Chu said the police have identified 268 suspects — an increase of 15 per cent over last month.
A total of 41 people have turned themselves in or been brought in by their parents, Chu said.
However, in some cases people have confessed to minor crimes when further investigation shows they were involved in more serious offences.
“Rushing these people into court without a full examination of all the evidence would produce weak cases with acquittals, bad case law and little or no penalties,” said Chu.
“Our diligence and thoroughness will ensure that we lay the highest number of charges and obtain the greatest number of convictions with the most severe penalties,” he said.
“Even though we acknowledge the frustration of those who wish these suspects were already in jail — and we share your frustration — there are many reasons why we must proceed at this pace,” said Chu.
“If you are in favour of speed you are in favour of more acquittals and lighter sentences. If we rush cases to court we risk losing them by being ineffective and inefficient,” he said.
Chu said it would be wrong to compare Canada’s criminal-justice system to that of Britain, which has been wracked by a series of riots beginning Aug. 6.
Two men who tried unsuccessfully to incite rioting in their hometowns using Facebook have already been charged, convicted and jailed.
“Some of you wonder why we can’t act as quickly here as the police and courts appear to be acting in Britain,” said Chu.
“The short answer is: Canada is not Britain. Our laws are different, our courts are different and our riots are different,” he said.
Chu said the police will soon launch a website dedicated to the riot, which will keep the public informed on the progress of the investigation.
The site will include pictures of 150 new suspects and will display videos of suspects the police are seeking the public’s help in identifying.
Riot investigation, arrests hampered by law - People are slower to face charges in B.C. because the Crown must meet more stringent evidentiary tests before the charges can be laid
Spoiler!
Perhaps we should consider what Vancouver Police Chief Jim Chu didn't say in his failed effort to defend his beleaguered force against accusations it's not acting fast enough in its investigation of the Stanley Cup riot.
After all, what he did say seems to have fallen on deaf ears, what with newspaper columnists once again feigning high dudgeon, and with Premier Christy Clark helpfully adding that she's "frustrated" and "angry" about the whole affair.
Had Chu said what he didn't say, perhaps Clark would have realized that her anger is misplaced, that when she points her finger at the police, three fingers are appropriately pointing back at her.
Chu did hint that there is a "detailed answer" as to why the treatment of rioters in Canada and Britain appears to differ, though he then decided people wouldn't be interested in hearing it. That's unfortunate, because the devil is in the details.
And the details in this case concern the process by which people are charged with criminal offences. As is mentioned from time to time, British Columbia is one of three provinces (along with Quebec and New Brunswick) in which the Crown, rather than the police, lay criminal charges. Or more specifically, police prepare a report with the results of their investigation and charge recommendations, and the Crown approves them.
This was not always so. Up until the 1970s, police in B.C. did lay charges, but many of the charges - up to 40 per cent - were ultimately stayed because the police did not provide the Crown with sufficient evidence to prosecute them. This proved to be something of a scandal, and led the province to grant the Crown statutory responsibility for laying charges.
The current practice is not without its critics. Among other things, critics charge that the procedure invites corruption in that it shields from the public the reasons charges are approved or not. Recall the Crown lawyers who fought testifying before the Davies Commission about their reasons for not approving charges against the police in the Frank Paul case.
The current procedure also likely slows the charging process down somewhat because, as has already happened in the riot investigation, the Crown can ask for more information after the police have completed their report. And this means that it might take longer to lay charges in B.C. than in other jurisdictions.
But it doesn't mean it's inappropriate for the Crown to request more information, since the Crown also faces an onerous task. According to the Crown Counsel Policy Manual, the Crown is expected to approve the charges only if there is a substantial likelihood of conviction and, if so, the prosecution is in the public interest.
As it happens, this "substantial likelihood of conviction" test is the highest standard in Canada. Most provinces require a "reasonable likelihood of conviction" before laying charges, though Ontario requires a "reasonable prospect" and Nova Scotia a "reasonable chance" of conviction. The B.C. Crown is permitted to use the lower "reasonable prospect" standard in cases involving high risk, violent or dangerous offenders, but only in those cases.
This means that, all other things being equal, people might be less likely to face charges in B.C. than in other provinces. It also means that the laying of charges might take longer, since the Crown must meet a more stringent evidentiary test before approving them.
Now that said, whether you support or oppose B.C.'s system depends entirely on your perspective. If your primary concern is with reducing the number of people who face charges that are later dropped, then the B.C. approach is for you. But if your primary concern is with charging as many people as possible as quickly as possible, even if the charges may not hold up in court, then the rest of Canada is more to your liking.
It appears that many people currently favour the latter system, including the frustrated and angry Christy Clark. And if she is so angered by B.C.'s system, then she ought to start pointing fingers at herself and her colleagues in the legislature, since they are the only ones who can change it.
commentary again on the differences and media slant:
Quote:
U.K. justice not as swift or severe as we're told - Britain's riots were quite different than ours, but proceedings there are following the same due process that the rule of law says everyone deserves
Spoiler!
Well, it appears we just don't know how to handle a riot out here in the colonies. So according to newspapers across the country, we ought to turn to the motherland for advice on how things ought to be done.
Never mind that Vancouver's riot was contained to the downtown core of one city while England's riots spread across the country. Or that Vancouver's riot lasted several hours while England's continued for several days.
Or that Vancouver's riot is estimated to have cost several million dollars while England's comes in at several hundred million pounds. Or that no one was killed in Vancouver, while England is dealing with five deaths and several cases of attempted murder, including the attempted murder of police officers.
Never mind any of these facts because they spoil the Canadian media's carefully painted and juxtaposed portraits of the British and Canadian justice systems. By selectively attending to certain British media reports, some in the Canadian media tell us that the British police and courts have already arrested, charged, tried and sentenced the rioters to jail, while here in the colonies, Dudley Do-Right is still trying to mount his horse.
Now if true, Britain's record of handling rioters would be the envy of Cuba, China and every other totalitarian regime that prides itself on its swift and sure justice system, while leaving antiquated concepts such as due process and the rule of law to dusty old texts about English law.
But it isn't true, as even a cursory review of British media reports reveals. To be sure, British authorities were under enormous pressure to act swiftly last week, given that the riots were ongoing and spreading, and this circumstance - which did not exist in Vancouver - led to several thousand arrests and many charges. It also led to courts sitting overnight and on Sunday, though a report in The Independent emphasized that most cases heard Sunday had nothing to do with the riot.
Indeed, British justice has not been nearly as swift or severe as you've been led to believe. According to a report in the Guardian newspaper, the majority of cases that were resolved quickly involved simple charges like burglary and possession of stolen goods, where defendants were caught red-handed and pleaded guilty.
The courts therefore had only to conduct sentencing hearings, which are typically a lot less time-consuming than trials. Many of the more serious charges will proceed to trial, which could take in excess of a year, and which, unlike sentencing hearings, might well lead to acquittals of the accused. So much for the swiftness of the British justice system.
And as for British justice being severe: Whatever you do, don't tell the Brits that. According to reports in the Telegraph and the Mail, many of the rioters were minors, which means they are subject to "referral orders" - restorative-justicebased non-custodial orders similar to Canadian diversion programs - and won't spend any time in jail.
Such orders can be entirely appropriate, though they certainly don't fit with the picture of rioters doing hard time. Consequently, everyone from Prime Minister David Cameron to Metropolitan Police Deputy Assistant Commissioner Stephen Kavanagh to British tabloid columnists have condemned this ostensibly light treatment of the rioters.
The belief that rioters are getting off easy is so pervasive that grandstanding politicians have proposed truly Draconian extra-judicial measures, including removing rioters' benefits, naming and shaming youth rioters and, most egregiously, evicting rioters' entire families from council housing.
This practice of punishing families for the misdeeds of one member, otherwise known as the North Korean approach, could, as a report in the Telegraph details, mean evicting a charity worker and her eightyear-old daughter because of the behaviour of her 18-yearold son.
Fortunately, though, such evictions are almost certainly illegal, and if necessary, the British courts - those selfsame institutions that Canadians believe are so tough on rioters - will declare them illegal. So much for the severity of the British justice system.
Contrary to the picture painted by the Canadian media, then, the British and Canadian experiences in the aftermath of the riots are remarkably similar, even though the riots themselves were markedly different: Justice officials in both countries have faced enormous pressure to be swift and severe, and have been attacked for failing to be swift and severe enough.
But the media-manufactured myth that they're doing everything right and we're doing everything wrong is found only in Canada.
TL;DR: Vancouver Police cannot lay charges like UK police; only Crown can. Crown has to meet very high standards in order to lay a charge, let alone get a conviction. Because of this high standard, Crown often goes back to police to ask for more info. More info = more investigative work/time. Media reports on how the UK police and court system are quickly charging and jailing the UK riot suspects is somewhat false.
The owner of the m5 that was torched says that she is unable to pay to fix her car.
And still no charges? Like the article says, she should go after the city for damages to pay for the car if the rioters that did this are really off the hook or if it takes years for them to get trials. This is disgusting, why should she have to pay for the damage.
Should elaborate that ICBC only compensated the vehicle at market value which is not enough to cover the lease. So technically she is only paying the difference. She signed the lease, shes getting screwed by the rioters for sure but not by anyone else. Article made it sound like she was not covered at all.
I'm more amused that she decided it was a good idea to lease a 120K car but then say she can't pay the 10k cost for insurance.
She can't really go after the city because the city isn't really at fault. The riots are at fault and you can't get a dime because nobody is being charged/fined yet. No matter how you look at it, 10k isn't spare change, baller or not, and hard to come by quickly.
She can't really go after the city because the city isn't really at fault. The riots are at fault and you can't get a dime because nobody is being charged/fined yet. No matter how you look at it, 10k isn't spare change, baller or not, and hard to come by quickly.
ICBC has to know who damaged her vehicle so that they can go after them for money. hence ICBC's quick offer to the police to use ICBC's facial recognition software.
So let me get this straight since ICBC paid for the remainder of her lease. She can't afford 10k? Wouldn't that just be a couple months of payments?
Yup. Lets say roughly 12XX a month, basing this off my old lease payments don't actually know the numbers, that's still less then a year of payments.
I posted this same article on another thread and someone made a good comment. Although it is sad to see a nice car destroyed, and it sucks for the owner to have your car destroyed by a bunch of drunk hooligans... Why the fuck would you buy/lease a car that you can not possible pay for.
I'm not entirely sure about the replacement insurance costs on an m5 but for my s4 it costs an extra $32 a month. Money well spent in my opinion....and something anyone with a 100K+ car should get.
So let me get this straight since ICBC paid for the remainder of her lease. She can't afford 10k? Wouldn't that just be a couple months of payments?
ICBC paid for the car, not the remainder of the lease so she owes BMW the difference.
a 2010 M5 with an original MRSP of 120,000 and in theory the lease over 3 years + buyout totals around 120,000
1.5 years into her lease she's paid off (18 months x 2000 a month) 36,000 of the lease.
Car gets torched 18 months later, the money owing is 18 months left + buyout = 84,000. ICBC assesses market value at 70,000 and she still has to pay BMW 14,000. So you're right, if she was baller she probably have 10k lying around but that's a big dent in anyone's wallet if they had to pay right away... even if she was making 60k/year a 20k/year lease payment isn't that outrageous (although not very smart)
edit: after reading it again, maybe she's looking for public handouts? lol
edit: after reading it again, maybe she's looking for public handouts? lol
My thoughts is it is either this or she decided not to get replacement insurance knowing the risk which was why she and her friends fought so hard to try to keep the damage to the car to a minimal.
__________________ Originally posted by Iceman_19 you should have tried to touch his penis. that really throws them off. Originally posted by The7even SumAznGuy > Billboa Originally posted by 1990TSI SumAznGuy> Internet > tinytrix
Quote:
Originally Posted by tofu1413
and icing on the cake, lady driving a newer chrysler 200 infront of me... jumped out of her car, dropped her pants, did an immediate squat and did probably the longest public relief ever...... steam and all.
I have never leased before nor do I recall them even asking if you own or lease the car. If infact it makes a difference shouldn't lease insurance be signifigantly cheaper than owner insurance?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorade
ICBC paid for the car, not the remainder of the lease so she owes BMW the difference.
a 2010 M5 with an original MRSP of 120,000 and in theory the lease over 3 years + buyout totals around 120,000
1.5 years into her lease she's paid off (18 months x 2000 a month) 36,000 of the lease.
Car gets torched 18 months later, the money owing is 18 months left + buyout = 84,000. ICBC assesses market value at 70,000 and she still has to pay BMW 14,000. So you're right, if she was baller she probably have 10k lying around but that's a big dent in anyone's wallet if they had to pay right away... even if she was making 60k/year a 20k/year lease payment isn't that outrageous (although not very smart)
edit: after reading it again, maybe she's looking for public handouts? lol
I have never leased before nor do I recall them even asking if you own or lease the car. If infact it makes a difference shouldn't lease insurance be signifigantly cheaper than owner insurance?
Whether you lease, finance, or own a vehicle outright...the insurance costs should be the same.
You're paying for INSURANCE on a vehicle...that's the bottom line. The cost for insurance varies depending on the car and your premiums...that's it.
It's hard for me to believe anything's going on at VPD.
An officer emailed me and was in contact very quickly the morning of the riot and picked up a CD full of originals to him.
Since then, I haven't heard back from him, and I've gotten THREE additional contacts, once through flickrmail asking me to contact VPD to talk about my pictures, and two emails asking me to please speak to them about the pictures. Each time, I explained that they've already got the originals from me....
This just looks poorly handled. If there are still no arrests by the time hockey starts again, watch the critics yap about it for months. If there's still no arrests by the time the playoffs start again, then...well, that just can't be a good thing.
__________________ Originally posted by Iceman_19 you should have tried to touch his penis. that really throws them off. Originally posted by The7even SumAznGuy > Billboa Originally posted by 1990TSI SumAznGuy> Internet > tinytrix
Quote:
Originally Posted by tofu1413
and icing on the cake, lady driving a newer chrysler 200 infront of me... jumped out of her car, dropped her pants, did an immediate squat and did probably the longest public relief ever...... steam and all.
__________________ Do Not Put Aftershave on Your Balls. -604CEFIRO Looks like I'm gonna have some hot sex again tonight...OOPS i got the 6 pack. that wont last me the night, I better go back and get the 24 pack! -Turbo E kinda off topic but obama is a dilf - miss_crayon Honest to fucking Christ the easiest way to get a married woman in the mood is clean the house and do the laundry.....I've been with the same girl almost 17 years, ask me how I know. - quasi
You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!
The banners on the left side and below do not show for registered users!
