Four Toronto police officers have been charged with perjury and obstructing justice. These are not inexperienced officers; together they have over fifty years’ on the force. You can find some of this here.
Below are some interesting quotes from the above article (emphasis mine):
“It certainly has been an anomaly week when it comes to our service,” Saunders said at a news conference. “We will do our best to get the public trust back that we have lost in certain ways.”
The officers were arrested at 7 a.m. Thursday and have since been released. All are suspended with pay.
McCormack said the officers’ arrest and subsequent release a short time later was “standard practice.” “It’s very transparent and we do not get any special treatment,” he said. “We do that all the time.”
I’ll come back to the above ‘short time later’ and ‘not special treatment’ shortly.
Here you will find that another officer is being investigated but will not face charges. I’m not sure what that means, exactly.
Sadly, in the same page, we also learn that a video may have been suppressed, and statements about the use of cell phones are being questioned. Again, emphasis mine:
CBC News has also learned that neither Tran nor his lawyer were told that a dashboard camera video of the incident may exist.
During Tran’s trial, the four officers said they had no recollection of using mobile phones to communicate with each other before or during Tran’s arrest. The internal investigators have since obtained court orders and seized phone records detailing whether, and for how long, the officers talked to each other, sources have told CBC News.
Finally, back to Mike McCormack’s comment that the officers’ arrests and subsequent speedy releases are not special treatment. Here is a page from the G20 news that shows how mere citizens were treated for merely being present. (Not perjury, not obstructing justice, apparently.) I will quote a bit, again emphasis mine.
A 15-year-old boy, dressed in an oversized orange t-shirt and cargo pants, said he was arrested Saturday night on the Esplanade and held for 33 hours. The teen, who would only identify himself as Liam, said that he was only there to watch the protest.
“They surrounded us and told us to leave,” he said, “but how was I supposed to read the situation?” He said police never once told them how to leave or when the last warning would be before arresting him. He was initially arrested for obstructing the police, he said, but released without being charged.
and again:
The arrest figure of more than 900 people includes only those who were taken to the detention centre, not those who were temporarily detained by police, Const. Murphy said. Most people were released without being charged.
and again:
Wearing dark jeans, a dark t-shirt and no shoes, Mr. MacDonald said he was arrested for obstruction of police, but that he was released without charge. He said he suspects he was arrested for wearing a bandana, but said it was on his head, not his face.
and again:
Questions were raised Monday about the way police handled a group of several hundred protesters and innocent bystanders at the intersection of Queen Street West and Spadina Avenue on Sunday evening. The group was boxed in by riot police for at least three hours in the soaking rain. After several were arrested, the rest were finally allowed to leave at about 10 p.m.
Three hours in the rain. That’s special treatment, eh? The vast majority of whom were never charged with anything. (I might also note, this is kilometres away from the G20 fence. No possible threat to the delegates.)
By now, you must be ready to read the Dumb Questions, eh?
Did the four charged officers get better treatment than the kettled bystanders?
Is wearing a bandana sufficient to show intent to create trouble?
Is 33 hours a short time?
Have the police lost the confidence of those whom they are sworn to Serve and Protect?
Does Zimbardo’s Law apply here? More on this in a later post.