Go Back   Alberta Outdoorsmen Forum > Main Category > General Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #31  
Old 08-08-2018, 02:11 PM
bobtodrick bobtodrick is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 3,939
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by whiteout View Post
So you have inside information about the case that even the police don’t have?

If you have such concrete evidence that shows he should not have been released, then you should contact the RCMP. They are apparently conducting the case in a different manner and might benefit from you input.

Here is the number for the Cochrane detachment 403-851-8000
I'll go out on a limb and say he doesn't call
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 08-08-2018, 04:30 PM
Mulehahn Mulehahn is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 908
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by whiteout View Post
So you have inside information about the case that even the police don’t have?

If you have such concrete evidence that shows he should not have been released, then you should contact the RCMP. They are apparently conducting the case in a different manner and might benefit from you input.

Here is the number for the Cochrane detachment 403-851-8000
Sorry.,no information. I may have had colorful associates in the passed but no one I know or have ever known associates with someone who shoots the driver an vehicle traveling at highway speeds; let alone one occupied by several people who they don't intend to harm. Have known about a deaths, even known a few people who have done the killings. In none of those instances was there enough to arrest a person and then have unconditionally released. IUt on Bond, house arrest,or a myriad of other conditions but never unconditionally. So either the police arrested the wrong person, didn't have enough probable cause to arrest or they decided that it was ok to let a clearly dangerous offender; one with no regard for anyones life, wholely innocent or otherwise, walk among us. No matter how you cut it there is a known deranged individual loose, one willing to kill anyone, and those near them, that they believed may have wronged them, in Alberta and the police, and crown prosecutors, involved in this case play a direct role in that still being the case.

Now I am sure I will be labelled a cop hater, may even get a time out. But before I do I will ask. What facts did I get wrong? Did someone not try to kill someone, as well as the others in the vehicle, simply based on the vehicle he drove? Was a suspect not identified, arrested, and then promptly released without charges being laid? Must an arrest warrant not be issued, with information gathered by police and reviewed by the crown, before the suspect is apprehended (unless caught committing another felony)? Is there not someone out there with no regard for human life willing to risk the lives of anyone nearby when they feel the eight to kill? Just asking these questions cause I truly want to kno the answers.
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 08-08-2018, 05:07 PM
bobtodrick bobtodrick is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 3,939
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mulehahn View Post
Sorry.,no information. I may have had colorful associates in the passed but no one I know or have ever known associates with someone who shoots the driver an vehicle traveling at highway speeds; let alone one occupied by several people who they don't intend to harm. Have known about a deaths, even known a few people who have done the killings. In none of those instances was there enough to arrest a person and then have unconditionally released. IUt on Bond, house arrest,or a myriad of other conditions but never unconditionally. So either the police arrested the wrong person, didn't have enough probable cause to arrest or they decided that it was ok to let a clearly dangerous offender; one with no regard for anyones life, wholely innocent or otherwise, walk among us. No matter how you cut it there is a known deranged individual loose, one willing to kill anyone, and those near them, that they believed may have wronged them, in Alberta and the police, and crown prosecutors, involved in this case play a direct role in that still being the case.

Now I am sure I will be labelled a cop hater, may even get a time out. But before I do I will ask. What facts did I get wrong? Did someone not try to kill someone, as well as the others in the vehicle, simply based on the vehicle he drove? Was a suspect not identified, arrested, and then promptly released without charges being laid? Must an arrest warrant not be issued, with information gathered by police and reviewed by the crown, before the suspect is apprehended (unless caught committing another felony)? Is there not someone out there with no regard for human life willing to risk the lives of anyone nearby when they feel the eight to kill? Just asking these questions cause I truly want to kno the answers.
Interesting game you play. Of course what you say here is true.
We are asking however, what proof do you have that this particular person was the shooter.
He may well have been, if that's the case when the police have a strong enough case that he doesn't get off on a technicality, so be it.
But again, where is the proof you have that HE did it.
My apologies if you've already called the Cochrane RCMP with the info you have...otherwise you're just a ****e disturber.
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 08-08-2018, 05:30 PM
midgetwaiter midgetwaiter is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 1,779
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CaberTosser View Post
If bans work so well, please explain to me the 40 shootings in 'gun controlled' Chicago on Sunday Aug 5th, all before noon.
Can we stop with the Chicago thing please? It's a terrible argument.

https://www.politifact.com/illinois/...ot-full-holes/
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 08-08-2018, 08:31 PM
CaberTosser's Avatar
CaberTosser CaberTosser is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Calgary
Posts: 19,416
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by midgetwaiter View Post
Can we stop with the Chicago thing please? It's a terrible argument.

https://www.politifact.com/illinois/...ot-full-holes/
Perhaps their rate of violence is because they've voted for Democrat mayors ever since 1931 then? That article notes that Chicago's former ban was lifted by the Columbia vs Heller Supreme Court decision, but I think its OK to allow that it will take a while for the local culture to adapt to their new found access to means of self defence.

That being said (and just like Toronto) Chicago's murder rate is primarily because of bad guy on bad guy violence, the people legally armed to defend themselves aren't the source of the problem. I'd love to see some non-partisan statistics where shootings are broken down by whether or not they were justified as being legitimate self-defence actions and how many were committed by people with existing criminal records versus those with no previous felony criminal records. The problem in both Toronto and Chicago and Oakland and New Orleans, etc always lies among people who would not qualify to legally purchase firearm due to their existing criminal histories.
__________________
"The trouble with people idiot-proofing things, is the resulting evolution of the idiot." Me
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 08-08-2018, 11:02 PM
midgetwaiter midgetwaiter is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 1,779
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CaberTosser View Post
Perhaps their rate of violence is because they've voted for Democrat mayors ever since 1931 then? That article notes that Chicago's former ban was lifted by the Columbia vs Heller Supreme Court decision, but I think its OK to allow that it will take a while for the local culture to adapt to their new found access to means of self defence.
Chicago is also about 30miles from Gary Indiana which has always had much less restrictive gun laws. In fact 20% of the recovered guns used in a crime in Chicago were originally purchased in Indiana. 60% of the recovered guns were from states other than Illinois. Chicago’s effort to legislate guns away was always doomed to fail, imagine banning booze sales in Calgary but not Okotoks.

That leaves us with the question, why bother using Chicago as an example at all? Best case it’s a strawman, easily brushed aside by someone familiar with the facts. However it seems to me it’s also commonly employed as a dog whistle argument, the kind of thing your average Alt-right “ I’m not REALLY racist” dog would hear. I’m not saying you are doing that purposely or anything but you might want to ask yourself how something so easily debunked got to be a common talking point in the first place. Doesn’t make any sense to me.

If we want to fight for the moral high ground on this, and I think we should, it’s in our interest to advance the best argument we can. The Chicago example is not that.
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 08-09-2018, 12:31 AM
Mulehahn Mulehahn is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 908
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bobtodrick View Post
Interesting game you play. Of course what you say here is true.
We are asking however, what proof do you have that this particular person was the shooter.
He may well have been, if that's the case when the police have a strong enough case that he doesn't get off on a technicality, so be it.
But again, where is the proof you have that HE did it.
My apologies if you've already called the Cochrane RCMP with the info you have...otherwise you're just a ****e disturber.
Nope, I have no further information. And You are correct, he may have not been the shooter. That doesn't make it any better. The suspect was Arrested! Not detained or brought in as a witness; he was Arrested. That would mean the enough evidence was gathered by the police that they felt it worthy of presenting to the crown and upon the reviewing it the Crown felt an Arrest warrant was needed! There is a lot of hoops to jump through to get to that point.

If a mistake was made and the wrong person was arrested then fine, can totally accept that. Mistakes happen all the time. I have made my fair share. But in a case like this they really shouldn't. If there is not enough evidence to lay charges then don't make an arrest. If you arrest an innocent man, even if you withhold his name someone will know who he is and his life will never be the same. If he is guilty but you don't have enough to charge him what is served by the arrest? Nothing except to alert the suspect! At the end of the day all I really know is that some where in Alberta there is a incompetent (thankfully) murderer who does not care if who or how many people he may kill and that, in my opinion, mistakes have been made in the handling of this case. Either an innocent man was ARRESTED for crimes a crime he didn't commit or a guilty person is allowed to walk among us because someone jumped the gun.
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 08-09-2018, 07:53 AM
Grizzly Adams's Avatar
Grizzly Adams Grizzly Adams is offline
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Central Alberta
Posts: 21,399
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mulehahn View Post
Nope, I have no further information. And You are correct, he may have not been the shooter. That doesn't make it any better. The suspect was Arrested! Not detained or brought in as a witness; he was Arrested. That would mean the enough evidence was gathered by the police that they felt it worthy of presenting to the crown and upon the reviewing it the Crown felt an Arrest warrant was needed! There is a lot of hoops to jump through to get to that point.

If a mistake was made and the wrong person was arrested then fine, can totally accept that. Mistakes happen all the time. I have made my fair share. But in a case like this they really shouldn't. If there is not enough evidence to lay charges then don't make an arrest. If you arrest an innocent man, even if you withhold his name someone will know who he is and his life will never be the same. If he is guilty but you don't have enough to charge him what is served by the arrest? Nothing except to alert the suspect! At the end of the day all I really know is that some where in Alberta there is a incompetent (thankfully) murderer who does not care if who or how many people he may kill and that, in my opinion, mistakes have been made in the handling of this case. Either an innocent man was ARRESTED for crimes a crime he didn't commit or a guilty person is allowed to walk among us because someone jumped the gun.
No, arrested means nothing. They can detain you for a specified time, to further their investigation, just to make sure you don't disappear . Google Habeas Corpus. My theory is, the bullet came out of the blue, intentionally or otherwise.

Grizz
__________________
"Indeed, no human being has yet lived under conditions which, considering the prevailing climates of the past, can be regarded as normal."
John E. Pfeiffer The Emergence of Man
written in 1969
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old 08-09-2018, 07:25 PM
fordtruckin's Avatar
fordtruckin fordtruckin is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: In the woods
Posts: 8,923
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by midgetwaiter View Post
Can we stop with the Chicago thing please? It's a terrible argument.

https://www.politifact.com/illinois/...ot-full-holes/
Hmmm so the article you provided to defunct the Toughest Gun Control Claim in Chicago says:

When it comes to the concealed carry of weapons, Chicago has less authority to impose limitations than do many other large U.S. cities.


Please explain to me how Chicago has less authority to impose limitations? Because they have a SCOTUS decision saying their ban was unconstitutional? All that means is other cities weren't stupid enough to do the same. If Atlanta, Seattle, Philadelphia, Memphis or any other were to implement a ban now, you could say they have less authority as well because their ban would also end up at the Supreme Court and deemed unconstitutional.

Your article proves nothing, it is the opinion of a politically guided news outlet.
__________________
I feel I was denied, critical, need to know Information!
Reply With Quote
  #40  
Old 08-09-2018, 08:29 PM
guywiththemule guywiththemule is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 1,604
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by fordtruckin View Post
Hmmm so the article you provided to defunct the Toughest Gun Control Claim in Chicago says:

When it comes to the concealed carry of weapons, Chicago has less authority to impose limitations than do many other large U.S. cities.


Please explain to me how Chicago has less authority to impose limitations? Because they have a SCOTUS decision saying their ban was unconstitutional? All that means is other cities weren't stupid enough to do the same. If Atlanta, Seattle, Philadelphia, Memphis or any other were to implement a ban now, you could say they have less authority as well because their ban would also end up at the Supreme Court and deemed unconstitutional.

Your article proves nothing, it is the opinion of a politically guided news outlet.
Yes. Nailed it ^^^^.
Reply With Quote
  #41  
Old 08-10-2018, 10:32 AM
midgetwaiter midgetwaiter is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 1,779
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by fordtruckin View Post
Hmmm so the article you provided to defunct the Toughest Gun Control Claim in Chicago says:

When it comes to the concealed carry of weapons, Chicago has less authority to impose limitations than do many other large
I’m not sure, I think you’re correct that they are drawing that conclusion based on the SCOTUS decision. That’s a fair criticism but dismissing everything in the article based on that one poor scentence is dishonest at best.

Look the fact is that the Chicago argument is deeply flawed, IMO it’s not in our interest to advance it. if you disagree so be it.
Reply With Quote
  #42  
Old 08-14-2018, 07:39 AM
MrDave MrDave is offline
Suspended User
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Innisfail
Posts: 1,073
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bobtodrick View Post
Give me one...ONE verified example of a cop cutting a criminal loose because he was a relative.
Just one!!
10-15 years ago I worked with the son of the big cop of Red Deer. This young fellow blew up the house he was renting, making pot oil. The news carried the story at 6am. Then the news was suppresses, no more said. Son gets out of burn unit within 3 weeks. Charges never laid, despite a pound of pot laying on the kitchen table.
Town of Rimbey, head cop busted poaching with his service gun and cop car. No charges, just a promotion. His son busted for pot, charges disappeared and the cop who laid the charges transferred to Assumption.
Lots of us have examples.
Reply With Quote
  #43  
Old 08-14-2018, 12:02 PM
walking buffalo's Avatar
walking buffalo walking buffalo is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 10,207
Default

I see that a new post from "Mr. Dave" towards another member has been deleted.

Thanks Mods, those comments were beyond ignorant.

I read it this morning, and had to come back when I had some time to respond.. it was that disturbing.

People that make such comments shouldn't be on this forum.
__________________
Alberta Fish and Wildlife Outdoor Recreation Policy -

"to identify very rare, scarce or special forms of fish and wildlife outdoor recreation opportunities and to ensure that access to these opportunities continues to be available to all Albertans."
Reply With Quote
  #44  
Old 08-14-2018, 12:23 PM
CaberTosser's Avatar
CaberTosser CaberTosser is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Calgary
Posts: 19,416
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by walking buffalo View Post
I see that a new post from "Mr. Dave" towards another member has been deleted.

Thanks Mods, those comments were beyond ignorant.

I read it this morning, and had to come back when I had some time to respond.. it was that disturbing.

People that make such comments shouldn't be on this forum.
The comment was directed towards me and I was the one who flagged it. I was part way into taking the bait when an edit of my response went 'invalid' and disappeared. Probably for the best though. I thought extending an olive branch in an earlier post might have diffused things, but that was not to be.
__________________
"The trouble with people idiot-proofing things, is the resulting evolution of the idiot." Me
Reply With Quote
  #45  
Old 08-28-2018, 03:43 PM
pikergolf's Avatar
pikergolf pikergolf is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 11,285
Default

Arrest made, 16 yrs old, Jeebus.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgar...outh-1.4801872
__________________
“One of the sad signs of our times is that we have demonized those who produce, subsidized those who refuse to produce, and canonized those who complain.”

Thomas Sowell
Reply With Quote
  #46  
Old 08-28-2018, 03:44 PM
HighlandHeart HighlandHeart is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 954
Default

I hope they take away his RPAL.
Reply With Quote
  #47  
Old 08-28-2018, 03:46 PM
Scott N's Avatar
Scott N Scott N is offline
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Calgary
Posts: 7,506
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by HighlandHeart View Post
I hope they take away his RPAL.
Yup, and maybe give him a good hard slap on the wrist.
Reply With Quote
  #48  
Old 08-28-2018, 03:54 PM
Brucez Brucez is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 27
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by HighlandHeart View Post
I hope they take away his RPAL.
it is a "prohibited weapon"
Reply With Quote
  #49  
Old 08-28-2018, 05:25 PM
Grizzly Adams's Avatar
Grizzly Adams Grizzly Adams is offline
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Central Alberta
Posts: 21,399
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Scott N View Post
Yup, and maybe give him a good hard slap on the wrist.
Got a big time lawyer , real quick. Speed dial ?

Grizz
__________________
"Indeed, no human being has yet lived under conditions which, considering the prevailing climates of the past, can be regarded as normal."
John E. Pfeiffer The Emergence of Man
written in 1969
Reply With Quote
  #50  
Old 08-28-2018, 06:16 PM
Imagehunter Imagehunter is offline
 
Join Date: May 2014
Posts: 317
Default

Guess he won't be charged as an adult at that age, does anyone know what the maximum penalty is for attempted murder?
Reply With Quote
  #51  
Old 08-28-2018, 06:31 PM
Grizzly Adams's Avatar
Grizzly Adams Grizzly Adams is offline
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Central Alberta
Posts: 21,399
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Imagehunter View Post
Guess he won't be charged as an adult at that age, does anyone know what the maximum penalty is for attempted murder?
They could apply to have him tried as an adult That would bring some serious jail time into play.

Grizz
__________________
"Indeed, no human being has yet lived under conditions which, considering the prevailing climates of the past, can be regarded as normal."
John E. Pfeiffer The Emergence of Man
written in 1969
Reply With Quote
  #52  
Old 08-28-2018, 06:31 PM
rem338win's Avatar
rem338win rem338win is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Cowtown, agian
Posts: 2,812
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mulehahn View Post
Nope, I have no further information. And You are correct, he may have not been the shooter. That doesn't make it any better. The suspect was Arrested! Not detained or brought in as a witness; he was Arrested. That would mean the enough evidence was gathered by the police that they felt it worthy of presenting to the crown and upon the reviewing it the Crown felt an Arrest warrant was needed! There is a lot of hoops to jump through to get to that point.

If a mistake was made and the wrong person was arrested then fine, can totally accept that. Mistakes happen all the time. I have made my fair share. But in a case like this they really shouldn't. If there is not enough evidence to lay charges then don't make an arrest. If you arrest an innocent man, even if you withhold his name someone will know who he is and his life will never be the same. If he is guilty but you don't have enough to charge him what is served by the arrest? Nothing except to alert the suspect! At the end of the day all I really know is that some where in Alberta there is a incompetent (thankfully) murderer who does not care if who or how many people he may kill and that, in my opinion, mistakes have been made in the handling of this case. Either an innocent man was ARRESTED for crimes a crime he didn't commit or a guilty person is allowed to walk among us because someone jumped the gun.

You clearly need to understand what you are talking about before you go to the keyboard. This entire post is giving me fits; so sure of yourself and still throwing pickles at the dart board.

Goodness sake.
__________________
The inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing of blessings; the inherent virtue of socialism is the equal sharing of miseries.
- Sir Winston Churchill

A body of men holding themselves accountable to nobody ought not to be trusted by anybody.
-Thomas Paine
Reply With Quote
  #53  
Old 08-28-2018, 06:34 PM
rem338win's Avatar
rem338win rem338win is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Cowtown, agian
Posts: 2,812
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MrDave View Post
10-15 years ago I worked with the son of the big cop of Red Deer. This young fellow blew up the house he was renting, making pot oil. The news carried the story at 6am. Then the news was suppresses, no more said. Son gets out of burn unit within 3 weeks. Charges never laid, despite a pound of pot laying on the kitchen table.
Town of Rimbey, head cop busted poaching with his service gun and cop car. No charges, just a promotion. His son busted for pot, charges disappeared and the cop who laid the charges transferred to Assumption.
Lots of us have examples.
They said verified. Not a poorly written two line of your third party account.

So the house blew up and the kitchen table was still sitting their with the pound and you saw it?

And you saw an officer poach a deer with a .38 or 9mm?

All this is dandy stuff. Media helped snuff it all too?
__________________
The inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing of blessings; the inherent virtue of socialism is the equal sharing of miseries.
- Sir Winston Churchill

A body of men holding themselves accountable to nobody ought not to be trusted by anybody.
-Thomas Paine
Reply With Quote
  #54  
Old 08-28-2018, 06:47 PM
Mulehahn Mulehahn is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 908
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rem338win View Post
You clearly need to understand what you are talking about before you go to the keyboard. This entire post is giving me fits; so sure of yourself and still throwing pickles at the dart board.

Goodness sake.
Wow... glad the suspect is finally being charged but what did I get so wrong. The police can not arrest you without cause. The grounds on which you can be arrested are pretty clearly laid out So either they arrested the wrong person the first time (in which case his life was most certainly negatively affected) or they arrested him again this time, and allowed someone with no regard for human life to walk freely for several weeks because?

So please, tell me politely and concisely which of those statements is false?
Reply With Quote
  #55  
Old 08-28-2018, 06:51 PM
CaberTosser's Avatar
CaberTosser CaberTosser is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Calgary
Posts: 19,416
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mulehahn View Post
Wow... glad the suspect is finally being charged but what did I get so wrong. The police can not arrest you without cause. The grounds on which you can be arrested are pretty clearly laid out So either they arrested the wrong person the first time (in which case his life was most certainly negatively affected) or they arrested him again this time, and allowed someone with no regard for human life to walk freely for several weeks because?

So please, tell me politely and concisely which of those statements is false?
Wow, like to argue much? There are other possibilities you know, such as ones I had already posted in this every thread. If it was the same guy he was free for the meantime but would you for a moment thing he was not under constant surveillance, both physical as well as electronic? (monitoring his phone and internet)
__________________
"The trouble with people idiot-proofing things, is the resulting evolution of the idiot." Me
Reply With Quote
  #56  
Old 08-28-2018, 07:11 PM
rem338win's Avatar
rem338win rem338win is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Cowtown, agian
Posts: 2,812
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mulehahn View Post
Wow... glad the suspect is finally being charged but what did I get so wrong. The police can not arrest you without cause. The grounds on which you can be arrested are pretty clearly laid out So either they arrested the wrong person the first time (in which case his life was most certainly negatively affected) or they arrested him again this time, and allowed someone with no regard for human life to walk freely for several weeks because?

So please, tell me politely and concisely which of those statements is false?
Both of them. And it has more to do with your ignorance on how the system and the power of arrest work.

There is a significant difference between arrested and charged and what the grounds are.

Please feel free to use your browser to find Google and discover. Also look up the term "reasonable" and take the definitions to heart.
__________________
The inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing of blessings; the inherent virtue of socialism is the equal sharing of miseries.
- Sir Winston Churchill

A body of men holding themselves accountable to nobody ought not to be trusted by anybody.
-Thomas Paine
Reply With Quote
  #57  
Old 08-28-2018, 09:54 PM
Mulehahn Mulehahn is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 908
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rem338win View Post
Both of them. And it has more to do with your ignorance on how the system and the power of arrest work.

There is a significant difference between arrested and charged and what the grounds are.

Please feel free to use your browser to find Google and discover. Also look up the term "reasonable" and take the definitions to heart.

I am aware of the difference. I am not talking charged, I am simply talking arrested. A brief summary of grounds for arrest:

A police officer can arrest where:

-there is reasonable grounds a person has committed an indictable offence
-there is reasonable grounds a person is about to commit an indictable offence
-a person is committing an indictable offence
-a person has a warrant out for his/her arrest.

Since the initial person was not detained for a previous crime, nor charged with anything at the time there was no warrant for his arrest. Since the arrest was made a significant time after the shooting the person was clearly not in the act of committing the indictable offence. Perhaps they thought he was about to shoot someone else, but if that were true he has clearly proven he is a danger and would that would of allowed for a longer detention so unlikely. That leaves reasonable grounds to believe the person initially arrested was the shooter. Perhaps you should look up reasonable grounds. It is not an easy thing to achieve; cant just go "so and so said he did it" or I have a hunch. It takes serious work. That is why it took so long to make the second arrest.

I truly have nothing against the police. They have a hard job. But in this case they made mistakes in the handling if this case. With that I am out. Hope they have the right person this time and it sticks
Reply With Quote
  #58  
Old 08-28-2018, 11:31 PM
Positrac Positrac is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 3,281
Default

Sounds like some restorative justice is definitely due if he is guilty. Maybe some time in a healing circle, followed by specialized counselling or a treatment program.

Hopefully the courts take into account the atrocities that may have been committed on this young man’s forefathers if he is found guilty...

I’m not on Twitter but has our Prime Minister, the illustrious JT, made a comment on the subject yet?




http://thechronicleherald.ca/canada/...urist-shooting

AIRDRIE, Alta. — A 16-year-old youth has been charged in a southern Alberta highway shooting that left a German tourist with a serious brain injury.
RCMP Cpl. Curtis Peters said the teen, who is from the Stoney Nakoda First Nation but can't be named because of his age, is facing 14 charges, including attempted murder and possession of a prohibited firearm.

"Investigators have located and seized the vehicle and the firearm which are both believed to have been involved in this offence," Peters said Tuesday.
Police wouldn't discuss a possible motive and would only say that they don't believe there was any conflict prior to the single shot being fired.

The 60-year-old tourist was driving in a black Dodge Durango with his family near Morley, Alta., on Aug. 2, when the shooting happened.
Police have said the suspect vehicle was passing the Durango when a shot was fired from the passenger window and into the tourist's SUV.


The Durango crashed into the ditch after the shooting near the Goodstoney Rodeo Centre on Stoney Nakoda land. Three family members who were passengers weren't seriously injured.
The driver survived, but police said he has a long road to recovery.

The injured man was flown back to Germany where surgeons removed the bullet.

"That bullet will be sent here to Canada where it will undergo forensic testing to compare it to the firearm which has been recovered," Peters said.

The German consulate has said the man can't talk or move his right side as a result of the injury. He has a lot of physiotherapy and rehabilitation ahead of him to regain some quality of life, Peters said.

"This has been a life-changing event for him."

Although Peters said there were others in the car with the accused, no other charges are pending and police are not searching for any other suspects.
"We believe this was an isolated incident."

The accused was scheduled to appear in provincial court in Cochrane, Alta., on Tuesday.
Reply With Quote
  #59  
Old 08-29-2018, 04:30 AM
NayNay's Avatar
NayNay NayNay is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Rimbey
Posts: 866
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MrDave View Post
10-15 years ago I worked with the son of the big cop of Red Deer. This young fellow blew up the house he was renting, making pot oil. The news carried the story at 6am. Then the news was suppresses, no more said. Son gets out of burn unit within 3 weeks. Charges never laid, despite a pound of pot laying on the kitchen table.
Town of Rimbey, head cop busted poaching with his service gun and cop car. No charges, just a promotion. His son busted for pot, charges disappeared and the cop who laid the charges transferred to Assumption.
Lots of us have examples.
Which cop in Rimbey did this? When did it happen?
Reply With Quote
  #60  
Old 08-29-2018, 05:40 AM
58thecat's Avatar
58thecat 58thecat is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: At the end of the Thirsty Beaver Trail, Pinsky lake, Alberta.
Posts: 24,497
Default

The kid will get pop tarts for breakfast and a glass of milk.....should have neck stretched and save the pop tarts and milk for respectful youn'uns.
__________________

Be careful when you follow the masses, sometimes the "M" is silent...
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:09 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.