critter cartoon
Friday, July 9, 2010
Tuesday, July 6, 2010
OPP officer, wife face charges
Source:recorder.ca
Posted By NICK GARDINER, STAFF WRITER
An 11-year veteran OPP officer stationed at the Grenville County detachment in Prescott has been suspended from duty after a police raid Sunday at his Augusta Township residence.
Const. Jim Blanchette, 45, was suspended effective Monday as a result of an investigation launched after police received information alleging there was stolen property in his possession, said OPP spokesman Sgt. Kristine Rae.
Rae said the investigation was launched immediately by the OPP professional standards bureau.
During Sunday's raid, police seized several miscellaneous antique items, including furniture, eight unrestricted long guns and one restricted handgun, said Rae.
Blanchette and his wife Robin, 44, have been charged with nine counts of careless storage of a firearm, nine counts of possession of an unregistered weapon and one count of possession of property obtained by crime.
They were released from police custody on conditions and a promise to appear in Brockville court Sept. 24.
Rae said Blanchette is suspended with pay, according to the Police Services Act.
Posted By NICK GARDINER, STAFF WRITER
An 11-year veteran OPP officer stationed at the Grenville County detachment in Prescott has been suspended from duty after a police raid Sunday at his Augusta Township residence.
Const. Jim Blanchette, 45, was suspended effective Monday as a result of an investigation launched after police received information alleging there was stolen property in his possession, said OPP spokesman Sgt. Kristine Rae.
Rae said the investigation was launched immediately by the OPP professional standards bureau.
During Sunday's raid, police seized several miscellaneous antique items, including furniture, eight unrestricted long guns and one restricted handgun, said Rae.
Blanchette and his wife Robin, 44, have been charged with nine counts of careless storage of a firearm, nine counts of possession of an unregistered weapon and one count of possession of property obtained by crime.
They were released from police custody on conditions and a promise to appear in Brockville court Sept. 24.
Rae said Blanchette is suspended with pay, according to the Police Services Act.
Saturday, July 3, 2010
Officer charged after prisoner roughed up: SIU
Source:The Toronto Sun
By KENNETH JACKSON, QMI Agency
OTTAWA - A Hawkesbury OPP officer has been charged with assault causing bodily harm after a prisoner was roughed up while in a cell in March, the Special Investigation Unit said Friday.
A 21-year-old man was searched by an officer while walking in the Vankleek Hill area March 20.
He was arrested for reasons that were not made available Friday and lodged in a cell.
During this time, "there was an interaction between an officer and the man" leaving the man with serious injuries.
Const. Jean Philippe Mathieu is charge with one count of assault causing bodily harm.
The officer is required to appear in court in L'Orignal on Aug. 4.
The SIU said it will not comment on the case because it's now before the courts.
The SIU is an arm's length agency that investigates reports involving police where there has been death, serious injury or allegations of sexual assault.
By KENNETH JACKSON, QMI Agency
OTTAWA - A Hawkesbury OPP officer has been charged with assault causing bodily harm after a prisoner was roughed up while in a cell in March, the Special Investigation Unit said Friday.
A 21-year-old man was searched by an officer while walking in the Vankleek Hill area March 20.
He was arrested for reasons that were not made available Friday and lodged in a cell.
During this time, "there was an interaction between an officer and the man" leaving the man with serious injuries.
Const. Jean Philippe Mathieu is charge with one count of assault causing bodily harm.
The officer is required to appear in court in L'Orignal on Aug. 4.
The SIU said it will not comment on the case because it's now before the courts.
The SIU is an arm's length agency that investigates reports involving police where there has been death, serious injury or allegations of sexual assault.
Thursday, July 1, 2010
Peel Police slammed in beating Hamilton suspect
Source: The Spec
July 01, 2010
Tracey Tyler
Torstar News Service
The Ontario Court of Appeal has condemned the “horrendous” conduct of two Peel Region police officers who beat a Hamilton man suspected in a string of Mississauga home invasions, leaving him with a broken jaw and permanent disability.
Jason Tran said the officers who were transporting him to a Peel police station back in 2003 had warned him it would be “the hard way” if he asserted his right to silence and refused to provide a statement.
His decision to follow his lawyer’s advice and say nothing left him with a broken jaw and headaches that still persist.
“Regardless of whether the officers abused Tran to obtain a confession or for some other reason, the essential fact is that they beat him up,” Justice Gloria Epstein said in a decision released late Wednesday.
“Their conduct was despicable regardless of its motivation.”
The court called it shocking no disciplinary action has ever been taken against the officers, who tried to cover up the incident and lied about it later in court.
A three-judge appeal panel also had harsh words for the Crown, for appearing to shrug off the incident after a trial judge concluded Tran was severely beaten and rejected the officers’ story about how it was that he ended up beaten and bloodied in a police interview room.
Justice Michael Tulloch ruled during a pre-trial motion in 2006 that Constable Will Vander Wier had delivered the blow to Tran’s jaw
After the judge’s decision, the Crown continued on as if nothing had happened, inviting the officer to remain seated at the counsel table, beside prosecutors, for the trial.
“The Crown’s conduct was evocative of an alignment with the police, notwithstanding the abuse,” said Epstein, with Justices Robert Sharpe and Janet Simmons agreeing.
The appeal court said the only remedy was to enter a stay of proceedings, effectively quashing Tran’s conviction for conspiracy to commit robbery.
Tran, whose jaw had to be wired shut, was so badly injured that he now bites himself when he eats, has a sore jaw and loose teeth and suffers migraines.
Yet the appeal court was told during oral arguments in January that, despite Tulloch’s findings of serious brutality, no further action has been taken against the officers.
The province’s Special Investigations Unit had launched an investigation, but closed the file without charges on June 6, 2003 and refused to say why, citing confidentiality.
During Tran’s trial in 2006, a lawyer for the SIU advised the court that the unit’s director, John Sutherland, had concluded there were no reasonable grounds for believing the officer had committed any criminal offence.
“It is difficult to understand why or how those responsible for investigating the incident could continue to maintain that there are no reasonable grounds to proceed,” Epstein said.
Tran was found guilty after a 40-day trial in 2006 of conspiring with eight other people to carry out a series of home invasions in the Mississauga-Hamilton area over three months in 2002.
The court was told they were wearing disguises when they were transported to targeted houses by van.
The robberies were apparently aimed at drug dealers who allegedly owed money. But elderly women and an 8-year-old girl were among the victims.
One woman was sexually assaulted and another was told she would be shot if something went wrong.
A man inside one of the homes had a dollar sign carved into his back with a knife by one of the robbers, who also tried to cut off the man’s finger.
Tran turned himself in to Hamilton police on March 27, 2003.
He said officers began telling him on the drive back to Peel that they didn’t want to hear anything about him not wanting to make a statement. At the police station, he was shoved and punched in the ribs and jaw, he said.
During a pre-trial motion before Tulloch three years later, the officers denied assaulting Tran and claimed to have found him on the floor, handcuffed and bleeding from the mouth, after leaving him alone in the interview room for a while.
One of the officers, identified as John Conway in the appeal court’s decision, testified that it looked as though Tran had bitten his lip and that Tran had explained his presence on the floor by saying, “I don’t know, I guess I fell.”
Tulloch, the trial judge, didn’t believe the officers.
The medical evidence showed Tran’s injuries were consistent with a blow to the jaw, not falling on the floor.
Under the circumstances, Tulloch had only two options: to stay the charges against Tran; or to reduce his sentence in recognition that his Charter rights had been seriously violated.
Tulloch opted for the latter, reducing a 28-month sentence by half and giving Tran 14 months plus three years probation.
The trial judge justified his decision by noting that the charges against Tran were serious and society has an interest in seeing these cases through to the end. While the abuse he suffered cannot be condoned, his beating at the hands of police did not affect the quality of the evidence used against him, Tulloch said.
But the appeal court said that didn’t go far enough.
Society’s interest in prosecuting a case is outweighed this time by the affront to decency and fair play caused by the officers’ serious abuses, it said.
“It is essential for the court to distance itself from this kind of state misconduct — an unwarranted, grave assault causing bodily harm, delayed medical attention, a cover up that included perjury, a prosecutorial response that affected the perception of trial fairness and no effective response,” Epstein said.
“Not to do so would be to leave the impression that it tacitly approves of it.”
The court dismissed appeals brought by two of Tran’s co-accused, Hoa Dang and Robert Johnson.
Peter Zaduk, Tran's trial lawyer, said he has been on bail but under virtual house arrest for the past three years, pending his appeal.
July 01, 2010
Tracey Tyler
Torstar News Service
The Ontario Court of Appeal has condemned the “horrendous” conduct of two Peel Region police officers who beat a Hamilton man suspected in a string of Mississauga home invasions, leaving him with a broken jaw and permanent disability.
Jason Tran said the officers who were transporting him to a Peel police station back in 2003 had warned him it would be “the hard way” if he asserted his right to silence and refused to provide a statement.
His decision to follow his lawyer’s advice and say nothing left him with a broken jaw and headaches that still persist.
“Regardless of whether the officers abused Tran to obtain a confession or for some other reason, the essential fact is that they beat him up,” Justice Gloria Epstein said in a decision released late Wednesday.
“Their conduct was despicable regardless of its motivation.”
The court called it shocking no disciplinary action has ever been taken against the officers, who tried to cover up the incident and lied about it later in court.
A three-judge appeal panel also had harsh words for the Crown, for appearing to shrug off the incident after a trial judge concluded Tran was severely beaten and rejected the officers’ story about how it was that he ended up beaten and bloodied in a police interview room.
Justice Michael Tulloch ruled during a pre-trial motion in 2006 that Constable Will Vander Wier had delivered the blow to Tran’s jaw
After the judge’s decision, the Crown continued on as if nothing had happened, inviting the officer to remain seated at the counsel table, beside prosecutors, for the trial.
“The Crown’s conduct was evocative of an alignment with the police, notwithstanding the abuse,” said Epstein, with Justices Robert Sharpe and Janet Simmons agreeing.
The appeal court said the only remedy was to enter a stay of proceedings, effectively quashing Tran’s conviction for conspiracy to commit robbery.
Tran, whose jaw had to be wired shut, was so badly injured that he now bites himself when he eats, has a sore jaw and loose teeth and suffers migraines.
Yet the appeal court was told during oral arguments in January that, despite Tulloch’s findings of serious brutality, no further action has been taken against the officers.
The province’s Special Investigations Unit had launched an investigation, but closed the file without charges on June 6, 2003 and refused to say why, citing confidentiality.
During Tran’s trial in 2006, a lawyer for the SIU advised the court that the unit’s director, John Sutherland, had concluded there were no reasonable grounds for believing the officer had committed any criminal offence.
“It is difficult to understand why or how those responsible for investigating the incident could continue to maintain that there are no reasonable grounds to proceed,” Epstein said.
Tran was found guilty after a 40-day trial in 2006 of conspiring with eight other people to carry out a series of home invasions in the Mississauga-Hamilton area over three months in 2002.
The court was told they were wearing disguises when they were transported to targeted houses by van.
The robberies were apparently aimed at drug dealers who allegedly owed money. But elderly women and an 8-year-old girl were among the victims.
One woman was sexually assaulted and another was told she would be shot if something went wrong.
A man inside one of the homes had a dollar sign carved into his back with a knife by one of the robbers, who also tried to cut off the man’s finger.
Tran turned himself in to Hamilton police on March 27, 2003.
He said officers began telling him on the drive back to Peel that they didn’t want to hear anything about him not wanting to make a statement. At the police station, he was shoved and punched in the ribs and jaw, he said.
During a pre-trial motion before Tulloch three years later, the officers denied assaulting Tran and claimed to have found him on the floor, handcuffed and bleeding from the mouth, after leaving him alone in the interview room for a while.
One of the officers, identified as John Conway in the appeal court’s decision, testified that it looked as though Tran had bitten his lip and that Tran had explained his presence on the floor by saying, “I don’t know, I guess I fell.”
Tulloch, the trial judge, didn’t believe the officers.
The medical evidence showed Tran’s injuries were consistent with a blow to the jaw, not falling on the floor.
Under the circumstances, Tulloch had only two options: to stay the charges against Tran; or to reduce his sentence in recognition that his Charter rights had been seriously violated.
Tulloch opted for the latter, reducing a 28-month sentence by half and giving Tran 14 months plus three years probation.
The trial judge justified his decision by noting that the charges against Tran were serious and society has an interest in seeing these cases through to the end. While the abuse he suffered cannot be condoned, his beating at the hands of police did not affect the quality of the evidence used against him, Tulloch said.
But the appeal court said that didn’t go far enough.
Society’s interest in prosecuting a case is outweighed this time by the affront to decency and fair play caused by the officers’ serious abuses, it said.
“It is essential for the court to distance itself from this kind of state misconduct — an unwarranted, grave assault causing bodily harm, delayed medical attention, a cover up that included perjury, a prosecutorial response that affected the perception of trial fairness and no effective response,” Epstein said.
“Not to do so would be to leave the impression that it tacitly approves of it.”
The court dismissed appeals brought by two of Tran’s co-accused, Hoa Dang and Robert Johnson.
Peter Zaduk, Tran's trial lawyer, said he has been on bail but under virtual house arrest for the past three years, pending his appeal.
Monday, June 28, 2010
McGuinty won’t say why cabinet passed law in secret to give police more powers
Source: The Spec
June 28, 2010
TORONTO — There was lots of second-guessing of police actions Monday following violent G20 protests, but some of the debate focused on moves by the Ontario cabinet that critics said suspended civil liberties in Toronto and kept the new law secret.
Opposition parties and civil libertarians were outraged the Liberal cabinet gave police extra powers to question, search and detain people near the G20 fences, and then failed to inform the public until it was too late to mount a court challenge.
“The secret law was inappropriate (and) the use of mass arrests as a tool to eradicate or find 50 to 100 looters is not appropriate,” said Nathalie Des Rosiers of the Canadian Civil Liberties Association.
“It’s unconstitutional.”
Ontario Premier Dalton McGuinty has so far refused to explain why his cabinet felt it had to pass the law in secret and keep it secret.
The decision to update the 70-year-old Public Works Protection Act for the first time ever — extending rules that normally govern court houses to portions of downtown Toronto — was done because of a special request from police, McGuinty said last week.
However, the premier still hasn’t said why the decision was taken in secret by a cabinet committee without any debate in the legislature, which was sitting at the time.
The Opposition said it understood the need for police to have resources to deal with “thugs” intent on committing violence during the G20, but also wondered why the law hadn’t been made public.
“I’d have a lot more respect for Premier McGuinty if he had the courage to let the public know that the law had changed,” said Progressive Conservative Leader Tim Hudak.
“To keep that secret in a cabinet discussion and not discuss it in the legislature, was slippery and cowardly.”
Toronto Mayor David Miller expressed his frustration on the weekend that the province had not made the new law public.
Instead, the premier’s office on Monday referred reporters to a newspaper ad with the headline: What you need to know about the G20 summit.
While the ad talks about restrictions to people who want to enter the secured summit area, it makes no mention of the special powers given to police to arrest people during the G20 week.
The government said Monday that the law was “not about police powers but about property,” and merely extended the Public Works Protection Act to specific areas within the G20 security zone.
Reports of expanded police powers to arrest and detain became public knowledge Friday — weeks after the Cabinet quietly passed the regulatory change — after a protester was arrested outside the security zone.
Throughout the weekend there were reports of police stopping people throughout downtown Toronto — often in areas nowhere near the G20 fences — demanding identification and to search bags and backpacks.
The Civil Liberties Association said the secret law played a factor when police decided to make mass arrests after cars were set on fire and windows smashed during Saturday’s G20 protests.
“I think it was one of the aspects (driving police behaviour),” said Des Rosiers.
“They got frustrated and angry when some of the looting and destruction was taking place and the message was they had to catch these 50 or so Black Bloc kids and they forgot about everything else.”
Amnesty International also expressed concerns about a “curtailment of civil liberties” and demanded the federal and Ontario governments co-operate in launching an independent review of the security measures put in place for the G8 and G20 summits.
There was lots of second-guessing of police actions Monday following the sometimes violent G20 protests on the weekend, but some of the debate focused on moves by the Ontario cabinet that critics say suspended civil liberties in Toronto and kept the new law secret.
Opposition parties and civil libertarians were outraged the Liberal cabinet gave police extra powers to question, search and detain people near the G20 fences, and then failed to inform the public until it was too late to mount a court challenge.
“The secret law was inappropriate (and) the use of mass arrests as a tool to eradicate or find 50 to 100 looters is not appropriate,” said Nathalie Des Rosiers of the Canadian Civil Liberties Association.
“It’s unconstitutional.”
June 28, 2010
TORONTO — There was lots of second-guessing of police actions Monday following violent G20 protests, but some of the debate focused on moves by the Ontario cabinet that critics said suspended civil liberties in Toronto and kept the new law secret.
Opposition parties and civil libertarians were outraged the Liberal cabinet gave police extra powers to question, search and detain people near the G20 fences, and then failed to inform the public until it was too late to mount a court challenge.
“The secret law was inappropriate (and) the use of mass arrests as a tool to eradicate or find 50 to 100 looters is not appropriate,” said Nathalie Des Rosiers of the Canadian Civil Liberties Association.
“It’s unconstitutional.”
Ontario Premier Dalton McGuinty has so far refused to explain why his cabinet felt it had to pass the law in secret and keep it secret.
The decision to update the 70-year-old Public Works Protection Act for the first time ever — extending rules that normally govern court houses to portions of downtown Toronto — was done because of a special request from police, McGuinty said last week.
However, the premier still hasn’t said why the decision was taken in secret by a cabinet committee without any debate in the legislature, which was sitting at the time.
The Opposition said it understood the need for police to have resources to deal with “thugs” intent on committing violence during the G20, but also wondered why the law hadn’t been made public.
“I’d have a lot more respect for Premier McGuinty if he had the courage to let the public know that the law had changed,” said Progressive Conservative Leader Tim Hudak.
“To keep that secret in a cabinet discussion and not discuss it in the legislature, was slippery and cowardly.”
Toronto Mayor David Miller expressed his frustration on the weekend that the province had not made the new law public.
Instead, the premier’s office on Monday referred reporters to a newspaper ad with the headline: What you need to know about the G20 summit.
While the ad talks about restrictions to people who want to enter the secured summit area, it makes no mention of the special powers given to police to arrest people during the G20 week.
The government said Monday that the law was “not about police powers but about property,” and merely extended the Public Works Protection Act to specific areas within the G20 security zone.
Reports of expanded police powers to arrest and detain became public knowledge Friday — weeks after the Cabinet quietly passed the regulatory change — after a protester was arrested outside the security zone.
Throughout the weekend there were reports of police stopping people throughout downtown Toronto — often in areas nowhere near the G20 fences — demanding identification and to search bags and backpacks.
The Civil Liberties Association said the secret law played a factor when police decided to make mass arrests after cars were set on fire and windows smashed during Saturday’s G20 protests.
“I think it was one of the aspects (driving police behaviour),” said Des Rosiers.
“They got frustrated and angry when some of the looting and destruction was taking place and the message was they had to catch these 50 or so Black Bloc kids and they forgot about everything else.”
Amnesty International also expressed concerns about a “curtailment of civil liberties” and demanded the federal and Ontario governments co-operate in launching an independent review of the security measures put in place for the G8 and G20 summits.
There was lots of second-guessing of police actions Monday following the sometimes violent G20 protests on the weekend, but some of the debate focused on moves by the Ontario cabinet that critics say suspended civil liberties in Toronto and kept the new law secret.
Opposition parties and civil libertarians were outraged the Liberal cabinet gave police extra powers to question, search and detain people near the G20 fences, and then failed to inform the public until it was too late to mount a court challenge.
“The secret law was inappropriate (and) the use of mass arrests as a tool to eradicate or find 50 to 100 looters is not appropriate,” said Nathalie Des Rosiers of the Canadian Civil Liberties Association.
“It’s unconstitutional.”
Friday, June 25, 2010
Stunt was no joke
Source: Barrie Examiner
Mr. Lahey's grand entrance into downtown Barrie played out in true Trailer Park Boysstyle.
One person pulled a foolish prank and another got a ticket.
John Dunsworth, 64, who plays Jim Lahey, the deranged trailer park supervisor on the show, was seen car-surfing down Dunlop Street on route to an autograph session.
Sadly, his improv move left 17-year-old Kyle Panezutti with charges, and nearly cost him his licence and wheels.
"That kid had nothing to do with what I did. I just jumped up on his car, kind of improv, and I didn't mean for him to get in trouble," an upset Dunsworth toldThe Barrie ExaminerMonday. "I was just there for an autograph session, we played a gig up the street at Yuk Yuks."
Dunsworth was headed to Liquid Chrome, a water-pipe and lighter superstore, to meet fans and sign posters, and decided it'd be funny to hitch a ride on Panezutti's black GMC Jimmy.
Then, he had a performance with co-star Randy (Patrick Roach) at the Barrie comedy club that night.
He said the stunt wasn't planned and Panezutti didn't know it was coming. "I want people to know he (Panezutti) doesn't know me. I don't know him," Dunsworth said.
Panezutti can second that. The young man said he was merely sitting in traffic, heading down to hopefully catch a glimpse of Mr. Lahey.
But, he didn't expect to have him perched on his mom's SUV.
"I watch (Trailer Park Boys) a lot, and my buddy and I went down to see if we could meet him (Dunsworth) and get a picture," Panezutti said. "I stopped at a light near Liquid Chrome and saw him and said 'Hi' to him. Then, suddenly, I felt someone jump up on top of my car.
"I thought he'd just jump back off, but he just stayed there," he added. "But I was stopped. I wasn't driving fast down the street with him up there."
Jiri Kusak, Liquid Chrome's district manager, said the incident, and Dunsworth's presence, drew a big crowd at his store from 2 p.m. to 4 p.m.
"He (Dunsworth) actually climbed up on some guy's car and car-surfed, before being escorted into our store," Kusak said, with a laugh. "It was pretty funny. I'm guessing there were 300 people there. He drew a great crowd."
Kusak said the crowd loved the stunt, and pictures of it were actually posted on Liquid Chrome's Facebook page.
While Dunsworth insists the stunt was his fault and his idea, a nearby Barrie police officer thought otherwise. He initially charged Panezutti with stunt driving, but later lowered it to careless driving under the Highway Traffic Act.
Panezutti and his mother, Pandy Stoppert, are livid, and feel the charges should be dropped due to the joking nature of the stunt.
But Barrie Police Chief Wayne Frechette said he believes the charge was necessary.
"It's about him committing a driving offence. If I'm driving, and some guy's on my roof, I'm still the one committing the offence," Frechette said. "We're not looking to charge the other guy, on the car. I don't think we can charge him. There's no charge for stupidity.
"The officer probably talked to that guy, and I really question that guy's (Dunsworth) sanity for doing something like that. But I don't think we were wrong in charging the driver."
Stoppert is furious with Barrie police, and could hardly contain her anger while speaking with The Barrie Examiner, Monday.
"I'm livid with that officer to let this be escalated to this point," the Barrie mom said. "It started out as something weird happening, and has caused so much grief and expense. I'm still trying to get this charge abolished.
"Tell me, how is he responsib
le for an unknown person jumping on his car? I can't grasp this," she added. "I'm still in shock and really frustrated over this."
Stoppert said she actually met with Dunsworth and he accompanied her and her son to the Barrie police station Monday morning.
"He went with us and told the police it wasn't Kyle's fault," she said. "He paid the towing fee for my car, and he said he's willing to pay our legal fees when we go to court.
"He even gave Kyle and his buddy free VIP passes to the show Sunday night and he got up on stage and explained what happened to the crowd," she added.
Frechette said although the charge has been laid, there might still be some hope for Panezutti.
"He (Dunsworth) can, if he wishes, come to Barrie court and testify on the kid's behalf, maybe the judge will believe him and go easy on him," Frechette said. "Maybe it won't make any difference. You never know."
That isn't enough for Stoppert, who wants her son's name cleared. But she could see one silver lining.
"The only thing that saved Kyle is them dropping the charge, which got him his license and his car back today," she said.
ncruickshank @ thebarrieexaminer.co m
Article ID# 2572378
Mr. Lahey's grand entrance into downtown Barrie played out in true Trailer Park Boysstyle.
One person pulled a foolish prank and another got a ticket.
John Dunsworth, 64, who plays Jim Lahey, the deranged trailer park supervisor on the show, was seen car-surfing down Dunlop Street on route to an autograph session.
Sadly, his improv move left 17-year-old Kyle Panezutti with charges, and nearly cost him his licence and wheels.
"That kid had nothing to do with what I did. I just jumped up on his car, kind of improv, and I didn't mean for him to get in trouble," an upset Dunsworth toldThe Barrie ExaminerMonday. "I was just there for an autograph session, we played a gig up the street at Yuk Yuks."
Dunsworth was headed to Liquid Chrome, a water-pipe and lighter superstore, to meet fans and sign posters, and decided it'd be funny to hitch a ride on Panezutti's black GMC Jimmy.
Then, he had a performance with co-star Randy (Patrick Roach) at the Barrie comedy club that night.
He said the stunt wasn't planned and Panezutti didn't know it was coming. "I want people to know he (Panezutti) doesn't know me. I don't know him," Dunsworth said.
Panezutti can second that. The young man said he was merely sitting in traffic, heading down to hopefully catch a glimpse of Mr. Lahey.
But, he didn't expect to have him perched on his mom's SUV.
"I watch (Trailer Park Boys) a lot, and my buddy and I went down to see if we could meet him (Dunsworth) and get a picture," Panezutti said. "I stopped at a light near Liquid Chrome and saw him and said 'Hi' to him. Then, suddenly, I felt someone jump up on top of my car.
"I thought he'd just jump back off, but he just stayed there," he added. "But I was stopped. I wasn't driving fast down the street with him up there."
Jiri Kusak, Liquid Chrome's district manager, said the incident, and Dunsworth's presence, drew a big crowd at his store from 2 p.m. to 4 p.m.
"He (Dunsworth) actually climbed up on some guy's car and car-surfed, before being escorted into our store," Kusak said, with a laugh. "It was pretty funny. I'm guessing there were 300 people there. He drew a great crowd."
Kusak said the crowd loved the stunt, and pictures of it were actually posted on Liquid Chrome's Facebook page.
While Dunsworth insists the stunt was his fault and his idea, a nearby Barrie police officer thought otherwise. He initially charged Panezutti with stunt driving, but later lowered it to careless driving under the Highway Traffic Act.
Panezutti and his mother, Pandy Stoppert, are livid, and feel the charges should be dropped due to the joking nature of the stunt.
But Barrie Police Chief Wayne Frechette said he believes the charge was necessary.
"It's about him committing a driving offence. If I'm driving, and some guy's on my roof, I'm still the one committing the offence," Frechette said. "We're not looking to charge the other guy, on the car. I don't think we can charge him. There's no charge for stupidity.
"The officer probably talked to that guy, and I really question that guy's (Dunsworth) sanity for doing something like that. But I don't think we were wrong in charging the driver."
Stoppert is furious with Barrie police, and could hardly contain her anger while speaking with The Barrie Examiner, Monday.
"I'm livid with that officer to let this be escalated to this point," the Barrie mom said. "It started out as something weird happening, and has caused so much grief and expense. I'm still trying to get this charge abolished.
"Tell me, how is he responsib
le for an unknown person jumping on his car? I can't grasp this," she added. "I'm still in shock and really frustrated over this."
Stoppert said she actually met with Dunsworth and he accompanied her and her son to the Barrie police station Monday morning.
"He went with us and told the police it wasn't Kyle's fault," she said. "He paid the towing fee for my car, and he said he's willing to pay our legal fees when we go to court.
"He even gave Kyle and his buddy free VIP passes to the show Sunday night and he got up on stage and explained what happened to the crowd," she added.
Frechette said although the charge has been laid, there might still be some hope for Panezutti.
"He (Dunsworth) can, if he wishes, come to Barrie court and testify on the kid's behalf, maybe the judge will believe him and go easy on him," Frechette said. "Maybe it won't make any difference. You never know."
That isn't enough for Stoppert, who wants her son's name cleared. But she could see one silver lining.
"The only thing that saved Kyle is them dropping the charge, which got him his license and his car back today," she said.
ncruickshank @ thebarrieexaminer.co m
Article ID# 2572378
Officers charged for assault on trail
Source:Enterprise-Bulletin
Posted By SHAWN GIILCK
Two Collingwood OPP officers have been charged with assaulting a woman on the Black Ash Creek Trail.
The alleged incident occurred June 1, and OPP officials -- including Collingwood OPP detachment commander Inspector John Trude -- were tight-lipped about the details Wednesday.
"The complaint was investigated by Professional Standards, and as the matter is before the courts, I have no further comment other than the information released in the original press release," Trude stated in an email to the Enterprise-Bulletin.
According to a news release from central region media relations officer Const. Peter Leon, the OPP's Professional Standards Bureau charged two members of the Collingwood OPP detachment this morning following the investigation of an incident that occurred while both officers were off-duty.
Provincial Const. Jeremy Shiffman, 38, a five-year member of the OPP, and Provincial Const. Ashley Plumb, 26, a three-year member of the OPP have each been charged with assault.
According to police, on the morning of June 1, a 34-year-old Collingwood woman was out walking along the Black Ash Trail. At the same time, the two off-duty officers were running along the trail when a physical altercation occurred between them and the woman.
Leon said the Professional Standards Bureau commenced an investigation immediately.
Both Shiffman and Plumb are apparently avid long-distance runners, having appeared in many races around Ontario, according to an Internet search. Little else is known about them.
In a telephone interview, Leon declined to provide more details on the incident, saying the matter was "before the courts."
"I can't speak to specific details," he told theEnterprise-Bulletin.
"Once the complaint was received it was immediately investigated," he added. "The officers were placed on administrative duties once the OPP became aware of the incident and will remain working in this capacity until the conclusion of the court case."
Both Shiffman and Plumb are scheduled to appear at the Ontario Court of Justice in Collingwood on July 20
Posted By SHAWN GIILCK
Two Collingwood OPP officers have been charged with assaulting a woman on the Black Ash Creek Trail.
The alleged incident occurred June 1, and OPP officials -- including Collingwood OPP detachment commander Inspector John Trude -- were tight-lipped about the details Wednesday.
"The complaint was investigated by Professional Standards, and as the matter is before the courts, I have no further comment other than the information released in the original press release," Trude stated in an email to the Enterprise-Bulletin.
According to a news release from central region media relations officer Const. Peter Leon, the OPP's Professional Standards Bureau charged two members of the Collingwood OPP detachment this morning following the investigation of an incident that occurred while both officers were off-duty.
Provincial Const. Jeremy Shiffman, 38, a five-year member of the OPP, and Provincial Const. Ashley Plumb, 26, a three-year member of the OPP have each been charged with assault.
According to police, on the morning of June 1, a 34-year-old Collingwood woman was out walking along the Black Ash Trail. At the same time, the two off-duty officers were running along the trail when a physical altercation occurred between them and the woman.
Leon said the Professional Standards Bureau commenced an investigation immediately.
Both Shiffman and Plumb are apparently avid long-distance runners, having appeared in many races around Ontario, according to an Internet search. Little else is known about them.
In a telephone interview, Leon declined to provide more details on the incident, saying the matter was "before the courts."
"I can't speak to specific details," he told theEnterprise-Bulletin.
"Once the complaint was received it was immediately investigated," he added. "The officers were placed on administrative duties once the OPP became aware of the incident and will remain working in this capacity until the conclusion of the court case."
Both Shiffman and Plumb are scheduled to appear at the Ontario Court of Justice in Collingwood on July 20
Police officer charged with child porn
Source: Brantfordexpositor.ca
Posted By JOE BELANGER, QMI Agency
London police have charged a Brantford police officer -- already facing Police Act charges -- with possession of child pornography.
Police said the man was arrested Monday and the investigation was launched after police received a complaint about child pornography on his computer.
A source said the officer lived in London at the time of the offence, but no other details were immediately available.
Timothy McPhee, 34 years, of Woodstock is charged with possession of child pornography.
McPhee, a constable, is scheduled to face a disciplinary hearing on a Police Act charge of insubordination on July 27.
A spokesperson for Brantford police could not immediately be reached for comment, although a press release is expected to be issued later today.
Police allege McPhee accessed the Canadian Police Information Centre, or CPIC, on more than one occasion for personal reasons between Oct. 28, 2009 and Jan. 11, 2010.
CPIC is the confidential, online police information system about criminals and crimes. It is illegal to access the system unless related to an investigation or in the performance of an officer's duties.
Posted By JOE BELANGER, QMI Agency
London police have charged a Brantford police officer -- already facing Police Act charges -- with possession of child pornography.
Police said the man was arrested Monday and the investigation was launched after police received a complaint about child pornography on his computer.
A source said the officer lived in London at the time of the offence, but no other details were immediately available.
Timothy McPhee, 34 years, of Woodstock is charged with possession of child pornography.
McPhee, a constable, is scheduled to face a disciplinary hearing on a Police Act charge of insubordination on July 27.
A spokesperson for Brantford police could not immediately be reached for comment, although a press release is expected to be issued later today.
Police allege McPhee accessed the Canadian Police Information Centre, or CPIC, on more than one occasion for personal reasons between Oct. 28, 2009 and Jan. 11, 2010.
CPIC is the confidential, online police information system about criminals and crimes. It is illegal to access the system unless related to an investigation or in the performance of an officer's duties.
Thursday, June 24, 2010
Hamilton police officers face assault charges
Source: The Spec
June 24, 2010
By Nicole O’Reilly
A Hamilton police officer charged with impaired driving last month is now facing threatening and assault charges following an incident in a Cambridge bar that preceded the impaired driving incident.
A second officer, who was also in the bar on May 30, has also been charged with assault with a weapon.
Both officers were off duty at the time, and have since been suspended from front-line patrol duties with Hamilton police, said Sergeant Terri-Lynn Collings.
Waterloo Regional police spokesperson Olaf Heinzel said he could not elaborate on the disturbance in the bar, as the matter is before the courts.
The impaired charges against Kevin Farrell, 26, were laid immediately after he was pulled over around 1:30 a.m. Heinzel said an investigation in to the preceding bar incident ensued, leading to the charges announced today.
The two-year member of the Hamilton police and Stoney Creek resident now also faces charges of uttering threats to cause death or bodily harm and assault.
Caitriona Sabatini, 26, of Stoney Creek and a three-year member of the police service is charged with assault with a weapon.
Farrell was scheduled to appear in a Cambridge court today on the impaired driving charges. On today’s charges he was released on a promise to appear Aug. 19.
Sabatini was also released on a promise to appear Aug. 26.
noreilly@thespec.com
905-526-3199
June 24, 2010
By Nicole O’Reilly
A Hamilton police officer charged with impaired driving last month is now facing threatening and assault charges following an incident in a Cambridge bar that preceded the impaired driving incident.
A second officer, who was also in the bar on May 30, has also been charged with assault with a weapon.
Both officers were off duty at the time, and have since been suspended from front-line patrol duties with Hamilton police, said Sergeant Terri-Lynn Collings.
Waterloo Regional police spokesperson Olaf Heinzel said he could not elaborate on the disturbance in the bar, as the matter is before the courts.
The impaired charges against Kevin Farrell, 26, were laid immediately after he was pulled over around 1:30 a.m. Heinzel said an investigation in to the preceding bar incident ensued, leading to the charges announced today.
The two-year member of the Hamilton police and Stoney Creek resident now also faces charges of uttering threats to cause death or bodily harm and assault.
Caitriona Sabatini, 26, of Stoney Creek and a three-year member of the police service is charged with assault with a weapon.
Farrell was scheduled to appear in a Cambridge court today on the impaired driving charges. On today’s charges he was released on a promise to appear Aug. 19.
Sabatini was also released on a promise to appear Aug. 26.
noreilly@thespec.com
905-526-3199
Special constable charged with assaulting person in custody
Source: The Spec
June 24, 2010
Nicole O’Reilly
Hamilton Spectator
A Niagara Regional police special constable is facing assault charges following an incident with a person in custody.
The incident occurred April 27 when the male special constable was working in the Niagara Falls holding cell.
Police have not released any details of the incident, other than to say the 10-year police services employee was charged with assault today.
Detectives from Niagara’s policing standards unit investigated this matter.
The special constable is suspended from duty with pay while awaiting disposition.
He has been released from police custody and is scheduled to appear in a Niagara court on Aug. 20.
noreilly@thespec.com
905-526-3199
June 24, 2010
Nicole O’Reilly
Hamilton Spectator
A Niagara Regional police special constable is facing assault charges following an incident with a person in custody.
The incident occurred April 27 when the male special constable was working in the Niagara Falls holding cell.
Police have not released any details of the incident, other than to say the 10-year police services employee was charged with assault today.
Detectives from Niagara’s policing standards unit investigated this matter.
The special constable is suspended from duty with pay while awaiting disposition.
He has been released from police custody and is scheduled to appear in a Niagara court on Aug. 20.
noreilly@thespec.com
905-526-3199
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
No more taxes after HST...I promise!
They had No Choice!
They wore these or I took away thier toys for 7 days!
No kidding!
"Damn Street Racer"pays with Brusies
