Another booze cruising police officer, a police officer that can seize the automobile your driving for SEVEN days for allegedly anything he deems to be a stunt, before any court date, thanks to car crushing, bicycle crushing, whatever way you want to look a it, Michael Bryant
It's a good thing our police officer's don't make mistakes or we'd have a lot more then ELEVEN THOUSAND damn street racers in Ontario!
.....................................................
October 23, 2009 | 5:39 PM ET
Toronto police have charged one of their own with a drinking and driving offence.
Police allege a speeding car slid onto a front lawn yesterday when the driver tried to brake at an intersection in Toronto's east end.
Const. Matthew Allard, 28, is charged with driving over the legal blood-alcohol limit.
Allard is scheduled to appear in court on Dec. 14.
CBC.CA
critter cartoon
Saturday, October 24, 2009
Wednesday, October 21, 2009
Canada's worst government!
Donna and Daddy Dalton at it again!
...........................................
Terence Corcoran, Financial Post
Published: Saturday, October 17, 2009
Every now and then a province falls into the hands of blundering politicians so inept that their government ends up deserving of the title "Canada's Worst Government." It's a rare award. At any time somebody has to be the worst, but no award for routine bottom-of-the-barrel performance seems necessary. Occasionally, however, the metric of incompetence is so large and conspicuousit demands special recognition. The Liberal regime of Ontario Premier Dalton McGuinty, now slipping into deep deficits that are likely to exceed $30-billion over two years and continue into the future, has hit the tipping point and triggered its candidacy as Canada's Worst Government.
The new deficit outlook, announced yes terday and to be documented in a fiscal statement next week, comes in the wake of Ontario's $1-billion eHealth fiasco. That followed the province's Green Energy Act, a plan to force electricity users to pay 80 cents for a kilowatt hour of solar power and subsidize scores of industrial rent seekers. The province is also a leading promoter of endless nanny state rules and regulations that serve no purpose except to give the premier an opportunity to issue a statement and deliver one of his patented sanctimonious speeches.
Below the radar of media attention, there is more. This is about one of those so-far unrecognized bits of McGuinty Liberal bungling. Next week, the Ontario legislature will begin taking another look at two monster pieces of legislation allegedly aimed at bringing new order to the province's shambling mining legislation. First is Bill 173, the Mining Amendment Act, which among other things is an attempt to bring Aboriginal communities into the administration of the province's scatter-brained mining laws. Second is Bill 191, the Far North Act. It also attempts to bring Aboriginal participaton into decision-making over resource development of Ontario's far north. What these two bills actually do, however, is trample on everybody's property rights, from First Nation rights to the rights of cottage owners caught in the murky legislation that sets out mineral rights across the province.
The only happy campers here are green activists -- theWorld Wildlife Fund, Environmental Defense, various Wildlands groups -- whose concern for property and other individual or corporate rights is as deep and sincere as a beer commercial. Under the Far North Act, all territory north of the 51st parallel -- a 450-square-kilometre mass of land north of Timmins and Thunder Bay that makes up about 40% of the province -- is set to become permanently out of bounds for all exploration and development. About half of that territory, 225,000 square kilometres, will be locked down as conservation lands. The other half will theoretically be open to exploration and development, but nobody looking at Bill 191 sees any hope that any mine or any other kind of development will ever take place.
Only about 24,000 people live in First Nation communities in Ontario's Far North. One of those First Nations, the Nishnawbe Aski, declared its total opposition to Bill 191 after it was introduced last summer. Grand Chief Stan Beardy called for immediate withdrawal of the bill. He said the 225,000-square-kilometre conser vation area, established without consultation or consent, will prevent his people "from achieving economic independence by preventing development needed to build our communities and strengthen the Ontario economy. "
Under Bill 191, in other words, Ontario confiscates half the far north and declares it a no-go zone, killing all development in the conservation area. But not much will happen on the other half of the far north territory under the convoluted "community-based land use planning" system set up under the draconian provisions of the bill. The province's mining groups say the planning structure is a perverse attempt to carry out convoluted legal provisions that guarantee First Nations be consulted before development takes place on Crown lands.
All of this is fallout from the Supreme Court's famous Haida decision and other rulings that force governments in Canada to consult with First Nations when dealing with the possible existence of treaty rights. Whatever the merits of those decisions, Toronto lawyer Neil Smitheman, with Fasken Martineau Du Moulin, says the Ontario government appears to be setting up structures that effectively allows the government to side step its duty and pass the burden of consultation on to the mining and mineral development industry. "To the extent that the legislative ammendments 'download' or delegate to industry what is properly the Crown's duty, the new legislation could be deemed ultra vires, or beyond the scope of the Province's legislative power. "
Industry officials say that under Bill 191 no exploration or development will ever take place in Ontario's far north. Jon Baird, executive director of the Prospectors and Developers Association, said yesterday "no self-respecting MPP should vote for this." Bill 191, and its sister Bill 173 (which applies to territory south of the far north region) grant massive arbitrary power to the Ontario Minister of Natural Resources and bureaucrats. Rulings are not appealable, no hearings need be called, environmental assessments are suspended.
The two bills are making their way through the legislature, with the government using closure to close down debate and bending the rules to get them through the legislative process. The Minister, Donna Cansfield, seems to be carrying out orders, even as nobody supports the bills except the greens and groups like the Canadian Borealis Initiative. They welcome the land set-aside as a new carbon sink, as one of the "largest ecosystems on earth" and the home of caribou and other wildlife.
The mining industry may not like that. On the other hand, the Canadian Mining Association is a member of the Canadian Borealis Initiative. No wonder Ontario's far north will soon be out of bounds.
National Post
...........................................
Terence Corcoran, Financial Post
Published: Saturday, October 17, 2009
Every now and then a province falls into the hands of blundering politicians so inept that their government ends up deserving of the title "Canada's Worst Government." It's a rare award. At any time somebody has to be the worst, but no award for routine bottom-of-the-barrel performance seems necessary. Occasionally, however, the metric of incompetence is so large and conspicuousit demands special recognition. The Liberal regime of Ontario Premier Dalton McGuinty, now slipping into deep deficits that are likely to exceed $30-billion over two years and continue into the future, has hit the tipping point and triggered its candidacy as Canada's Worst Government.
The new deficit outlook, announced yes terday and to be documented in a fiscal statement next week, comes in the wake of Ontario's $1-billion eHealth fiasco. That followed the province's Green Energy Act, a plan to force electricity users to pay 80 cents for a kilowatt hour of solar power and subsidize scores of industrial rent seekers. The province is also a leading promoter of endless nanny state rules and regulations that serve no purpose except to give the premier an opportunity to issue a statement and deliver one of his patented sanctimonious speeches.
Below the radar of media attention, there is more. This is about one of those so-far unrecognized bits of McGuinty Liberal bungling. Next week, the Ontario legislature will begin taking another look at two monster pieces of legislation allegedly aimed at bringing new order to the province's shambling mining legislation. First is Bill 173, the Mining Amendment Act, which among other things is an attempt to bring Aboriginal communities into the administration of the province's scatter-brained mining laws. Second is Bill 191, the Far North Act. It also attempts to bring Aboriginal participaton into decision-making over resource development of Ontario's far north. What these two bills actually do, however, is trample on everybody's property rights, from First Nation rights to the rights of cottage owners caught in the murky legislation that sets out mineral rights across the province.
The only happy campers here are green activists -- theWorld Wildlife Fund, Environmental Defense, various Wildlands groups -- whose concern for property and other individual or corporate rights is as deep and sincere as a beer commercial. Under the Far North Act, all territory north of the 51st parallel -- a 450-square-kilometre mass of land north of Timmins and Thunder Bay that makes up about 40% of the province -- is set to become permanently out of bounds for all exploration and development. About half of that territory, 225,000 square kilometres, will be locked down as conservation lands. The other half will theoretically be open to exploration and development, but nobody looking at Bill 191 sees any hope that any mine or any other kind of development will ever take place.
Only about 24,000 people live in First Nation communities in Ontario's Far North. One of those First Nations, the Nishnawbe Aski, declared its total opposition to Bill 191 after it was introduced last summer. Grand Chief Stan Beardy called for immediate withdrawal of the bill. He said the 225,000-square-kilometre conser vation area, established without consultation or consent, will prevent his people "from achieving economic independence by preventing development needed to build our communities and strengthen the Ontario economy. "
Under Bill 191, in other words, Ontario confiscates half the far north and declares it a no-go zone, killing all development in the conservation area. But not much will happen on the other half of the far north territory under the convoluted "community-based land use planning" system set up under the draconian provisions of the bill. The province's mining groups say the planning structure is a perverse attempt to carry out convoluted legal provisions that guarantee First Nations be consulted before development takes place on Crown lands.
All of this is fallout from the Supreme Court's famous Haida decision and other rulings that force governments in Canada to consult with First Nations when dealing with the possible existence of treaty rights. Whatever the merits of those decisions, Toronto lawyer Neil Smitheman, with Fasken Martineau Du Moulin, says the Ontario government appears to be setting up structures that effectively allows the government to side step its duty and pass the burden of consultation on to the mining and mineral development industry. "To the extent that the legislative ammendments 'download' or delegate to industry what is properly the Crown's duty, the new legislation could be deemed ultra vires, or beyond the scope of the Province's legislative power. "
Industry officials say that under Bill 191 no exploration or development will ever take place in Ontario's far north. Jon Baird, executive director of the Prospectors and Developers Association, said yesterday "no self-respecting MPP should vote for this." Bill 191, and its sister Bill 173 (which applies to territory south of the far north region) grant massive arbitrary power to the Ontario Minister of Natural Resources and bureaucrats. Rulings are not appealable, no hearings need be called, environmental assessments are suspended.
The two bills are making their way through the legislature, with the government using closure to close down debate and bending the rules to get them through the legislative process. The Minister, Donna Cansfield, seems to be carrying out orders, even as nobody supports the bills except the greens and groups like the Canadian Borealis Initiative. They welcome the land set-aside as a new carbon sink, as one of the "largest ecosystems on earth" and the home of caribou and other wildlife.
The mining industry may not like that. On the other hand, the Canadian Mining Association is a member of the Canadian Borealis Initiative. No wonder Ontario's far north will soon be out of bounds.
National Post
Tuesday, October 20, 2009
Bryant case put over until mid-November
A Toronto court will hear criminal charges against Ontario's former attorney general Michael Bryant on Nov. 16.
Bryant was charged following an accident that resulted in the death of a bicycle courier, Darcy Allan Sheppard. The case went to court for the first time Monday at a routine procedural hearing, but was put over until the November date.
Bryant himself did not make an appearance, and was represented at the Toronto courtroom by his lawyers.
Bryant is charged with criminal negligence causing death and dangerous driving of a vehicle causing death in the incident in downtown Toronto in late August.
Sheppard, 33, died of head injuries after a car dragged him along a stretch of Toronto's Bloor Street.
The Ontario government has hired top Vancouver criminal lawyer Richard Peck to prosecute the case.
Sarnia officer charged with 2 counts of harassment
The Canadian Press
SARNIA, Ont. — A police officer in Sarnia, Ont. has been charged with two counts of criminal harassment.
Police say they made the arrest Friday night in connection with a domestic incident in nearby Pt. Edward.
Earlier, provincial police said a 46-year-old Sarnia man was arrested without incident.
They said they would not be releasing the name of the accused in order to protect the identity of the victim.
Police say the alleged incident dated back over the past several weeks.
Halton cop charged
October 20, 2009
The Hamilton Spectator
(Oct 20, 2009)
A Halton police officer has been charged with drunk driving.
The constable, a member of the Halton Regional Police Service for 32 years, is charged with impaired operation of a motor vehicle and operation of a motor vehicle with over 80 milligrams of alcohol.
He was charged after an accident at Appleby Line and Mainway in Burlington at 3 a.m. Sunday.
Police say a Burlington woman, 45, was driving south on Appleby when her car collided with one driven by a 52-year-old man.
No one was injured.
Stephen Bate is to appear in court in Milton on Nov. 18.
The Spec
The Hamilton Spectator
(Oct 20, 2009)
A Halton police officer has been charged with drunk driving.
The constable, a member of the Halton Regional Police Service for 32 years, is charged with impaired operation of a motor vehicle and operation of a motor vehicle with over 80 milligrams of alcohol.
He was charged after an accident at Appleby Line and Mainway in Burlington at 3 a.m. Sunday.
Police say a Burlington woman, 45, was driving south on Appleby when her car collided with one driven by a 52-year-old man.
No one was injured.
Stephen Bate is to appear in court in Milton on Nov. 18.
The Spec
Thursday, October 15, 2009
Saturday, October 10, 2009
DiManno: Watch me blow smoke out my ears
The cops and the cig police are blowing smoke out their ass.
That would be spokespeople for the Ontario Provincial Police and tobacco jackboots with the Windsor-Essex County's health unit, co-defenders of a most absurdly autocratic interpretation of the province's antismoking legislation.
The letter of the law is allegedly being followed. In this case, that letter is A, for asinine; B, for bollocks; C, for chicken s--t; D, for duh-duh-dumb; et cetera.
Some poor mock trucker from London, Ont., was issued a $305 ticket on Wednesday for smoking in his rig. A rig, as defined by tobacco tyrants in the health sphere, is a work environment, thus subject to outright banning of nicotine under Ontario's Employment Standards Act.
Cops claim they're just enforcing the law, which has been in place since May 2006, though this particular OPP officer – unidentified – seems most pedantic indeed, pulling over the driver of a trailer-truck who happened to have a cigarette between his lips whilst motoring along Highway 401 near Windsor. Was Smokey Bear trying to make his cop-quota, just bored, or one of those Nico-Nazis?
The trucker has not been named either, though we're all scrambling to track the guy down. The Ontario Trucking Association has also put out the word to its members: Please come forward. "I'm a little surprised he hasn't but it could be that he just wants to stay out of the limelight,'' says David Switzer, association vice-president. "Or maybe he was heading home after being on the road, went to sleep, and doesn't know anything about how this has exploded in the media."
That driver might have a good case for ducking the citation in court, should he choose to fight the fine. The majority of trucking companies in Canada operate in more than one province, thus are not strictly subject to Ontario's antismoking legislation; rather, they fall under the federal Canada Labour Code, which still allows designated smoking and non-smoking areas in a workplace. A driver, especially if the sole occupant of the rig, can designate it a smoking area.
This is a point Switzer makes every time the issue arises, which is a couple of times a month, though he's never heard of a ticket actually being issued, only the warning extended. On those occasions, the association provides a tutorial on the law to bylaw enforcers, many of whom have a poor grasp of the legislative distinctions.
"It's like, whoa, you can't really do that."
Too many assume their authority has no bounds. And, I'd posit, they're bossy dinks by nature.
The antismoking brigade is just about the most self-righteous outfit of crusaders in memory. This movement long ago stopped being about health, as it morphed – more accurately, showed its true colours – into sanctimonious social engineering by diktat. In another era, they would have pounded the drum against booze or knocked the genitals off nude sculptures.
The other day, I was having a dart – yes, I smoke and love it, am not remotely interested in quitting – outside an office building in downtown Toronto and noticed a sign overhead warning that no smoking was allowed within 25 feet of the front entrance. The going-rate for smoker-shunning is nine metres. But this would have put me on the opposite side of the street, in front of another building that likewise forbade smoking on its doorstep. Where am I supposed to stand – on the streetcar tracks? Dead smoker in the middle of the road.
In fact, the sidewalk smoking proscription applies only to medical facilities under provincial law. There is, as yet, no municipal standard in Toronto for any other buildings. Property managers can ask you to move along but they can't demand it. They don't own the sidewalk. There's no bylaw being broken. This, naturally, is not something they want you to know.
And another thing: I'm smoking as I write this column, in my home. I have the luxury of working out of my house, at least in the type-type stage of committing journalism. Smoking helps me focus my thoughts and make deadline.
We are not yet at the pink-lung-doctrine point where smoking in one's home is prohibited – though no doubt headed in that direction.
But a stingy interpretation of Ontario's act might very well consider my house a work area and ditto for the self-employed sector.
They will be coming with their citation pads and pitchforks soon enough. Man the barricades. But stock up on smokes first.
Rosie DiManno usually appears Monday, Wednesday, Friday and Saturday.
Toronto Star
That would be spokespeople for the Ontario Provincial Police and tobacco jackboots with the Windsor-Essex County's health unit, co-defenders of a most absurdly autocratic interpretation of the province's antismoking legislation.
The letter of the law is allegedly being followed. In this case, that letter is A, for asinine; B, for bollocks; C, for chicken s--t; D, for duh-duh-dumb; et cetera.
Some poor mock trucker from London, Ont., was issued a $305 ticket on Wednesday for smoking in his rig. A rig, as defined by tobacco tyrants in the health sphere, is a work environment, thus subject to outright banning of nicotine under Ontario's Employment Standards Act.
Cops claim they're just enforcing the law, which has been in place since May 2006, though this particular OPP officer – unidentified – seems most pedantic indeed, pulling over the driver of a trailer-truck who happened to have a cigarette between his lips whilst motoring along Highway 401 near Windsor. Was Smokey Bear trying to make his cop-quota, just bored, or one of those Nico-Nazis?
The trucker has not been named either, though we're all scrambling to track the guy down. The Ontario Trucking Association has also put out the word to its members: Please come forward. "I'm a little surprised he hasn't but it could be that he just wants to stay out of the limelight,'' says David Switzer, association vice-president. "Or maybe he was heading home after being on the road, went to sleep, and doesn't know anything about how this has exploded in the media."
That driver might have a good case for ducking the citation in court, should he choose to fight the fine. The majority of trucking companies in Canada operate in more than one province, thus are not strictly subject to Ontario's antismoking legislation; rather, they fall under the federal Canada Labour Code, which still allows designated smoking and non-smoking areas in a workplace. A driver, especially if the sole occupant of the rig, can designate it a smoking area.
This is a point Switzer makes every time the issue arises, which is a couple of times a month, though he's never heard of a ticket actually being issued, only the warning extended. On those occasions, the association provides a tutorial on the law to bylaw enforcers, many of whom have a poor grasp of the legislative distinctions.
"It's like, whoa, you can't really do that."
Too many assume their authority has no bounds. And, I'd posit, they're bossy dinks by nature.
The antismoking brigade is just about the most self-righteous outfit of crusaders in memory. This movement long ago stopped being about health, as it morphed – more accurately, showed its true colours – into sanctimonious social engineering by diktat. In another era, they would have pounded the drum against booze or knocked the genitals off nude sculptures.
The other day, I was having a dart – yes, I smoke and love it, am not remotely interested in quitting – outside an office building in downtown Toronto and noticed a sign overhead warning that no smoking was allowed within 25 feet of the front entrance. The going-rate for smoker-shunning is nine metres. But this would have put me on the opposite side of the street, in front of another building that likewise forbade smoking on its doorstep. Where am I supposed to stand – on the streetcar tracks? Dead smoker in the middle of the road.
In fact, the sidewalk smoking proscription applies only to medical facilities under provincial law. There is, as yet, no municipal standard in Toronto for any other buildings. Property managers can ask you to move along but they can't demand it. They don't own the sidewalk. There's no bylaw being broken. This, naturally, is not something they want you to know.
And another thing: I'm smoking as I write this column, in my home. I have the luxury of working out of my house, at least in the type-type stage of committing journalism. Smoking helps me focus my thoughts and make deadline.
We are not yet at the pink-lung-doctrine point where smoking in one's home is prohibited – though no doubt headed in that direction.
But a stingy interpretation of Ontario's act might very well consider my house a work area and ditto for the self-employed sector.
They will be coming with their citation pads and pitchforks soon enough. Man the barricades. But stock up on smokes first.
Rosie DiManno usually appears Monday, Wednesday, Friday and Saturday.
Toronto Star
Friday, October 9, 2009
Police officers to face hearing
Police want more power to save lives and fight crime, they do what they want, when they want, they get caught crossing the line, they loose a rank, a weeks pay, while waiting for the outcome, they are suspended with pay.
These two will get off with a years paid vacation!
.................................................
SHAWN JEFFORDS
The Observer
Two Sarnia officers charged under the Police Services Act could face internal discipline following a hearing next month.
Const. Steven Wyville and Patrick Nahmabin are each charged with two counts of discreditable conduct in relation to a break and enter in the city last year.
Both officers pleaded guilty and received discharges in court last week. The hearing will take place over two days on Oct. 22 and 23 at police headquarters.
“The prosecutor is waiting for all the information from the courts, the judge’s report, things like that,” said Chief Phil Nelson. “It’s just a matter of doing some housekeeping and getting set up for that.”
The officers were charged last year after being unlawfully in a home in which they were looking for Nahmabin’s stolen badge. The discharges left both veteran officers without criminal records.
In the meantime, they remain suspended with pay. The officers could face a range of penalties from suspension, demotion in rank and pay, and even dismissal.
The hearing is open to the public.
“This is an act used on a regular basis to discipline officers,” Nelson said. “It’s part of a provincial statute and how we deal with police labour issues.”
sjeffords@theobserver.ca
The Observer
Durham police officer charged with pointing gun at co-worker
A Durham Regional police officer was suspended and faces three charges after he threatened a fellow officer with his police firearm this week.
Ian Cameron, 37, and another officer were involved in "a physical altercation" on Monday, during which Cameron - who joined the force in 2004 - drew his weapon and threatened the other officer with it. The conflict ended soon after that and no shots were fired. The incident took place at a police station, but out of public view.
Cameron, who was released following a bail hearing Wednesday, was charged with assault, possession of a weapon and pointing a firearm.
The Professional Standards Unit, which deals with matters related to the conduct of police and its services in the area, is handing the investigation.
Canwest News Service
Police officer charged after July car crash
Author: Nicole Million
Date: Oct 07, 2009
An eight-year Ontario Provincial Police veteran has been charged in relation to a single-car crash that happened in July.
On July 12, just before 10:30 p.m., an officer from the Southern Georgian Bay OPP detachment rolled her vehicle on Highway 12 in Tay Township while responding to a report of a suspected impaired driver.
“The police vehicle the officer was operating left the roadway and rolled into the ditch on the north side of Highway 12,” Const. Peter Leon, Central Region media relations officer, stated in a news release.
The officer, who holds the rank of constable, sustained minor injuries at the time. She has been charged with failing to drive in a marked lane.
The collision closed the highway near Triple Bay Road for four-and-a-half hours while technical traffic collision investigators examined the scene.
During the course of the investigation, the officer remained on active duty, noted Leon.
“The officer does not change his or her duties whatsoever. They remain in an active frontline capacity. In this case, it was a Highway Traffic Act charge laid and it doesn’t affect the officer. They can still operate a police vehicle and respond for calls for service.”
Leon noted the charge is the same any member of the public would face under similar circumstances.
“In the big scope of things, this is not a criminal offence in any way,” he said. “As police, we hold members of the public accountable for their actions on the roadways, and we also must expect the same of our (officers).”
nmillion@simcoe.co
Simcoe.com
Date: Oct 07, 2009
An eight-year Ontario Provincial Police veteran has been charged in relation to a single-car crash that happened in July.
On July 12, just before 10:30 p.m., an officer from the Southern Georgian Bay OPP detachment rolled her vehicle on Highway 12 in Tay Township while responding to a report of a suspected impaired driver.
“The police vehicle the officer was operating left the roadway and rolled into the ditch on the north side of Highway 12,” Const. Peter Leon, Central Region media relations officer, stated in a news release.
The officer, who holds the rank of constable, sustained minor injuries at the time. She has been charged with failing to drive in a marked lane.
The collision closed the highway near Triple Bay Road for four-and-a-half hours while technical traffic collision investigators examined the scene.
During the course of the investigation, the officer remained on active duty, noted Leon.
“The officer does not change his or her duties whatsoever. They remain in an active frontline capacity. In this case, it was a Highway Traffic Act charge laid and it doesn’t affect the officer. They can still operate a police vehicle and respond for calls for service.”
Leon noted the charge is the same any member of the public would face under similar circumstances.
“In the big scope of things, this is not a criminal offence in any way,” he said. “As police, we hold members of the public accountable for their actions on the roadways, and we also must expect the same of our (officers).”
nmillion@simcoe.co
Simcoe.com
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
