Sammy Yatim: A Guest Commentary

I received the following as a response to one of my blog posts on Sammy Yatim, the young man gunned down a week ago by the Toronto Police. Anon's comments and insights are more powerful than anything I could have written:

Sammy...
I've wanted die...Only I was to scared to do it myself.
I pushed everyone around me to edge, silently hoping they would save me.
That night on the bus, those girls most likely ridiculed you, pushed you...as you felt you have had enough. New to Toronto, trying to fit in, left home...and nowhere to go. I know what it's like...No one understood...You allowed everyone off the bus. If you wanted to hurt someone, you had plenty opportunity...you did not. You wanted to say your're angry, and had no other means of expressing, I know...I've hurt too.
When the police arrived and you yelled obcenties, I picture myself. "what are you going to do!?" It always escalates. In my past at least. And then I am left feeling..."What have I done" It's as if I black out in rage. I still feel that way when an officer is in my rear view. I have done no wrong, yet feel complete anxiety. That night when confronted by so many officers, you realize you have really done it this time. You know your in trouble and your scared. I know. I know, because I could never control my anger. I know, because at that moment, you come slowly come back to reality.

As I watched you back up, move forward, and unsure of what do. It all seems cloudy. Your still angry, and hoping the other party realizes, I know you new they would never hurt you. You know they were going to calm you. And faced with guns pointed at me, I know I would need somebody to whisper it's okay. You were waiting for that moment, the moment when you could release the knife, as that was your only armour. I could only imagine the thoughts going through your mind. I can remember at my darkest moments of rage, coming back to reality only once I had pushed it too far, I remember thinking..."Gawd...what have I done".

Eighteen is such a young age, and so very tough. So much pain, learning love, life, and mean kids. I am always amazed at the students who say" Hey he went to my school" and shed tears, and the ones who always thought he was such a nice guy, yet probably never spoke to him as he passed in the hall. They gather at the funeral and form huddles of tears, yet while alive he was alone.

We all suffer from mental health, EACH AND EVERY HUMAN.

It's how we deal with it that seperates us from a patient. Some report it, some deal with it, some ignore it, some medicate it. We all have issues in our lives.

It's how each individual handles their stress or depression. I hope other teens feeling left with no other options are confronted with options and not left with death. RIP Sammy.

Sammy Yatim: A Petition From Change.Org

A petition has been established at Change.org. seeking justice for Sammy Yatim. At last count it was closing in on 27,000 signatures. Here is how it reads:

In the early hours of Saturday, July 27, 2013, Sammy Yatim was shot dead by a Toronto Police officer as the 18-year old man stood alone in a stationary TTC street car with a 3-inch knife in his hands. His death has caused an uproar in the community and oridnary people are asking, "Why did Sammy Yatim have to be shot dead by the Police?"

In the last 25 years, a number of people have been shot dead by the Toronto Police who claim to be acting within the law. After every such tragedy, inquiries and inquests are held that make recommendations, but it seems none of these policies and procedures have succeeded in preventing the death of men and women who need help, not harm.

In 1996, a medical student Edmund Yu was shot dead as he sat alone in the back seat of a TTC street car, armed only with a tiny hammer.

Now, Sammy Yatim has been killed by a police officer firing not one or two, but nine bullets and all within a few minutes of his first encounter with the young man who was alone inside a stationary TTC street car.

An inquiry is taking place. However, we fear this inquiry too will end up like earlier such exercises and no will be found responsible for the death of this young troubled man who had all his life ahead of him.

If the police constable who shot Sammy Yatim dead is not charged, once more we will send a message to ordinary citizens that Police forces are above the law.

For the good of communities and for better civilian-police relations, let a court decide whether any laws were broken in the death of Sammy Yatim.

This petition is not to bring disrepute to the fine men and women who serve in the Toronto Police and who we consider the world's finest police force.

Having said that we feel the SIU and the AG of Ontario should intervene in the interest of justice and also to assure the citizenery who feel they have no voice in this matter.

We acknowledge that despite the many videos, we do not know the entire story. However, based on the video and the reaction by Police Chef Bill Blair and Police Chair Alok Mukherjee, where they immediately suspended the officer in question, we feel there is enough evidence for us to conclude that something awfully wrong happenned that resulted in the death of Sammy Yatim.

In view of the above, we feel if an apporpriate charge is not filed against the police constable who caused the death, the citizenry will lose confidence in the legal system and the men and women who have been entrusted to deliver justice.

If you are interested in adding your name to the growing numbers seeking justice, click here.

Sammy Yatim Killing: The Spin Cycle Has Begun

There is no question that the police and their supporters are desperate to 'change the channel' from the murder of Sammy Yatim to the terrible pressures police officers face. As I noted in a blog posting last evening, that organ of the right, The Globe and Mail, started the process with an editorial that can only be described as defensive and patronizing, urging all of us to just calm down.

Last evening, I was watching, and a Critical Incident Support Team member, Sgt Mike McAllister, talked about how devasting it can be for officers who take a civilian's life. To watch the accompanying video, click here.

In today's Star (which, by the way, has been providing excellent coverage of this tragedy) the officer involced in the shooting, Const. James Forcillo, a six-year-veteran of the force, is described by Toronto Police Association president Mike McCormack as distraught. “He’s having a tough time with it.” McCormack said the officer’s family is also “devastated” by the event.

Feelings of sympathy for the officer seem to abound: When asked Tuesday night if Forcillo was devastated by the turn of events, a colleague at 14 Division said: “That’s an understatement.”

Says Forcillo's lawyer, Peter Brauti:

“Like any officer involved in a loss-of-life incident, this officer is devastated,” Brauti said. “All we can do at this point is wait for the investigation into the matter to conclude. It is important that people not rush to judgment in this matter.”

By the way, Brauti said his client has not yet been interviewed by the SIU. He is still reviewing the information provided to him before advising his client whether he should exercise his right to remain silent. He may be devasted, but clearly doesn't necessarily believe that confession is good for the soul.

Meanwhile, perhaps we should limit the word devastated and its variants to Sammy Yatim's family who, for the rest of their lives, must live with the loss inflicted upon them by an officer apparently too quick to shoot and too slow to ask questions.

Sammy Yatim Killing: Once More, The Globe And Mail Is Out Of Step

Thanks to a tweet from Dr.Dawg, I became aware of an odious, but ultimately not very surprising editorial from The Globe and Mail on the shooting of Sammy Yatim. I have written numerous times of how I view the paper as the organ of the establishment and the status quo, as well as why I cancelled my subscription some years ago.

Today's editorial confirms that the decline of the paper is proceeding apace under the sychophantic stewardship of Editor-in-Chief John Stackhouse, a man who abandoned any semblance of journalistic integrity when he failed to fire Margaret Wente for her serial plagiarism.

The editorial essentially says let's all calm down, police have to make split-second decsions, police don't usually fire just one shot because the chances of hitting the 'target' are only about 25%.

Perhaps the following excerpts best catch the flavour and bias of the piece. The bolded parts are mine:

The videos show that the officer fired nine shots toward 18-year-old Sammy Yatim, as the teenager, who had ignored repeated commands to drop a knife he was holding, began moving toward the front steps out of the streetcar. Two officers had their firearms aimed into the streetcar; one fired three shots, there was a pause, and then six more shots were heard.

...But the public should not overreact to the images seen on the Internet before all the facts are known.


Perhaps these on-line commentators say it best as they express their disdain for the Globe's propagandistic piece:

Tom Philip, 9:09 PM on July 29, 2013:

I have been considering cancelling my subscription to The Globe and Mail for some time, chiefly because of the dramatic decline in quality in recent years. This editorial has made the decision for me. The slaying of Sammy Yatim -- no threat to anyone, confined as he was on a streetcar in what amounted to a jail cell on wheels -- was as brutal, callous and ugly a crime as I can recall. Did it not cross the minds of the dozens of police officers as they aimed their 9mm automatic pistols at this boy with a knife that here was someone's child, someone with a father and a mother, sisters and brothers, a young man with his life ahead of him and every right to live that life? In the moments before he so casually gunned his victim down, did it not occur to the officer who fired the fatal shots to display some simple humanity? Spare me the tired bromide about police having to make split-second decisions. The police in this instance had all the time in the world to de-escalate the situation, but without even taking the time to think, opted instead to end it with an overwhelming display of lethal violence. Spare me, as well, the nonsense about allowing the SIU, as gutless and toothless a body as ever existed in this province, to complete its investigation. The proper venue for this case is a court of law, with the evidence presented in public and the officers involved judged by a jury composed of the citizens of Toronto. That is what this editorial ought to be calling for, and what it would have called for before The Globe and Mail and most of the rest of the media in this country became a mealy-mouthed lapdog to power and authority. Sammy Yatim could have been any one of us. He could have been your child or mine. Until justice is done and seen to be done, his death will be a stain on this city and on everyone who wears the uniform of the Toronto Police Service. That's my name up there, by the way. No Internet anonymity for me. Now I'm going upstairs to call the Globe's circulation department. I won't have this rubbish in my home one more day.


And this from KevinBrown2011:

9:18 PM on July 29, 2013

What moron wrote this editorial?

So we should not form any opinion on what is clearly shown in the video until the SIU issues its findings?

The writer tries to justify the number of shots fired when clearly NO shots should have been fired. Also it is obvious that the first 3 shots felled the victim as the officer changed his trajectory and fired 6 more shots while the victim was on the floor. There was no need to fire at the victim when he was injured on the floor the street car. And after filling the young man with lead an officer jumps in and tasers him?

How could anyone believe that the actions of the cops were reasonable and justified?

How, indeed.

New Footage Of Sammy Yatim's Killing

The first shots are fired at about the 55 second mark on the video. They continue after he has fallen, his body jerking with each bullet. Sure looks like an execution to me, given that he clearly posed no threat to anyone, something the video also makes clear:

Standing Up To Police Abuse Of Authority

I remember a story my son told me of being in a coffee shop in Toronto during the notorious 2010 G20 Summit, about which I have written extensively on this blog. Two police officers came into the shop, one of them noticing my son had his smartphone out. He said to him, "You'd better not be filming us," the threat of confiscation being the apparent subtext. I have always thought of that incident as emblematic of the arrogant abuse of authority that was so much in evidence that weekend, abuse that is becoming increasingly common in our country today. It was also a threat with absolutely no legal basis.

In today's Star, Antonia Zerbisias writes about the public's right to document police actions, a right often impeded by police threating videographers with the rather nebulous obstructing justice charge. The issue has become especially germane in light of the police killing of Sammy Yatim, whose death was captured on video. Were it not for the existence of the video, who knows what 'official story' the public would now be hearing about this tragedy?

... there is no law, says Halifax-based lawyer David T.S. Fraser, that stops citizens from taking photographs or video in a public place. That includes shopping malls, airports, retail outlets and subway stations — unless management, not police, prohibit photography.

“I think it’s as close to an unequivocal right as you can get,” insists Fraser, whose practice focuses on privacy legislation. “As long as you’re in a public place, as long as you are not obstructing the police in the execution of their duties, and as long as you are not creating new risks and dangers, then you have the right to photograph and video-record anybody, including the police — and I would say especially the police.

Fraser goes on to say that for the charge of obstructing justice to stick, “You have to actually intend to obstruct —not just be on the sidelines, but actively interfere.

Concludes Fraser: “I would call for citizens to take more pictures of police officers, to make it more normal and make it more difficult for police officers to intimidate individuals.”

I suspect most of us couldn't agree more.

UPDATE: There is a reasonably interesting piece written by Margaret Wente, whose work I normally disdain and seldom read, on the issue in today's Globe.

Murder By Police?

Rarely at a loss for words, I find myself in that state as I think about Sammy Yatim, the 18-year-old killed just after midnight Saturday night aboard a TTC streetccar. As the video posted last evening shows, police, under no apparent threat, opened fire on the teen a few seconds after they ordered him to drop his three-inch bladed knife.

The usual words and phrases, such as outrage, out-of-control police, unnecessary police violence seem wholly inadequate as expressions of digust over what has transpired. I therefore leave the job to the professionals, in this case The Star's Rosie DiManno, who offers her assessment here.

What Does The Toronto Police Force Have In Common With The BART Transit Police Force? UPDATED

The following execution by Bay Area Rapid Transit Police happened in Oakland, California January 1, 2009.

This killing, aboard a Toronto Transit streetcar, was executed by the Toronto police. Any apparent differences between the two videos, other than the fact that the 18-year-old in the second one refused to drop his knife at police command, elude me.

UPDATE: Thanks to The Disaffected Lib for pointing out a Star video in which an eyewitness describes what happened at the streetcar from his perspective.

A Reasonable Doubt?

You decide.

It Certainly Took Him Long Enough

His Mad Face?

Seasoned cynic that I am, I can't help but think that Toronto Police Chief Bill Blair's denunciation of police misbehaviour is little more than a public relations exercise. Almost three years after the G20 debacle, in which over 1000 people were arrested and a mere handful of police hit with the most modest of sanctions for their egregious abuse of authority, the Chief has deemed it prudent to speak to both the public and his own troops on where he stands when 'good' cops go bad.

As reported in today's Star,

An angry Chief Bill Blair is slamming his own officers for “totally unacceptable behaviour,” including turning off dashboard cameras, being untruthful in court and racist remarks.

Included in his video message — which runs about five minutes and shows Blair in full uniform, set against a dark background and speaking directly to the camera — are two short video clips that make examples of individual officers on the force. It’s the first time the chief has used video in such a fashion.

The first clip was captured on a police dashboard camera three years ago, and shows Const. Christian Dobbs repeatedly striking Toronto cook Raymond Costain, who is face down and hidden from view, in front of the King Edward hotel.

I think I would have found this public condemnation much more credible were it coming from another police chief, given that Chief Blair was such an integral party to the abrogation of Charter rights during the G20, concealing, for example, the fact that the so-called emergency laws about 5-meter perimeters around fences were total fiction. This, of course, led to the unlawful searches, seizures and arrests of lawful protesters during that infamous weekend in June of 2010.

A real leader not only 'talks the talk' but also 'walks the walk.' I have seen no evidence of such ambulatory ability on the part of Bill Blair.

Kafka, The Toronto Police, and Toronto Community Housing

"Someone must have been telling lies about Joseph K., for without having done anything wrong he was arrested one fine morning."

- The Trial, by Franz Kafka

Last evening, I made a brief post which included a quotation from George Orwell's 1984, linking it to a story from The Guardian that dealt with the suppression of freedom of expression rights being experienced by some British public servants. Today, he and another literary icon, Franz Kafka, came to mind as I read a story from the Star detailing a witch hunt conducted by the Toronto Community Housing Corporation (TCHC) that resulted in the suspension of six employees, four of whom were ultimately terminated. Indeed, if one were to substitute the word fired for arrested in the above Kafka quotation, one would have a perfect summary of what happened to these workers.

Their problems began in the aftermath of a much publicized incident of racial profiling in which two Toronto police officers, attached to the Toronto Anti-Violence Intervention Strategy (TAVIS), stopped four black youth, ages 15 and 16, in a public housing complex. Exercising his rights, one of the lads refused to answer any questions, and the situation quickly escalated to the point where one of the officers pulled a gun, and the teens were arrested. All of the trumped-up charges, including the standard resisting arrest charge police so frequently use against those who exercise their rights, were eventually dropped.

To the police department's chagrin, someone handed over a copy of the surveillance video to The Star that captured the events, which included an unprovoked assault on one of the youths by the police, as you will see in the video below:

The fact that this video and the original story of the police abuse of authority were published by The Star did not sit well with the resume builders and careerists at TCHC. In what I am sure they deemed a remarkably good use of their well-paid time, they set out to track down the heretics who had caused public embarrassment to the police, apparently more concerned with maintaining a cozy relationship with them than they were with the egregious violation of Charter Rights the video reveals.

To make a long story short, since you can read the details in the above links, interrogations took place, and despite an absence of evidence that anyone had leaked anything to The Star, (indeed, you will see stout denials in today's story by the putative 'culprits') terminations ensured.

The abuse of authority, whether at the hands of police, employers or individuals victimizing other individuals, has always outraged me. This case is no exception.

Police Workout Video

No need to join a gym, I guess, when police have so many on-the-job-workout opportunities.

Raymond Costain, afterwards.

H/t trapdinawrpool

Toronto Police: Again and Again and Again ....

Albert Einstein famously defined insanity as doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. By that standard, perhaps both the Toronto Police force and I are insane; I seem to periodically write essentially the same blog post about their misbehaviour, and they seem to keep practising a disturbing pattern of conduct that cries out for remediation.

The latest case of alleged police brutality was reported yesterday in The Toronto Star:

Ian Scott, director of the Special Investigations Unit, (the body that probes incidents of serious injury and death in which police officers are involved) said Wednesday he was unable to conduct an “adequate” probe into a brutality complaint made by Tyrone Phillips, who alleges police beat him up during his arrest outside a nightclub.

Toronto police, Scott said, have refused to provide the SIU with Phillips’ complaint, first filed to the Office of the Independent Police Review Director, a provincial agency that probes grievances against police, then forwarded on to police.

The story, laughable were it not for the seriousness of the incident, outlines what seems to be a bureaucratic and jurisdictional dispute between two provincial bodies that, upon closer examination, suggests once again that Chief Bill Blair is continuing a policy of opacity that shields his officers from any real accountability.

Hiding behind the strict letter of legislation, his spokesperson, Mark Pugash, offers fatuous reasons for not releasing the formal complaint filed by Phillips, who alleges he was beaten severely by police and placed under arrest for no apparent reason, sustaining a serious concussion in the process, one that medical records verify.

As reported in today's Star, while the victim has given permission for the release of his complaint to the SIU, all that police spokesman Mark Pugash seems interested in doing is disingenuously carp about the fact that SIU head Scott went to the media to complain about his force's intransigence:

Pugash asked Thursday why Scott “went through the exercise he did yesterday with the inflammatory and quite offensive news release.”

Meanwhile, the larger issue of police brutality seems to be getting lost in this jurisdictional 'pissing match.'

And according to The Star's Rosie DiManno, there is sufficient blame to go around:

Each party has wrapped itself in the piety of rules. Yet those purported rules, as interpreted, have resulted in nobody doing the morally correct thing.

Scott has a complaint and a complainant. The police information sworn out after Phillips’ arrest would include the badge number of the arresting officer. That’s an obvious starting point for the SIU investigation. The subject officer isn’t compelled to submit to an interview — another failing of the Police Act. But it doesn’t require an investigative reporter to chase down the basic facts of the incident: Witness officers, if there were any; booking officer, or anybody else who came in contact with the accused; hospital records, to which the patient is entitled.

Ultimate responsibility for the conduct of the men and women of the Toronto Police force rests with 'teflon' Chief Bill Blair, a man apparently more deft at maneuvering to protect his own career than he is at holding himself and his force to account. As DiManno pointedly asks,

What did Police Chief Bill Blair do with Phillips’ complaint? What was the outcome of the mandated police investigation before the grievance was sent on to the SIU? It should be noted that the Police Act does, in fact, allow the chief to divulge information contained in a complaint received, under various exceptions to the nondisclosure guidelines, which shouldn’t be there as masking layer anyway.

Both excellent questions, the answers to which, if past performance is any indication, will not be forthcoming.

“This was an attack on the rule of the law.”

So said Crown attorney Elizabeth Jackson, who is seeking a sentence of 18 months in jail and three years’ probation at the sentencing hearing of George Horton, 24, whose crime during the 2010 Toronto G20 Summit was kicking the scout car of Staff. Sgt. Graham Queen as well as another cruiser and a CBC van.

The officer “wasn’t just anybody,” Jackson told court. “This was an attack on the rule of the law.”

While I in no way condone violence in any way, shape or form, it seems to me that insisting on a separate sentencing criterion because a police officer was traumatized by what was essentially a property crime does a grave disservice to, if not the rule of law, then respect for that law, given that thousands of protesters demonstrating democratically and peacefully were assaulted, traumatized and violated in myriad ways by the very police who are now suddenly such sensitive souls.

But, of course, I need to remind myself that Canada under attack is what our Prime Autocrat and his lieutenant Vic Toews want us to believe is the reality today as they continue to carry out their destruction of our traditions.

Excessive Force Or Standard Police Operating Procedure?

You decide.

Police Overreaction?

Or justifiable force? You decide.

Interesting, though, the number of police that swarm the man recording the incident on his cellphone, beginning at around 5:20 of the video.

Chief Blair's Poodle Speaks

First, bullets flew through the Eaton Centre food court. Then, two weeks later, on a sun-filled patio in Little Italy. On Sunday, a man was shot while hundreds watched a fireworks display in the city’s east end. Just 24 hours before that, a stray bullet grazed a toddler’s leg in North York.

Yet Mark Pugash, Toronto police spokesman and spinmaster, tells us there is really little to worry about here.

I guess, despite evidence that would seem to contradict this skilled communicator, This is the best of all possible worlds.

Deny, Deny. Deny

In the strange parallel world inhabited by Toronto Police Chief Bill Blair, that seems to be the rule governing administrative oversight. When confronted with an authoritative and damning report on the behaviour of your officers, both frontline and senior, attempt to deal with its implications by refusing to apologize for the abrogation of Charter rights that took place under your command, defiantly assert that the rights of citizens were protected that weekend, maintain that 'most police carried out their duties in a professional manner,' and, when really pushed, admit that there are things that “could have been done better”

The apparent inviolable rule of this parallel world is to never, under any circumstances, accept personal responsibility for what happened under your command.

Fortunately, to set things right, both worlds have a Toronto Star which, in today's hard-hitting editorial, suggests that if Blair continues inhabiting that strange world where DENY, DENY, DENY is the ruling ethos, he should step down.

Senior Toronto Officers Facing Charges

The Star reports the following:

About five high-ranking Toronto police officers were informed last week they will face misconduct charges for their actions during the G20 summit, the Star has learned.

The CBC is reporting 28 front line officers have been charged with misconduct — including unlawful arrest and excessive force.

Regarding the G20 police abuse of Charter rights, the still-truculent Toronto Police Chief Bill Blair yesterday:

“Generally, I think the rights of our citizens were protected that weekend,” Blair said, except, he added, “in individual circumstances.”

“I am quite prepared to hold people accountable,” he said. “If there is misconduct, we’ll deal with that.”

Unfortunately, he is still excluding himself from culpability in that misconduct.

The Irony Of Police 'Sensitivity'

Given the brutal manner in which some police officers discharge their authority, it always strikes me as just a tad 'precious' when they complain about how unjustly they are being treated whenever the press offers some criticism of their practices.

In responding to The Toronto Star's series, Police Who Lie, Mike McCormack, president of the Toronto Police Association, complains that the investigative project is a gross misrepresentation of police practices, and condemns it for using a presentation style disturbingly similar to the covers of tabloid magazines that grab your attention while you’re standing in the checkout line at the grocery store.

The sad truth is that the police have no one but themselves to blame when their behaviour is held up to public scrutiny and found wanting. And what McCormack fails to acknowledge is that the public has every right to know about misconduct which, in the case of the Toronto Police, has taken many forms, lying in court being only one of them.

Who, for example, can forget the wiretapping and surveillance conducted upon former Police Services Board Chair Susan Eng, done when Mike's father, William, was the Toronto Police Chief? Eng attributed this illegal activity to the fact that prior to becoming chair of the board, she had been a vocal critic of the police.

Then, as just another example, there was Craig Bromell, former head of the police union now being led by Mike McCormack. In cases of involving investigation by the SIU, Bromell told his members not to co-operate with its inquiries and threatened lawsuits against police critics. Such directives and threats hardly fostered an environment conducive to the public trust that the constabulary seems to believe is its due.

The infamous G20 misconduct, in which Toronto police played a key role, is well-knowned, attested to even by voices as credible as Steve Paikin's.

So I'm sorry that public scrutiny so-much disheartens Mike McCormack and his troops, but he is going to have to learn that because police wield so much power, they must be held to the highest standards, and if they want to avoid criticism, they are going to have to govern themselves by those standards.