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.

Oh, How The U.S. Right Must Hate Him

If you're not sure why, watch this short Noam Chomsky video, in which he shares his thoughts on Edward Snowden and American hypocrisy:

Wisdom Through The Ages

I have nothing to add to this:

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.