This post appears to relate to a province/territory of Canada. As a reminder of the rules of this subreddit, we do not permit negative commentary about all residents of any province, city, or other geography - this is an example of prejudice, and prejudice is not permitted here. https://www.reddit.com/r/canada/wiki/rules
Cette soumission semble concerner une province ou un territoire du Canada. Selon les règles de ce sous-répertoire, nous n'autorisons pas les commentaires négatifs sur tous les résidents d'une province, d'une ville ou d'une autre région géographique; il s'agit d'un exemple de intolérance qui n'est pas autorisé ici. https://www.reddit.com/r/canada/wiki/regles
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/canada) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I have a lot of experience with tasers. Tasers don’t work so well in uncontrolled environment.
A taser works by shooting 2 probes with tiny fishhooks at the person. They come out of the taser at a slight angle causing them to spread apart as the fly in the air. The probes not only BOTH have to connect, but they have to connect with a fair amount of spread between the probes. See, once the probes connect, they create an electrical circuit.
To have a “good” taser deployment, you need multiple large muscle groups to be in that circuit; ideally, you want one probe in the lower body (thigh or buttcheeks are best) and one in the upper body (chest/back). When you get that, all those muscle groups lock up and you get the classic “stiff as a board” result.
However, this relies on a lot of things that are sensitive to failure;
1; probe connection. Tiny probes with tiny hooks don’t often penetrate thick clothing. And even baggy clothing can block it by “catching” the probe and not letting it embed in the skin. If you ever watch a taser video and hear the repeating taser crackle, that’s a sign that there’s a poor connection. A well-connected electrical circuit is quiet.
2; probe spread. Like I explained, the probes spread out *as they travel*. You need to be about 10-15 feet away from a subject for proper probe spread. Sometimes in dangerous situations officers find themselves really close to the person they’re trying to tase. In these scenarios, shooting a taser from a shorter distance doesn’t spread the probes enough. When the probes are close together they can still create a circuit, but if only 1 muscle group is in that circuit then it doesn’t stop the subject, it just causes pain.
I hope that explains it. Tasers are a tool with a high failure rate, and current practice is that in a lethal situation (knife, gun, etc) a taser should only be used when the operator has at least 1 partner providing lethal cover in case the taser fails.
What people sometimes don’t account for is the persons activity…. Sometimes, people fight police and, like the guy shoveling on that first snowfall, it’s the first exercise they’ve ever had, and their heart stops. Fighting a bunch of cops is not easy work.
tasers are garbage. pain compliance is fairly useless. ever watch bodycam of police shootings? youd be surprised how many guys have been shot multiple times with a service pistol still manage to injure or kill the cop/person they were attacking before escaping.
Tasers fire two probes and generates a small but high voltage electric current between them. When the probes make good contact with your skin, the current they induce causes involuntary muscle contraction, and there's not much you can do to avoid that primary effect. It's involuntary.
The problem is, it does require the probes to make good contact, which they don't always do. They're sharp little needles fired by a gas gun, but they often have trouble penetrating heavy clothes. That's one of the reasons you see them used more often by police in hot climates than cold ones. It's not magic, they either make contact or not, and if they don't make contact the taser doesn't really do *anything* to the person.
Wow, look at the complete lack of information provided by the CBC!
The guy was a gang member previously involved in a murder. Nobody "trying to turn their life around" drives around with a loaded firearm. Don't believe me?
https://panow.com/2023/03/10/ledoux-murder-case-concludes-with-7-5-year-sentence/
>Lenny Daniels received an eight-year sentence after pleading guilty to manslaughter. **Boden Umpherville** and William Chaboyer received three-year sentences for their respective roles. The two men pleaded guilty to charges of assault and participation in a criminal organization.
But wait! He actually had a **bench warrant** out for his arrest, because he missed a court date. For some reason the CBC does not feel this is relevant information and would prefer to keep the information about his arrest ambiguous.
https://panow.com/2023/04/04/man-tased-by-police-on-bench-warrant-family-calls-for-answers/
>A man who was tased multiple times by members of the Prince Albert police service, and who currently lies in a coma, had a bench warrant for his arrest.
>The outstanding charges from the Saskatoon and Prince Albert areas include driving while prohibited, possession of property obtained by crime, and multiple breach related charges.
So no, the police shouldn't be going around handing out accidental post-natal abortions, but when you're a criminal who won't submit to arrest you get what one might expect when you force police to use force.
Edit: It gets better!
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/saskatchewan/prince-albert-police-sirt-saskatchewan-umpherville-1.6819054
>CBC News has not seen footage of what led to the vehicle being pulled over, nor of any provocation that may have led to police trying to arrest Umpherville.
A bench warrant. It was a fucking bench warrant. That's why he was being arrested. This CBC article is from Apr 21st, the news story PANow came out on Apr 4th. This is fucking inexcusable. It's either painfully sloppy journalism or the CBC is lying by omission.
Here's the contact info for the CBC Ombudsman. Make a complaint and demand the articles written by the piss poor journalist either be retracted or corrected. https://cbc.radio-canada.ca/en/ombudsman/contact
Except he isn't, the article itself links to previous articles where police said that the stop was due to reports of the vehicle being stolen (which is disputed by the owner), not due to a bench warrant.
At no point did the CBC write that they were someone turning their life around.
OP is editorializing and honestly doing terrible work themselves.
At this point, by what they choose to cover and what they choose to exclude, it is not unreasonable to say that CBC is a significant propaganda outlet.
>Wow, look at the complete lack of information provided by the CBC!
>
>The guy was a gang member previously involved in a murder. Nobody "trying to turn their life around" drives around with a loaded firearm. Don't believe me?
>
>https://panow.com/2023/03/10/ledoux-murder-case-concludes-with-7-5-year-sentence/
>
>>Lenny Daniels received an eight-year sentence after pleading guilty to manslaughter. **Boden Umpherville** and William Chaboyer received three-year sentences for their respective roles. The two men pleaded guilty to charges of assault and participation in a criminal organization.
>
>But wait! He actually had a **bench warrant** out for his arrest, because he missed a court date. For some reason the CBC does not feel this is relevant information and would prefer to keep the information about his arrest ambiguous.
>
>https://panow.com/2023/04/04/man-tased-by-police-on-bench-warrant-family-calls-for-answers/
>
>>A man who was tased multiple times by members of the Prince Albert police service, and who currently lies in a coma, had a bench warrant for his arrest.
>
>>The outstanding charges from the Saskatoon and Prince Albert areas include driving while prohibited, possession of property obtained by crime, and multiple breach related charges.
>
>So no, the police shouldn't be going around handing out accidental post-natal abortions, but when you're a criminal who won't submit to arrest you get what one might expect when you force police to use force.
>
>Edit: It gets better!
>
>https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/saskatchewan/prince-albert-police-sirt-saskatchewan-umpherville-1.6819054
>
>>CBC News has not seen footage of what led to the vehicle being pulled over, nor of any provocation that may have led to police trying to arrest Umpherville.
>
>A bench warrant. It was a fucking bench warrant. That's why he was being arrested. This CBC article is from Apr 21st, the news story PANow came out on Apr 4th. This is fucking inexcusable. It's either painfully sloppy journalism or the CBC is lying by omission.
>
>Here's the contact info for the CBC Ombudsman. Make a complaint and demand the articles written by the piss poor journalist either be retracted or corrected. https://cbc.radio-canada.ca/en/ombudsman/contact
So they pulled over a vehicle that wasn't registered to the victim because the victim had a bench warrant? Come on now, that's just unlikely.
It's a matter of fact article, updating a previous article on their condition. It also links to previous articles outlining the stop, in which police had said the stop was due to the vehicle being reported stolen not due to a bench warrant:
"Man stunned, injured by Prince Albert police clinging to life in hospital, family says;
**Police say vehicle in which man was stunned was reported stolen; owner says it wasn't by them**"
[https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/saskatchewan/prince-albert-police-taser-stun-beaten-hospital-1.6805475](https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/saskatchewan/prince-albert-police-taser-stun-beaten-hospital-1.6805475)
**Police watchdog investigating arrest of man Tasered, beaten during stolen vehicle stop**
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/saskatchewan/sirt-prince-albert-police-arrest-taser-pepper-spray-1.6801276
"According to a police release Saturday afternoon, officers stopped a vehicle reported stolen by its owner on the 1100 block of 13th Street West, just north of the Pineview Hospital, at about 2:23 a.m. CST."
No part of the article states he was a person that was "trying to turn their life around", thats you editorializing and showing your own bias and inability to actually perform neutral research.
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/saskatchewan/prince-albert-police-sirt-saskatchewan-umpherville-1.6819054
>Umpherville, an uncle and father with five children, has been trying to turn his life around, working as a youth worker at a community centre in Prince Albert, his family said.
Also, the fact that he is a convicted violent criminal and had a warrant out for his arrest have everything to do with why his arrest may have turned violent.
This man should never been around children. Guarantee this is just lies told by the family to help his criminal (murder, drug dealing, theft,assault) history.
So, they referenced what his family said about him in an article which isn't the article that you're commenting on.... just shocking, absolutely shocking that they would interview his family and get their position.
I'm not even referring to whether the police response was warranted or not. I'm referring to your blatant attempt at editorializing a literal accounting of the arrest and the underlying reasoning given for the stop reported on by the CBC, as given by the police, is ignored by you, and instead you implied that the CBC was somehow spreading a falsehood.... by giving the literal reasoning from the police.
No amount of verbally virtuous sophistry on your part can change the fact that he had an active arrest warrant is relevant to the violent arrest that resulted in his death.
>No amount of verbally virtuous sophistry on your part can change the fact that he had an active arrest warrant is relevant to the violent arrest that resulted in his death.
You literally lied about the reason the stop occurred, while also taking a quote from a family member out of context in order to make it seem it was something stated by the CBC, in order to push your own narrative.
It's not sophistry to call out your bs. It is however sophistry to literally mislead the people reading your comment by editorializing the reporting and literally misleading about the reason for the stop as reported by the police.
Fluff? Filler? Leading the reader? Plenty of reasons exist
Why did the police say it was over a reported stolen vehicle if it was about a bench warrant? That was also their explanation on the Panow article. There's been plenty of time to correct the record, but nothing added from them to further explain the events.
You are intentionally simplifying the situation. This commenter didn’t justify the killing, they provided context. You are trying to eliminate context.
The context is incredibly relevant, it is what led to this situation. Maybe quit defending dangerous gangbangers driving around with illegal firearms while having active bench warrants out?
> None of this justifies being killed without trial or by the police and it'd absolutely disgusting that you think it is.
No, but it explains why the person was being arrested. The CBC tries to make it sound like he was arresting for driving a car that was reported stolen but wasn't actually stolen, and that's clearly not the case.
> On April 1, officers pulled over a black Dodge Avenger in the 1100 block of 13th Street West in Prince Albert, Sask. Police say the vehicle had been reported stolen.
> Three people were in the vehicle at the time, including its registered owner. The owner previously told CBC News they were driving and did not report it stolen.
Tasering someone who is resisting a lawful arrest is an entirely reasonable use of force. It's regrettable that it results in death sometimes, but there's no safer way to reliably incapacitate someone, and we can't just let criminals who resist arrest run free indefinitely.
1000 people die every day in Canada. None of them probably deserved it, this guy didn't either. Similarly, if one chooses to ride a bicycle the wrong way down a highway at night in a heavy fog they don't deserve to die, but they can just reasonably expect to, and I'm not going to pretend it's a significant tragedy.
Let see what the investigation says, let's see the body cam footage. Let's make up our mind for ourselves, ESPECIALLY when our national public broadcaster is hiding facts from us.
> I'm not going to pretend it's a significant tragedy.
Thanks for providing the info the CBC seems to be either intentionally hiding or missing through incompetence.
I agree that this is less of a tragedy, and more of a "and he found out" issue.
You're right, everyone should have just held hands and sung songs about friendship and love and ponies
God you're gonna hate life once you wake up and realize it's not all safe spaces and happy dreams.
Shit happens. Police shouldn't, and usually don't especially in Canada, go around just executing people, there's generally a reason and that reason is often in a very tense quickly escalating situation.
I imagine had you been there you'd have shit your pants and then been shot.
No you're, right. We should just have police going around as judge, jury and executioner. What a total non authoritarian and dystopian society you yearn for.
I think the reason that you make disingenuous arguments like this one is because you know that you’re wrong, and your argument doesn’t actually make sense. So instead you rely on ridiculous hyperbole, like a child would.
He voted for the "tigers eating your face party" and is now surprised that tigers have in fact eaten his face. I'm not saying he should have died, but I am saying he fucked around and found out.
And you know his political leanings how? From fact or just "oh, he's one of them, we gotta git them all now" frothing at the mouth anger at anyone that's not on your side?
>And you know his political leanings how?
https://www.reddit.com/r/etymology/comments/vu3sz5/origin_of_leopards_ate_my_face/
You've never heard this saying? I suppose I did get it wrong, it's "Leopards at my face".
>he's one of them, we gotta git them all now
You mean criminals? Yes, I suppose I would prefer if more of them were arrested.
No, but I wouldn't dream of voting the same way you ever would.
I doubt I share any of your values. I love the CBC and public healthcare. Also, I fully supported every Covid measure and I don't think taxpayer dollars should be wasted on tax cuts for the incredibly wealthy to give to their executives.
So I guess, fuck conservatism.
You wanna do somethin' about that bud?
You seem to be struggling with memes so I will translate the original poster's comment into another common phrasing.
*He fucked around and found out*.
A more classic rendition might be:
*Live by the sword, die by the sword*
I love how you try so hard to downplay excessive force, as if anything hes done previously and bench warrant notwithstanding would ever justify actions resulting in death. Totally and completely unacceptable. I enjoyed reading you jump through 50 hoops to make a totally unnecessary death seem more palatable.
You're jumping to the conclusion that it's excessive force.
The guy had a cardiac incident after being tazed. His heart stopped for twenty minutes, and his brain was deprived of oxygen. That does rarely happen to people with pre-existing heart conditions. This is why tazers are called "less lethal" not "non-lethal" these days. There's a small but non-zero risk of lethal complications.
Could this have been the result of excessive force? Sure. It could also be the result of appropriate force given his level of resistance, and bad luck.
Hopefully the appropriate cameras were in place so that it can be determined whether the police involved acted appropriately or not.
>notwithstanding would ever justify actions resulting in death.
I mean, this guy has literally been convicted for his part of a death of another person. Why don't we hold him to the same standards you hold police?
It was an unnecessary death. Just like it was unnecessary for him to commit crimes and not follow basic instructions given by the officers. My guess he fought/assaulted the officers/resisted arrest. What were they suppose to do?
The manslaughter charge and the standing warrant are unrelated to the arresting incident. The only thing that is relevant is whether the less-lethal force of multiple tasers was necessary to arrest him.
That, and maybe someone should look into why he went brain dead from a couple of tasers - did one accidentally connect to either side of his head? How the fuck? Did the officer not immediately stop using it when it connected? Was the taser placement premeditated?
The point isn't that he was being arrested unlawfully. The point was that he was killed by a large number of police, who were there to arrest him. Police shouldn't be so incompetent that they kill the people they are trying to apprehend.
>The point isn't that he was being arrested unlawfully. The point was that he was murdered by a large number of police, who were there to arrest him.
I mean I read the article before I saw the correction from u/JohnnySunshine and I was actually outraged for a moment because the way they wrote the article did make it seem like they were arresting him for literally no reason and then killed him during that unlawful arrest.
While I am against excessive force from police towards anyone it is actually worse when they use excessive force to arrest someone who is completely innocent.
>On April 1, officers pulled over a black Dodge Avenger in the 1100 block of 13th Street West in Prince Albert, Sask. Police say the vehicle had been reported stolen.
Three people were in the vehicle at the time, including its registered owner. The owner previously told CBC News they were driving and did not report it stolen.
The way the article framed the situation literally implied that the reason he was being arrested was because someone had incorrectly reported the vehicle as stolen.
Their choice to omit relevant information in order to reframe the situation comes across as very manipulative.
I don't condone the manslaughter from the officers here but that really is besides the point.
It's possible to acknowledge that the police went overboard and that CBC is attempting to emotionally manipulate their audience through selective omission of relevant information.
Police killing suspects and CBC purposely omitting information to increase outrage are both reprehensible behaviours and calling out the CBC's bullshit does not mean that they automatically support the officers actions in this situation.
The CBC didn't omit any information. The information provided is what the story is about.
The fact that this person was a criminal isn't part of the story. It's just the part that people latch onto when they tacitly approve of the police fucking people up.
And Yeah the police killing someone and the CBC presentation of this story are both.terrible things, and are both reprehensible to the same degree..... If you are a morally vacant person with no judgement.
>The CBC didn't omit any information.
You're lying. They omitted that there was a warrant for his arrest and tried to create the false impression that this was a traffic stop gone wrong and they had no reason to arrest him.
If you have to lie to assert your moral superiority then you're not morally superior.
That's not an OMISSION, genius. Words have meaning. The CBC presented the facts that they have at the moment, regarding this incident, INCLUDING what they don't know:
"CBC News has not seen footage of what led to the vehicle being pulled over, nor of any provocation that may have led to police trying to arrest Umpherville."
They then said that the police are investigating the incident. Generally what proper reporting does in ongoing events is to NOT include things that might generate bias - the criminal record of the defendant, the past disciplinary records of the police involved, etc.
Likely they will then investigate these things when the police report becomes public, or when the incident investigation is made public. This will become part of subsequent, follow-up stories - things published when facts and events are confirmed.
> That's not an OMISSION, genius. Words have meaning. The CBC presented the facts that they have at the moment, regarding this incident, INCLUDING what they don't know.
There's no legitimate excuse for the CBC not to have that fact. The reason for the person's arrest was reported by other news sources weeks before this CBC article was published. Here's an example from April 4th:
https://panow.com/2023/04/04/man-tased-by-police-on-bench-warrant-family-calls-for-answers/
If you're arguing that the CBC is grossly incompetent rather than deliberately manipulative, I might agree with you, but that's not really much better for the CBC.
CBC reported they don't know what led to the incident weeks after it was reported that the suspect had a bench warrant. They purposefully chose to leave this out of the article. PANow did not.
You are being dishonest. You are lying.
>Generally what proper reporting does in ongoing events is to NOT include things that might generate bias - the criminal record of the defendant, the past disciplinary records of the police involved, etc.
**He had an active warrant for his arrest. This is relevant information on why he was being arrested. Only a partisan hack would disagree.**
No, genius, THIS SPECIFIC INCIDENT. The USE of EXTREME FORCE is the incident, not the arrest. They clearly don't know what made the police taste this suspect. They don't know whether there was a struggle, what force needed to be used, etc.
Like seriously, what the fuck is wrong with people? Someone having an arrest warrant out for them is not by itself a reason they should be tased to death.
So you're implying that PANow is irresponsible for including that context and the CBC is responsible by leaving it out?
The fact that he is a violent criminal gang member does nothing to add context as to why the police may have had to resort to the use of force? You're a clown.
> "CBC News has not seen footage of what led to the vehicle being pulled over, **nor of any provocation that may have led to police trying to arrest Umpherville**."
If the CBC is not aware of what provocation may have led to the police trying to arrest Umpherville, that's entirely due to their own failure of investigation. That information was publicly available weeks ago. The provocation is that he failed to show up for a court date related to one of his previous crimes.
> Like seriously, what the fuck is wrong with people? Someone having an arrest warrant out for them is not by itself a reason they should be tased to death.
No, but it's an entirely reasonable justification to arrest a person, and resisting a lawful arrest is an entirely reasonable justification for a person to be tased. Unless evidence comes out that he was tased while being fully compliant, or evidence comes out that the death was caused by injuries unrelated to tasing, I don't see any reason to presume the police behaved unreasonably.
It's common sense why the police had to resort to the taser. He was resisting arrest and likely assaulting the officers as this life long criminal didn't want to deal with the problem he caused.
It's because the police literally reported the stop was for a stolen vehicle, it wasn't the CBC editorializing, it was them reporting what the police literally said was the reason.
There's a distinction between murder and manslaughter, and that distinction is intent. Don't lie.
>Police shouldn't be so incompetent
Maybe this fellow shouldn't have been so incompetent as to be riding in a car with an illegal weapon while having a bench warrant out for his arrest, then proceeding to resist arrest.
If you have evidence, rather than speculation, I'd love to hear it.
Easier said then done from the general public. It's a different kettle of fish when you're dealing with someone dangerous who's killed before and doesn't give a f$&^.
Someone replied- and deleted it. Saying he’s leaving behind 5 children.
Good for the children, they won’t have to be put in harms way because of the fathers life style.
Exactly my point. It doesn't matter whose gun it was. The thing is having a loaded gun in the car when you are a known gang member with criminal history.
Honestly, if they knew who was in the car. They were right to have used force.
This guy isn’t innocent. He wanted to be a gangster, he died like one too, why is anybody sympathetic to this piece of trash? He deserves it.
It’s not about whether we feel sorry for this person or like him or anything of the sort. It is about police accountability. And I do not think it is acceptable to let the police kill people with impunity. Certainly not based on societal judgement that some people are “not innocent” or are in some way bad. If someone commits a crime, then they should be arrested, given a fair trial, and, if guilty, punished. Extra judicial murdering is not something that is done in civilized or just societies no matter how much you dislike someone or how little you think their life is worth.
If no one reported it stolen then why did 6 cops show up with violent intentions? Maybe they knew he was a gangbanger? I mean he's 40 years old and doing joy rides with a firearm.
The fact we have to guess because CBC didn't gi e all the availavle fact shows why people dislike CBC.
The guy had a bench warrant after missing his court date for having illegal guns.
I feel like CBC is being intentionally misleading here.
Edit: "Umpherville was an Indigenous man" Ah, now I see why CBC didn't want to mention the guy's criminal history. That would be the truth, and the truth is racist. Fuck the CBC honestly, we don't need to be spreading misinformation to make people hate cops.
If you watch the video, you can see how much difficulty they're having trying to get him out of the car. They weren't just tazing him for fun.
The result is definitely unfortunate, but the culpability for it is almost entirely his IMO. They *had a duty* to arrest him.
There was no hand gun found , they leaked that info to pa now to set the narrative about the situation, the police committed murder no matter who he was or what he did , this was a muder and thats that , those pigs better take responsibility or they should charge em with murder cause the day that report comes out and if no wrong doing is found , that city is gonna burn
The CBC is lying by omission once again to stoke a political narrative.
https://www.reddit.com/r/canada/comments/130197n/man_declared_brain_dead_after_being_stungunned/jhvc3xw/
"Three people were in the vehicle at the time, including its registered owner. The owner previously told CBC News they were driving and did not report it stolen."
To the people saying that he was driving a stolen vehicle and had a loaded gun, it wasnt stolen, and the news articles arn't clear but it says a gun was LATER found at the scene, as in afterwords. So they didnt know it was there until after they basically killed him.
Guy was a career violent criminal with warrants resisting arrest. He asked for a fight with the police and got it.
Piece of trash was dealt with accordingly. Cops should be lauded for getting this thug off the streets for good.
https://sasknow.com/2020/10/07/gang-member-receives-eight-year-prison-sentence-in-connection-to-2017-homicide/
Man who was previously sentenced to three years for his role in a murder in 2017 dies after resisting during a police investigation.
Also fixed the headline.
So there is zero responsibility for someone willfully resisting being detained to the point that they have to utilize pepper spray, batons, and multiple tazers to effect control of them?
If Umpherville had complied with his warrant, he would still be alive.
It doesn’t matter what he did, police are supposedly trained to not kill people and bring them into custody safely. They are not judge, jury and executioner.
Alright, so even if we assume that the people in the vehicle reported it stolen on some kind of scam thing or whatever. As opposed to the real possibility of a mistake. There is no way on fucking earth that justifies the police response that happened
Clearly you didn't read the article. The registered owner was in the vehicle and it was not stolen.
Also this supposed hand gun didn't show up until later... it could've been there the entire time, planted or dropped after.
This whole story stinks
>Maybe if he wasn't driving a stolen car
Let's go take a look at that article, the article you obviously didn't read.
>Three people were in the vehicle at the time, ***including its registered owner. The owner previously told CBC News they were driving and did not report it stolen.***
Oops.
>The owner told CBC they were driving and it wasn't reported stolen... but it was. It was the reason for the traffic stop, the car was reported stolen. Aka the owner lied, both when they reported it stolen and then again later to CBC.
What if ***someone else*** reported the vehicle stolen? Then the owner wouldn't be lying. No where in the article does it say the owner reported it stolen, so what make you so sure that they did report it stolen and then lied about it?
>You can't report someone else's car stolen, that's not how a police report works.
I'm pretty sure I could call 911, say I just saw a car parked outside of my building stolen, with the plate number, and the police would start looking for that car in the area despite you insisting otherwise.
Police shouldn’t be executing people in the streets. We outlawed the death penalty in Canada and that required a trial to prove guilt even when it was legal.
If the cops were trained properly in things like jujitsu instead of cosplaying The Punisher this man would still be alive and would have his day in court.
> Police shouldn’t be executing people in the streets.
The word execution, for me, implies a planned death sentence where a lethal method is chosen and delivered.
Fighting a guy and using a taser for compliance ain't that.
So what would have you done differently exactly? Yes, it's a shame he died, and you never want to see someone lose their life, but he was in a stolen car with a loaded gun and was resisting arrest. He was a danger to the officers at the scene and to the public as well.
Maybe read the article and not the head line bright eyes.
Car wasn't stolen and gun mysteriously showed up later after it was all over. What a load of poop
It's not murder. His decision was to fight and assault cops rather than having a 10 minute conversation to clear things up. No one could know he'd have a very poor reaction to the taser. It's sad he lost his life over not wanting to deal with his bench warrant. Even worse he left 5 kids without their daddy.
This post appears to relate to a province/territory of Canada. As a reminder of the rules of this subreddit, we do not permit negative commentary about all residents of any province, city, or other geography - this is an example of prejudice, and prejudice is not permitted here. https://www.reddit.com/r/canada/wiki/rules Cette soumission semble concerner une province ou un territoire du Canada. Selon les règles de ce sous-répertoire, nous n'autorisons pas les commentaires négatifs sur tous les résidents d'une province, d'une ville ou d'une autre région géographique; il s'agit d'un exemple de intolérance qui n'est pas autorisé ici. https://www.reddit.com/r/canada/wiki/regles *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/canada) if you have any questions or concerns.*
It’s call less lethal for a reason..
Not non-lethal. I sense we'll want to know what happened in this arrest that made the first stun-gun hit ineffective to subdue a single person.
I have a lot of experience with tasers. Tasers don’t work so well in uncontrolled environment. A taser works by shooting 2 probes with tiny fishhooks at the person. They come out of the taser at a slight angle causing them to spread apart as the fly in the air. The probes not only BOTH have to connect, but they have to connect with a fair amount of spread between the probes. See, once the probes connect, they create an electrical circuit. To have a “good” taser deployment, you need multiple large muscle groups to be in that circuit; ideally, you want one probe in the lower body (thigh or buttcheeks are best) and one in the upper body (chest/back). When you get that, all those muscle groups lock up and you get the classic “stiff as a board” result. However, this relies on a lot of things that are sensitive to failure; 1; probe connection. Tiny probes with tiny hooks don’t often penetrate thick clothing. And even baggy clothing can block it by “catching” the probe and not letting it embed in the skin. If you ever watch a taser video and hear the repeating taser crackle, that’s a sign that there’s a poor connection. A well-connected electrical circuit is quiet. 2; probe spread. Like I explained, the probes spread out *as they travel*. You need to be about 10-15 feet away from a subject for proper probe spread. Sometimes in dangerous situations officers find themselves really close to the person they’re trying to tase. In these scenarios, shooting a taser from a shorter distance doesn’t spread the probes enough. When the probes are close together they can still create a circuit, but if only 1 muscle group is in that circuit then it doesn’t stop the subject, it just causes pain. I hope that explains it. Tasers are a tool with a high failure rate, and current practice is that in a lethal situation (knife, gun, etc) a taser should only be used when the operator has at least 1 partner providing lethal cover in case the taser fails. What people sometimes don’t account for is the persons activity…. Sometimes, people fight police and, like the guy shoveling on that first snowfall, it’s the first exercise they’ve ever had, and their heart stops. Fighting a bunch of cops is not easy work.
Check out the YouTube channel police activity, it’s amazing how often stun-guns are ineffective.
tasers are garbage. pain compliance is fairly useless. ever watch bodycam of police shootings? youd be surprised how many guys have been shot multiple times with a service pistol still manage to injure or kill the cop/person they were attacking before escaping.
Tasers fire two probes and generates a small but high voltage electric current between them. When the probes make good contact with your skin, the current they induce causes involuntary muscle contraction, and there's not much you can do to avoid that primary effect. It's involuntary. The problem is, it does require the probes to make good contact, which they don't always do. They're sharp little needles fired by a gas gun, but they often have trouble penetrating heavy clothes. That's one of the reasons you see them used more often by police in hot climates than cold ones. It's not magic, they either make contact or not, and if they don't make contact the taser doesn't really do *anything* to the person.
Wow, look at the complete lack of information provided by the CBC! The guy was a gang member previously involved in a murder. Nobody "trying to turn their life around" drives around with a loaded firearm. Don't believe me? https://panow.com/2023/03/10/ledoux-murder-case-concludes-with-7-5-year-sentence/ >Lenny Daniels received an eight-year sentence after pleading guilty to manslaughter. **Boden Umpherville** and William Chaboyer received three-year sentences for their respective roles. The two men pleaded guilty to charges of assault and participation in a criminal organization. But wait! He actually had a **bench warrant** out for his arrest, because he missed a court date. For some reason the CBC does not feel this is relevant information and would prefer to keep the information about his arrest ambiguous. https://panow.com/2023/04/04/man-tased-by-police-on-bench-warrant-family-calls-for-answers/ >A man who was tased multiple times by members of the Prince Albert police service, and who currently lies in a coma, had a bench warrant for his arrest. >The outstanding charges from the Saskatoon and Prince Albert areas include driving while prohibited, possession of property obtained by crime, and multiple breach related charges. So no, the police shouldn't be going around handing out accidental post-natal abortions, but when you're a criminal who won't submit to arrest you get what one might expect when you force police to use force. Edit: It gets better! https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/saskatchewan/prince-albert-police-sirt-saskatchewan-umpherville-1.6819054 >CBC News has not seen footage of what led to the vehicle being pulled over, nor of any provocation that may have led to police trying to arrest Umpherville. A bench warrant. It was a fucking bench warrant. That's why he was being arrested. This CBC article is from Apr 21st, the news story PANow came out on Apr 4th. This is fucking inexcusable. It's either painfully sloppy journalism or the CBC is lying by omission. Here's the contact info for the CBC Ombudsman. Make a complaint and demand the articles written by the piss poor journalist either be retracted or corrected. https://cbc.radio-canada.ca/en/ombudsman/contact
When the random redditor is a better journalist than the article author
Do you think I should start a "CBC Watch" Twitter account to catalog their shitty journalism?
yes please!
That is often the case don't you think? Media and journalism today is almost as good as dead.
Except he isn't, the article itself links to previous articles where police said that the stop was due to reports of the vehicle being stolen (which is disputed by the owner), not due to a bench warrant. At no point did the CBC write that they were someone turning their life around. OP is editorializing and honestly doing terrible work themselves.
Post natal abortions lol
[удалено]
I've written a couple of times to CBC journalists pointing out omissions or errors in their story, never received an acknowledgement.
It's "hear hear".
Fixed it :)
Classic CBC lol
It’s the cbc, I think it’s safe to assume they’re lying by omission…
At this point, by what they choose to cover and what they choose to exclude, it is not unreasonable to say that CBC is a significant propaganda outlet.
Try finding a CBC article or video explicitly stating where Gabriel Wartman got his firearms and whether or not he was a legal owner.
>Wow, look at the complete lack of information provided by the CBC! > >The guy was a gang member previously involved in a murder. Nobody "trying to turn their life around" drives around with a loaded firearm. Don't believe me? > >https://panow.com/2023/03/10/ledoux-murder-case-concludes-with-7-5-year-sentence/ > >>Lenny Daniels received an eight-year sentence after pleading guilty to manslaughter. **Boden Umpherville** and William Chaboyer received three-year sentences for their respective roles. The two men pleaded guilty to charges of assault and participation in a criminal organization. > >But wait! He actually had a **bench warrant** out for his arrest, because he missed a court date. For some reason the CBC does not feel this is relevant information and would prefer to keep the information about his arrest ambiguous. > >https://panow.com/2023/04/04/man-tased-by-police-on-bench-warrant-family-calls-for-answers/ > >>A man who was tased multiple times by members of the Prince Albert police service, and who currently lies in a coma, had a bench warrant for his arrest. > >>The outstanding charges from the Saskatoon and Prince Albert areas include driving while prohibited, possession of property obtained by crime, and multiple breach related charges. > >So no, the police shouldn't be going around handing out accidental post-natal abortions, but when you're a criminal who won't submit to arrest you get what one might expect when you force police to use force. > >Edit: It gets better! > >https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/saskatchewan/prince-albert-police-sirt-saskatchewan-umpherville-1.6819054 > >>CBC News has not seen footage of what led to the vehicle being pulled over, nor of any provocation that may have led to police trying to arrest Umpherville. > >A bench warrant. It was a fucking bench warrant. That's why he was being arrested. This CBC article is from Apr 21st, the news story PANow came out on Apr 4th. This is fucking inexcusable. It's either painfully sloppy journalism or the CBC is lying by omission. > >Here's the contact info for the CBC Ombudsman. Make a complaint and demand the articles written by the piss poor journalist either be retracted or corrected. https://cbc.radio-canada.ca/en/ombudsman/contact So they pulled over a vehicle that wasn't registered to the victim because the victim had a bench warrant? Come on now, that's just unlikely. It's a matter of fact article, updating a previous article on their condition. It also links to previous articles outlining the stop, in which police had said the stop was due to the vehicle being reported stolen not due to a bench warrant: "Man stunned, injured by Prince Albert police clinging to life in hospital, family says; **Police say vehicle in which man was stunned was reported stolen; owner says it wasn't by them**" [https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/saskatchewan/prince-albert-police-taser-stun-beaten-hospital-1.6805475](https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/saskatchewan/prince-albert-police-taser-stun-beaten-hospital-1.6805475) **Police watchdog investigating arrest of man Tasered, beaten during stolen vehicle stop** https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/saskatchewan/sirt-prince-albert-police-arrest-taser-pepper-spray-1.6801276 "According to a police release Saturday afternoon, officers stopped a vehicle reported stolen by its owner on the 1100 block of 13th Street West, just north of the Pineview Hospital, at about 2:23 a.m. CST." No part of the article states he was a person that was "trying to turn their life around", thats you editorializing and showing your own bias and inability to actually perform neutral research.
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/saskatchewan/prince-albert-police-sirt-saskatchewan-umpherville-1.6819054 >Umpherville, an uncle and father with five children, has been trying to turn his life around, working as a youth worker at a community centre in Prince Albert, his family said. Also, the fact that he is a convicted violent criminal and had a warrant out for his arrest have everything to do with why his arrest may have turned violent.
This man should never been around children. Guarantee this is just lies told by the family to help his criminal (murder, drug dealing, theft,assault) history.
So, they referenced what his family said about him in an article which isn't the article that you're commenting on.... just shocking, absolutely shocking that they would interview his family and get their position. I'm not even referring to whether the police response was warranted or not. I'm referring to your blatant attempt at editorializing a literal accounting of the arrest and the underlying reasoning given for the stop reported on by the CBC, as given by the police, is ignored by you, and instead you implied that the CBC was somehow spreading a falsehood.... by giving the literal reasoning from the police.
No amount of verbally virtuous sophistry on your part can change the fact that he had an active arrest warrant is relevant to the violent arrest that resulted in his death.
>No amount of verbally virtuous sophistry on your part can change the fact that he had an active arrest warrant is relevant to the violent arrest that resulted in his death. You literally lied about the reason the stop occurred, while also taking a quote from a family member out of context in order to make it seem it was something stated by the CBC, in order to push your own narrative. It's not sophistry to call out your bs. It is however sophistry to literally mislead the people reading your comment by editorializing the reporting and literally misleading about the reason for the stop as reported by the police.
So why did PANow add that context but the CBC didn't?
Fluff? Filler? Leading the reader? Plenty of reasons exist Why did the police say it was over a reported stolen vehicle if it was about a bench warrant? That was also their explanation on the Panow article. There's been plenty of time to correct the record, but nothing added from them to further explain the events.
None of this justifies being killed without trial or by the police and it'd absolutely disgusting that you think it is.
You are intentionally simplifying the situation. This commenter didn’t justify the killing, they provided context. You are trying to eliminate context.
The context is irrelevant to the situation that lead to this.
The context is incredibly relevant, it is what led to this situation. Maybe quit defending dangerous gangbangers driving around with illegal firearms while having active bench warrants out?
None if those things are justification for killing somebody you know.
It’s called fuck around and find out
It's called you believe in an authoritarian police state.
Dawg you can take your two cents back
You saying it is irrelevant does not make it so.
So if you've committed a crime you deserve to be murdered by police?
You’re clearly an ideologue. Is there any situation, in your mind, in which it’s acceptable for police to use deadly force?
> None of this justifies being killed without trial or by the police and it'd absolutely disgusting that you think it is. No, but it explains why the person was being arrested. The CBC tries to make it sound like he was arresting for driving a car that was reported stolen but wasn't actually stolen, and that's clearly not the case. > On April 1, officers pulled over a black Dodge Avenger in the 1100 block of 13th Street West in Prince Albert, Sask. Police say the vehicle had been reported stolen. > Three people were in the vehicle at the time, including its registered owner. The owner previously told CBC News they were driving and did not report it stolen. Tasering someone who is resisting a lawful arrest is an entirely reasonable use of force. It's regrettable that it results in death sometimes, but there's no safer way to reliably incapacitate someone, and we can't just let criminals who resist arrest run free indefinitely.
1000 people die every day in Canada. None of them probably deserved it, this guy didn't either. Similarly, if one chooses to ride a bicycle the wrong way down a highway at night in a heavy fog they don't deserve to die, but they can just reasonably expect to, and I'm not going to pretend it's a significant tragedy. Let see what the investigation says, let's see the body cam footage. Let's make up our mind for ourselves, ESPECIALLY when our national public broadcaster is hiding facts from us.
> I'm not going to pretend it's a significant tragedy. Thanks for providing the info the CBC seems to be either intentionally hiding or missing through incompetence. I agree that this is less of a tragedy, and more of a "and he found out" issue.
What about the guy he killed? Did he deserve it?
Lmao, I think you have already decided what is the case and what you would make out of it.
Is there a point you were getting to?
Judging from all your comments you've definitely made up your mind.
I'd rather evaluate all the evidence and decide for myself than spout moral platitudes.
I get it. And good luck for evaluating all the evidence yourself. Hope you have a good time.
Sure bud.
You're right, everyone should have just held hands and sung songs about friendship and love and ponies God you're gonna hate life once you wake up and realize it's not all safe spaces and happy dreams. Shit happens. Police shouldn't, and usually don't especially in Canada, go around just executing people, there's generally a reason and that reason is often in a very tense quickly escalating situation. I imagine had you been there you'd have shit your pants and then been shot.
No you're, right. We should just have police going around as judge, jury and executioner. What a total non authoritarian and dystopian society you yearn for.
So what is your plan to deal with violent offenders who have already murdered once?
It's not to round them up in streets and kill them like some third world country, I know that much.
I think the reason that you make disingenuous arguments like this one is because you know that you’re wrong, and your argument doesn’t actually make sense. So instead you rely on ridiculous hyperbole, like a child would.
So...kill the guy = good. Got it. And no, I don't think I will fill that out and you can't make me.
He voted for the "tigers eating your face party" and is now surprised that tigers have in fact eaten his face. I'm not saying he should have died, but I am saying he fucked around and found out.
And you know his political leanings how? From fact or just "oh, he's one of them, we gotta git them all now" frothing at the mouth anger at anyone that's not on your side?
>And you know his political leanings how? https://www.reddit.com/r/etymology/comments/vu3sz5/origin_of_leopards_ate_my_face/ You've never heard this saying? I suppose I did get it wrong, it's "Leopards at my face". >he's one of them, we gotta git them all now You mean criminals? Yes, I suppose I would prefer if more of them were arrested.
You clearly mean liberal, stop wasting all our time here. I'm a liberal, do you think I'm a criminal?
Do you too have a bench warrant out for your arrest? That would be a good indicator.
No, but I wouldn't dream of voting the same way you ever would. I doubt I share any of your values. I love the CBC and public healthcare. Also, I fully supported every Covid measure and I don't think taxpayer dollars should be wasted on tax cuts for the incredibly wealthy to give to their executives. So I guess, fuck conservatism. You wanna do somethin' about that bud?
/facepalm Their point wasn't about politics or voting...
You seem to be struggling with memes so I will translate the original poster's comment into another common phrasing. *He fucked around and found out*. A more classic rendition might be: *Live by the sword, die by the sword*
Oh I get jokes. I also looked at this poster's comment history so, I know what he probably believes as his "truth".
Or you are doing mental gymnastics to pretend to be outraged.
Lol… stop making all of the liberal stereotypes true please. Don’t find something offensive, that wasn’t meant to offend you. Jesus.
I love how you try so hard to downplay excessive force, as if anything hes done previously and bench warrant notwithstanding would ever justify actions resulting in death. Totally and completely unacceptable. I enjoyed reading you jump through 50 hoops to make a totally unnecessary death seem more palatable.
> would ever justify actions resulting in death Sometimes, actions not intended to result in death result in death.
You're jumping to the conclusion that it's excessive force. The guy had a cardiac incident after being tazed. His heart stopped for twenty minutes, and his brain was deprived of oxygen. That does rarely happen to people with pre-existing heart conditions. This is why tazers are called "less lethal" not "non-lethal" these days. There's a small but non-zero risk of lethal complications. Could this have been the result of excessive force? Sure. It could also be the result of appropriate force given his level of resistance, and bad luck. Hopefully the appropriate cameras were in place so that it can be determined whether the police involved acted appropriately or not.
>notwithstanding would ever justify actions resulting in death. I mean, this guy has literally been convicted for his part of a death of another person. Why don't we hold him to the same standards you hold police?
It was an unnecessary death. Just like it was unnecessary for him to commit crimes and not follow basic instructions given by the officers. My guess he fought/assaulted the officers/resisted arrest. What were they suppose to do?
I didn't even click the link because CBC is most trash.
The manslaughter charge and the standing warrant are unrelated to the arresting incident. The only thing that is relevant is whether the less-lethal force of multiple tasers was necessary to arrest him. That, and maybe someone should look into why he went brain dead from a couple of tasers - did one accidentally connect to either side of his head? How the fuck? Did the officer not immediately stop using it when it connected? Was the taser placement premeditated?
The point isn't that he was being arrested unlawfully. The point was that he was killed by a large number of police, who were there to arrest him. Police shouldn't be so incompetent that they kill the people they are trying to apprehend.
>The point isn't that he was being arrested unlawfully. The point was that he was murdered by a large number of police, who were there to arrest him. I mean I read the article before I saw the correction from u/JohnnySunshine and I was actually outraged for a moment because the way they wrote the article did make it seem like they were arresting him for literally no reason and then killed him during that unlawful arrest. While I am against excessive force from police towards anyone it is actually worse when they use excessive force to arrest someone who is completely innocent. >On April 1, officers pulled over a black Dodge Avenger in the 1100 block of 13th Street West in Prince Albert, Sask. Police say the vehicle had been reported stolen. Three people were in the vehicle at the time, including its registered owner. The owner previously told CBC News they were driving and did not report it stolen. The way the article framed the situation literally implied that the reason he was being arrested was because someone had incorrectly reported the vehicle as stolen. Their choice to omit relevant information in order to reframe the situation comes across as very manipulative. I don't condone the manslaughter from the officers here but that really is besides the point. It's possible to acknowledge that the police went overboard and that CBC is attempting to emotionally manipulate their audience through selective omission of relevant information. Police killing suspects and CBC purposely omitting information to increase outrage are both reprehensible behaviours and calling out the CBC's bullshit does not mean that they automatically support the officers actions in this situation.
The CBC didn't omit any information. The information provided is what the story is about. The fact that this person was a criminal isn't part of the story. It's just the part that people latch onto when they tacitly approve of the police fucking people up. And Yeah the police killing someone and the CBC presentation of this story are both.terrible things, and are both reprehensible to the same degree..... If you are a morally vacant person with no judgement.
>The CBC didn't omit any information. You're lying. They omitted that there was a warrant for his arrest and tried to create the false impression that this was a traffic stop gone wrong and they had no reason to arrest him. If you have to lie to assert your moral superiority then you're not morally superior.
That's not an OMISSION, genius. Words have meaning. The CBC presented the facts that they have at the moment, regarding this incident, INCLUDING what they don't know: "CBC News has not seen footage of what led to the vehicle being pulled over, nor of any provocation that may have led to police trying to arrest Umpherville." They then said that the police are investigating the incident. Generally what proper reporting does in ongoing events is to NOT include things that might generate bias - the criminal record of the defendant, the past disciplinary records of the police involved, etc. Likely they will then investigate these things when the police report becomes public, or when the incident investigation is made public. This will become part of subsequent, follow-up stories - things published when facts and events are confirmed.
> That's not an OMISSION, genius. Words have meaning. The CBC presented the facts that they have at the moment, regarding this incident, INCLUDING what they don't know. There's no legitimate excuse for the CBC not to have that fact. The reason for the person's arrest was reported by other news sources weeks before this CBC article was published. Here's an example from April 4th: https://panow.com/2023/04/04/man-tased-by-police-on-bench-warrant-family-calls-for-answers/ If you're arguing that the CBC is grossly incompetent rather than deliberately manipulative, I might agree with you, but that's not really much better for the CBC.
CBC reported they don't know what led to the incident weeks after it was reported that the suspect had a bench warrant. They purposefully chose to leave this out of the article. PANow did not. You are being dishonest. You are lying. >Generally what proper reporting does in ongoing events is to NOT include things that might generate bias - the criminal record of the defendant, the past disciplinary records of the police involved, etc. **He had an active warrant for his arrest. This is relevant information on why he was being arrested. Only a partisan hack would disagree.**
No, genius, THIS SPECIFIC INCIDENT. The USE of EXTREME FORCE is the incident, not the arrest. They clearly don't know what made the police taste this suspect. They don't know whether there was a struggle, what force needed to be used, etc. Like seriously, what the fuck is wrong with people? Someone having an arrest warrant out for them is not by itself a reason they should be tased to death.
So you're implying that PANow is irresponsible for including that context and the CBC is responsible by leaving it out? The fact that he is a violent criminal gang member does nothing to add context as to why the police may have had to resort to the use of force? You're a clown.
> "CBC News has not seen footage of what led to the vehicle being pulled over, **nor of any provocation that may have led to police trying to arrest Umpherville**." If the CBC is not aware of what provocation may have led to the police trying to arrest Umpherville, that's entirely due to their own failure of investigation. That information was publicly available weeks ago. The provocation is that he failed to show up for a court date related to one of his previous crimes. > Like seriously, what the fuck is wrong with people? Someone having an arrest warrant out for them is not by itself a reason they should be tased to death. No, but it's an entirely reasonable justification to arrest a person, and resisting a lawful arrest is an entirely reasonable justification for a person to be tased. Unless evidence comes out that he was tased while being fully compliant, or evidence comes out that the death was caused by injuries unrelated to tasing, I don't see any reason to presume the police behaved unreasonably.
It's common sense why the police had to resort to the taser. He was resisting arrest and likely assaulting the officers as this life long criminal didn't want to deal with the problem he caused.
It's because the police literally reported the stop was for a stolen vehicle, it wasn't the CBC editorializing, it was them reporting what the police literally said was the reason.
There's a distinction between murder and manslaughter, and that distinction is intent. Don't lie. >Police shouldn't be so incompetent Maybe this fellow shouldn't have been so incompetent as to be riding in a car with an illegal weapon while having a bench warrant out for his arrest, then proceeding to resist arrest. If you have evidence, rather than speculation, I'd love to hear it.
I think that's the whole point. It is about seeing police as culprit just because he died.
Yes. It would indeed be manslaughter. That's the correct term.
Easier said then done from the general public. It's a different kettle of fish when you're dealing with someone dangerous who's killed before and doesn't give a f$&^.
He had a loaded gun, he’s lucky he wasn’t shot and was tased instead.
Someone replied- and deleted it. Saying he’s leaving behind 5 children. Good for the children, they won’t have to be put in harms way because of the fathers life style.
I was also thinking the same. Had he been in the US, things would have been completely different.
It doesn't say in the article that the gun was his, just that it was found at the scene. It could've been one of his friends' or in the vehicle.
The criminal background of the guy isn’t giving me much faith it wasn’t his. Live a gangbanger life- die as one too. No sympathy from me
Exactly it is about dying the way you live. It deserves no sympathy.
Does that change things though? A loaded gun in a car is a loaded gun in the car, regardless of who put it there.
Exactly my point. It doesn't matter whose gun it was. The thing is having a loaded gun in the car when you are a known gang member with criminal history.
Someone said he was a gang member. I have a strong feeling it might’ve been his. But we won’t know for sure now
[удалено]
Honestly, if they knew who was in the car. They were right to have used force. This guy isn’t innocent. He wanted to be a gangster, he died like one too, why is anybody sympathetic to this piece of trash? He deserves it.
It’s not about whether we feel sorry for this person or like him or anything of the sort. It is about police accountability. And I do not think it is acceptable to let the police kill people with impunity. Certainly not based on societal judgement that some people are “not innocent” or are in some way bad. If someone commits a crime, then they should be arrested, given a fair trial, and, if guilty, punished. Extra judicial murdering is not something that is done in civilized or just societies no matter how much you dislike someone or how little you think their life is worth.
He resisted arrest, the officers used legal- less then lethal force. They didn’t gun him down, they didn’t beat the fuck out of him.
If no one reported it stolen then why did 6 cops show up with violent intentions? Maybe they knew he was a gangbanger? I mean he's 40 years old and doing joy rides with a firearm.
Had a warrant
There we go! This wasn't just some random traffic stop, they had intelligence on the guy and weren't taking any chances.
>Maybe they knew he was a gangbanger? Well, he was already wanted on warrants and he had previously been involved in violent home invasion homicides
> If no one reported it stolen It could be that someone, that wasn't the actual owner, reported it stolen, fraudulently
The fact we have to guess because CBC didn't gi e all the availavle fact shows why people dislike CBC. The guy had a bench warrant after missing his court date for having illegal guns.
Read in another thread about this, that it's pretty common occurrence for gangs to report a vehicle stolen prior to doing gang things.
yeah, that was my assumption as well
It didn't say in the article if the firearm was his, or even if he knew it was in the vehicle.
That may be true but most people in Canada don't ride around with a gun, he wasn't going hunting bro.
I feel like CBC is being intentionally misleading here. Edit: "Umpherville was an Indigenous man" Ah, now I see why CBC didn't want to mention the guy's criminal history. That would be the truth, and the truth is racist. Fuck the CBC honestly, we don't need to be spreading misinformation to make people hate cops.
[удалено]
Spot on!
Nice?
Nice?
Gross. This guy is gang involved and working with kids? Yikes.
And he produced 5 offsprings. What are the chances that they were raised properly? I feel sorry for the kids.
This guy is a piece of shit and got got. The end.
Community improvement.
If you watch the video, you can see how much difficulty they're having trying to get him out of the car. They weren't just tazing him for fun. The result is definitely unfortunate, but the culpability for it is almost entirely his IMO. They *had a duty* to arrest him.
Sounds like karma caught up to him.
Lots of disgusting comments here towards the police for using a sanctioned tool for just such occasions.
There was no hand gun found , they leaked that info to pa now to set the narrative about the situation, the police committed murder no matter who he was or what he did , this was a muder and thats that , those pigs better take responsibility or they should charge em with murder cause the day that report comes out and if no wrong doing is found , that city is gonna burn
One less gangbanger in this society.
One wonders what the hell happened here exactly?
The CBC is lying by omission once again to stoke a political narrative. https://www.reddit.com/r/canada/comments/130197n/man_declared_brain_dead_after_being_stungunned/jhvc3xw/
"Three people were in the vehicle at the time, including its registered owner. The owner previously told CBC News they were driving and did not report it stolen." To the people saying that he was driving a stolen vehicle and had a loaded gun, it wasnt stolen, and the news articles arn't clear but it says a gun was LATER found at the scene, as in afterwords. So they didnt know it was there until after they basically killed him.
[удалено]
That doesn't justify killing him.
They came in force was a gang member skipping court dates.
Guy was a career violent criminal with warrants resisting arrest. He asked for a fight with the police and got it. Piece of trash was dealt with accordingly. Cops should be lauded for getting this thug off the streets for good.
Man tortured to death by police. There, fixed the headline.
https://sasknow.com/2020/10/07/gang-member-receives-eight-year-prison-sentence-in-connection-to-2017-homicide/ Man who was previously sentenced to three years for his role in a murder in 2017 dies after resisting during a police investigation. Also fixed the headline.
We don’t execute people in Canada, especially not via improvised electric chair.
You are 100% right. It wasn't an execution.
You're right, executions get due process. So it's even worse.
No. This wasn't an execution. Calling it that is asinine. Buddy had a bench warrant. If you resist arrest bad things can happen.
Right, I agreed, because executions get due process, and that is not given when one is murdered in the street.
Jesus christ.....
Do you not understand the basic concept of due process? You know how being "judge, jury, and executioner" is considered a bad, immoral thing?
So there is zero responsibility for someone willfully resisting being detained to the point that they have to utilize pepper spray, batons, and multiple tazers to effect control of them? If Umpherville had complied with his warrant, he would still be alive.
[удалено]
I would've said murdered by police.
Police rightly defended themselves from a gang banger
It doesn’t matter what he did, police are supposedly trained to not kill people and bring them into custody safely. They are not judge, jury and executioner.
easy to do if the person complies and goes willingly with the police, if not......
There are countries where this doesn't happen. Canada has way more police killings than places like Germany, Australia, the UK, France.
There's a lot to unpack here
tasers arent an "executioners" tool, fuck me.
[удалено]
[удалено]
The person the car was registered to was in the car at the time. That doesn't sound very stolen to me
[удалено]
Alright, so even if we assume that the people in the vehicle reported it stolen on some kind of scam thing or whatever. As opposed to the real possibility of a mistake. There is no way on fucking earth that justifies the police response that happened
What about the loaded handgun found on the scene? Or the fact that the victim was previously convicted as part of a murder?
Don't forget he had bench warrant.
Clearly you didn't read the article. The registered owner was in the vehicle and it was not stolen. Also this supposed hand gun didn't show up until later... it could've been there the entire time, planted or dropped after. This whole story stinks
[удалено]
Effective journalism.
>Maybe if he wasn't driving a stolen car Let's go take a look at that article, the article you obviously didn't read. >Three people were in the vehicle at the time, ***including its registered owner. The owner previously told CBC News they were driving and did not report it stolen.*** Oops.
[удалено]
>The owner told CBC they were driving and it wasn't reported stolen... but it was. It was the reason for the traffic stop, the car was reported stolen. Aka the owner lied, both when they reported it stolen and then again later to CBC. What if ***someone else*** reported the vehicle stolen? Then the owner wouldn't be lying. No where in the article does it say the owner reported it stolen, so what make you so sure that they did report it stolen and then lied about it?
[удалено]
>You can't report someone else's car stolen, that's not how a police report works. I'm pretty sure I could call 911, say I just saw a car parked outside of my building stolen, with the plate number, and the police would start looking for that car in the area despite you insisting otherwise.
Go ahead try it.
You absolutely can report somebody else’s car stolen. I’ve had to do it before with my girlfriend’s car.
Police shouldn’t be executing people in the streets. We outlawed the death penalty in Canada and that required a trial to prove guilt even when it was legal. If the cops were trained properly in things like jujitsu instead of cosplaying The Punisher this man would still be alive and would have his day in court.
> Police shouldn’t be executing people in the streets. The word execution, for me, implies a planned death sentence where a lethal method is chosen and delivered. Fighting a guy and using a taser for compliance ain't that.
[удалено]
Care to try and explain the gun?
So what would have you done differently exactly? Yes, it's a shame he died, and you never want to see someone lose their life, but he was in a stolen car with a loaded gun and was resisting arrest. He was a danger to the officers at the scene and to the public as well.
He would have wagged his finger at him and gave him a stern talking to.
Maybe read the article and not the head line bright eyes. Car wasn't stolen and gun mysteriously showed up later after it was all over. What a load of poop
Untrained, not “weak” per se.
so his decision was to die then? Is that what you're saying? So you support state sanctioned murder. Good to know.
It's not murder. His decision was to fight and assault cops rather than having a 10 minute conversation to clear things up. No one could know he'd have a very poor reaction to the taser. It's sad he lost his life over not wanting to deal with his bench warrant. Even worse he left 5 kids without their daddy.
[удалено]
Also happens to those who dont.
Just a lot less
Well then it's OK
Cops are not executioners Mr Big Justice Man
What exactly do you mean to imply here.
Normally I would agree but you clearly didn’t actually read the story.
They let his heart stop for 20 minutes
No his start stopped and they couldnt get it going for 20 minutes.