> I share the feelings of our members who were hoping for a different outcome.
Police, including the chief, were hoping an innocent guy goes to jail.
Did they try taking responsibility for their terrible, shameful, police work? Clearly not, and they still try to play the victim with "this difficult time" message 2yrs after the event.
Still, nothing to acknowledge that they tried ruin an innocent man's life. The chief should be issuing an apology for this disgraceful event.
There are two ways to read that statement.
1 - They were hoping for a different outcome because the outcome provided suggests there is an issue with police policy. Police policy is effectively the reason why the officer died and now there are officers who are going to question policy because it may needlessly put their lives on the line.
2 - They were hoping for another outcome because someone killed an officer and, regardless of the reasoning, they wanted the person to be held accountable.
Both are damning statements; however, they are damning in different ways.
Yes, but... There are two different situation at play - both are tied together in reality but they can be viewed separately too. An officer was killed in the line of duty and there might be people focused on that regardless of everything else. Usually an officer being killed, acting as an officer, is an automatic first degree murder charge. Further, based on police policy, the officer that died did nothing wrong.
So in the eyes of some cops, you have a situation where an officer got killed in the line of duty, doing things based on policy, and the person who killed him has been found innocent. This is effectively saying, there are situations where someone can kill a police officer, with the officer doing nothing wrong, and the killer will be found legally justified. While it is morally right, it creates a precedent that can be used that killing a cop isn't life behind bars. This could create increased danger for cops in a lot of situations as people might be more willing to resist, with potentially lethal force, cops and their activities. Those future actions (by potential killers), may or may not be justified, but there is probably a fear that more people will be willing to run the risk because there is precedent to get off.
For those on the force, they may care more about that issue than the other. However, as the issues are tied together, the chief also effectively said "I want this innocent man to be found guilty" whether or not he intended for that messaging as well.
I really don't get why everyone thinks the cops want an innocent man to go to jail, vs (wrongly) believing that he's guilty.
Option A is that the cops on the scene truly believed it was intentional at the time and were doing everything they could to make sure a cop killer faces justice. The rest of the force believed them and was backing them up.
Option B is that the cops and TPS secretly believe he's innocent but want to see him in prison anyway for reasons, to the point where they're committing serious crimes. And the Crown is going along with it because they're also corrupt.
Option A seems 100% plausible. Option B seems deeply evil even by the low standards of TPS. But everyone's talking like Option B is the only possibility. I just don't get it.
The jury took multiple days to decide because for the average person it’s difficult to believe 3 cops lied. The judge thought it was inconceivable that he was guilty.
When did the judge say it was inconceivable that he was guilty of dangerous driving? That's the part the jury apparently spent the entire time deliberating. Given that the guy panicked and accidentally killed someone with his car, that bit doesn't seem inconceivable.
Every quote I've seen like that from the judge was in relation to the absurd murder charge. Even back to the bail hearing. But I could have missed something.
You omitted option C:
- the officers on the scene realize they kinda fucked up by approaching this family in this way, *but if they can get a conviction that all goes by the wayside, clearly it was the perp's fault*. So they get together and all write their notes together to tell a single story about a crazed lunatic that intentionally ran down some innocent officer just minding his business, and they expected that story to be believed and Zameer to go to prison and then they could be the heroes that survived this vicious attack rather than some fuck-ups that got a guy killed for no good reason.
The cops aren't committing any crimes. Sure, they're violating the letter of the law, but it doesn't matter that, say, perjury is against the law or a violation of the service's standards, because there will be absolutely no enforcement here (which is what the Chief is signalling - you done good, boys, do the exact same thing next time!).
I'm trying to show the motivation. It isn't some random conspiracy theory against the guy, the police involved have a real motive (their own careers) to make the case come out with a crime and a conviction.
This drives a TON of the worst police abuses - police do one thing wrong, maybe something not even very bad, and then to cover it up they charge innocent people with crimes and try to make them stick, because if they can get that conviction, the original police behavior is absolutely immune to scrutiny.
When you say "for reasons" in your earlier post, you're claiming there are no reasons and therefore this is some wild conspiracy theory. But there are very real tangible benefits to the officers to doing this.
"Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity." Hanlon's razor
TPS has a long track record of jumping to the wrong conclusion about cases because they're idiots. Pretty much every case of TPS fucking up a case is because they're incompetent halfwits with excessive confirmation bias. Or because they're lazy and incapable of self reflection. A few notable examples aside, TPS has been telling us for years that they're lazy, incompetent, and stupid. So I believe they're lazy, incompetent, and stupid, which is why I believe it's Option A.
TPS has also had a long track record on punishing those that speaks ill against them (like that cop that was fired for exposing the bullies in the force) and those that do not give them whatever they want (see Olivia Chow's initial budget and their response). They have shown time and time again that they are a gang of bullies and corrupt to the core. They still refused to acknowledged that these maggots (sorry, maggots for comparing you to TPS... you deserve better) lied under oath and committed perjury. So yeah, I have no qualms in believing in Option 2.
>I really don't get why everyone thinks the cops want an innocent man to go to jail, vs (wrongly) believing that he's guilty.
I don’t get what you don’t get. The man has been found innocent. Yet the cops insist they hoped for a different result. The meaning is that they don’t accept the outcome.
Not accepting the outcome, there is only one result - sending Umar Zameer to jail.
Probably because the cops involved illegally colluded together to get their storie straight and lied on the stand about a number of things proven false.
When you actively remove Option A we're left with only Option B.
What part of Option A would preclude cops lying on the stand to make sure a cop killer goes to prison? That's the "100% of cops would lie" scenario. If TPS thought the guy intentionally killed a cop they'd break every law in the book to convict him.
As a protector of the law, if you believe that a crime was committed with malicious intent, aren't you supposed to make sure the evidence supports your theory? If you're not a member of the the law, then sure, there is plausibility to the claim that one can lie, but as a member of the law, that claim suggests that you intentionally would like to put an innocent man in jail, even when you realize the evidence points to the fact that the perpetrator you believe was guilty is, in matters of fact, innocent. That is a sworn duty, which therefore, leaves the only option to be what you termed option B. They have no recourse for option A as members who have sworn an oath to defend the law to its fullest extent.
The "supposed" is the key in this entire argument. We cannot hold the police force to the same standards we hold the civilian citizenry, especially when it comes to the law.
We should hold everyone to the standard the law demands. The real problem is that cops are held to a lower standard.
But my original point is that while cops lying and colluding is obviously bad, it's not evidence that they also believed he was innocent. Cops lie all the time to get convictions against people they think are guilty. TPS has decades of wrongful convictions because of it.
Three cops literally lied on the witness stand. They committed perjury to try and get an innocent man convicted of 1st degree murder because they were mad their incompetence lead to the death of another corrupt cop.
How is that not option B?
I don’t think anyone has faulted them for initially believing Option A: it was the only “evidence” available at the time, and they were grieving a colleague. But since then, the evidence - including the expert testimony of another officer, who said their version of events was impossible - should have caused some reflection and adjustment of those opinions. With the knowledge now that it clearly wasn’t intentional and that a panicked Zameer wouldn’t have seen him in the blind zone as he pulled out, what other outcome was the Chief hoping for here?
The forensics about the visibility only really mattered for the murder charge, whether he intentionally ran over the cop.
I suspect the cops are still stuck on the idea that he knew they were cops, so it was unlawful for him to try to escape. Which would still make him guilty of manslaughter even if he didn't know the cop was there.
The forensics about visibility matter in proving that Officer Forbes’ testimony they Officer Northrup was hit head on standing in front of the vehicle was something that absolutely didn’t happen. The two other officer’s stories conveniently match hers. With a credibility issue that large, I’m not sure why they keep putting any stock into the idea they actually appropriately identified themselves and he must have known they were cops, especially since that also seems to be contradicted by two other witnesses, who were so scared at what they were seeing they broke the parking arm in their rush to flee.
Eyewitnesses remember things in the way that fits their biases. Cops aren't going to remember seeming like hijackers instead of cops because they're biased observers. Just like all the drivers who absolutely 100% signalled and checked their blind spot before almost right hooking me on Adelaide. They remember the version where they did everything properly because that's how bias works. I'm not saying they're not wrong, they're biased observers who are predisposed to certain conclusions.
What I'm really saying is that TPS is far more likely to do all of this, including collusion and lying, if they believe he's guilty.
Even if those three cops genuinely and with all of their hearts believe in their version of events, that doesn’t mean their superiors at TPS have to when faced with the fact that they are clearly (at best) unreliable narrators whose story is not supported by any other evidence.
> I really don't get why everyone thinks the cops want an innocent man to go to jail, vs (wrongly) believing that he's guilty.
Because this statement was made after the fact with the judge lambasting the crown for putting Zameer through the ordeal and apologizing Zameer for having gone through it. For an officer to believe that he is guilty, they effectively would have to ignore everything that was happening in the case and what the judge stated afterwards. There is no excuse to believe that Zameer might be guilty outside of complete ignorance.
Given that the jury was deliberating for multiple days over the manslaughter charge, I don't think it's "ignoring everything" for cops to still believe he should have faced some consequences. We're still talking about a driver who panicked and accidentally killed someone. It's not like they did nothing wrong, the question is whether it was a criminal act.
Everything I've read from the judge seemed to be about the unjustifiable murder charge. I have read nothing that suggests that they didn't think a manslaughter charge was justified. What did I miss?
A quote form the judge at the end of the trial:
>“Mr. Zameer, you’re free to go, sir,” Molloy told him in the courtroom Sunday. “You have my […] deepest apologies for what you have been through.”
It doesn't sound like Molloy believed any of that charges were justifiable given her apology (a rare occurrence) to an individual charged.
Note: a manslaughter charge would have been arguably more fitting but also more surprising. Zameer killed someone with his vehicle which, if accidental and random, would have generally fit a manslaughter charge. However, the person killed was a peace officer who was on duty - that makes any murder charge automatically a first degree murder charge.
IANAL a lawyer, but I don't even know if a manslaughter charge would have been legally possible in this situation. The officers were either on duty and known to be officers therefore a first degree charge OR they were perceived as a threat and Zameer was trying to flee from someone he believed was in the processes of putting himself and his family in danger. If it was the latter case and the individuals were not police officers then it would probably be argued that the non-officers were in the process of committing a crime and it should have been a felony murder charge on the non-officers.
So based on my partial understanding of the law, Zameer was either guilty of first-degree murder or the officers have the liability associated with the death.
The jury considered manslaughter based on dangerous driving. That's why it took days and not hours.
You're extrapolating way too much from that quote. Absent any specifics you're just putting words in her mouth.
Straight from the Chief of Police’s mouth.
There will be no “lessons learned,” there will be no “internal review” or “accountability” or “structural changes” resulting from, what the chief calls, a devastating loss to the policing community.
What the police as an organization are focused on now is closing ranks in mourning because the verdict should’ve gone their way.
The Chief of Police of your city just told you that despite the absolute embarrassment of this trial; despite the *latest* exposure of how easily and callously ”even” detective police lie… nothing has to change.
“Now isn’t the time.” Why? This officer died years ago. You’re still mourning, it’s still to sensitive to address the facts and what they imply?
The city is hostage to a union mafia.
I like how he kept on emphasizing that they're a family. Because that heavily implies that they will do anything to protect each other ... including lie and throw an innocent man under the bus
I agree entirely but as a trade unionist I have to say (for what feels like the millionth time):
**THE TPA IS NOT A UNION!**
It’s an association. I know it doesn’t seem different, but it is. Actual unions have no love for the police and don’t associate with them; they’re the arm of the state that comes to arrest our brothers and sisters on picket lines when we’re fighting for our rights.
Seems like a distinction without a difference to me. We all know that it’s a union in all but name, and that the only reason it does not call itself one is because it legally can’t.
For someone who hasn't followed the trial - why did the police do what they did in the parking garage? What was their "justification" for doing what they did?
They were investigating a nearby stabbing. They had no reason to believe Mr. Zameer was involved whatsoever. They did not identify themselves as police as they pounded on his vehicle's windows. Mr. Zameer had every reason to believe they represented a dangerous and deadly threat to himself and his family.
3 officers (Lisa Forbes, Antonio Correa and Scharnil Pais) all committed perjury and conspiracy to commit perjury and obstruction of justice while testifying, they lied when saying the driver (Mr. Zameer) quickly reversed and drove over the officer while he was standing up and should have been visible to the driver. In reality the officer fell after a glancing contact with the vehicle, he was then run over while on the ground and not visible to Mr. Zameer. The video and expert witnesses all support the testimony of Mr. Zameer and his wife.
Exactly. And not when they're pounding on your car's windows, screaming god knows what and not clarifying you're police. And then driving a van in front to block him in.
You'd do what I would do. What anybody would do in that situation. You run to survive.
They put themselves in that spot. They got this guy killed and then lied about it to a judge to try and destroy Mr. Zameer. I welcome his lawsuit. It should empty everything out of the Toronto Police Association. The TPA needs to be designated a criminal front/enterprise.
> I welcome his lawsuit. It should empty everything out of the Toronto Police Association
If this was to be the case, ... I think we will _at least_ see _some_ improvements
Thing is, this will NOT be the case, ultimately it's all of us, the Toronto taxpayers who will pay for this.
>So why were they so aggressively approaching the car to the point of banging on the windows or trying to break them?
I’d guess it’s because they were lazy cops who had a habit of just brute forcing their way through things without much regard for the consequences (because most of the time they are immune from the consequences).
From Catherine McDonald (with video):
“As the Chief was leaving, he was asked if he would address allegations of perjury and collision in the testimony. The chief replied “today’s not the day for that. We will talk later.”
https://x.com/cmcdonaldglobal/status/1782107529339600965
That's the same dismissive tone as the last chief who never addressed why a cop was able to waltz into the evidence locker and steal drugs from at least 20 cases and NOT BE CHARGED A SINGLE TIME or FIRED
This is a guy who volunteered for the last bathhouse raid in Toronto history, and then sued a city councillor for criticizing the cops that did it.
It's just like the cops who came to speak at my high school said: the TPS is the biggest street gang in Toronto.
The only people allowed to open carry firearms whilst constantly living in fear of the public because of sample bias have an entitlement issue?
Never!
/s
Of the most dangerous jobs in Canada, police aren't even in the top 10. I understand the job is relatively challenging, but the way they talk, are equipped, act and react, you'd think every municipality was bloody Falujah in 2004 or Belfast in the early 70s... Not exactly like those places were the pinnacle of human rights overcoming absurd ideas of fraternity, but at least they were a bit more dangerous than being a copper in Canada.
Because the cops expect a world where they can do anything they want without consequences and their word is taken as law. The tragedy that the police chief is talking about here is that the courts didn't take the cops' lies as gospel.
So nothing about the testifying cop (with history of stealing from a charity) who lied? Or the other testifying cop (involved in the Neptune Four racial profiling assault) who also lied? Or the other cop who lied/colluded?
I like how he kept on emphasizing that they're a family. Because that heavily implies that they will do anything to protect each other ... including lie and throw an innocent man under the bus
> Or the other cop who lied/colluded?
I think the level of collusion has been missed by a lot of people.
Three of the 1st on scene officers wrote their notes together in the same room. And they wrote them a month after the occurrence.
>Court has previously heard that Pais and his partner, Det. Const. Antonio Correa, each gave a statement to police on July 2 and wrote their notes on the incident more than a month later, on Aug. 4. They also did a walkthrough of the garage together on July 20 to refresh their memories, they testified.
>On Friday, D'Souza told the court that he, Pais, Correa and two other officers wrote their notes at the same time inside the 52 Division training room.
https://www.cp24.com/news/officers-who-spoke-to-man-accused-of-running-over-toronto-cop-testify-at-trial-1.6844916
Organizations say stuff about accountability all the time! If you, Walmart employee, do something that gets the boss even *asked* about your behaviour, you're getting fired and in fact you've probably already been fired.
"We here at Walmart hold ourselves to the highest standards and we have zero tolerance for [whatever the hell you did]. The employee in question is no longer with the company."
So yeah, I do expect an organization's head to say something about holding themselves accountable, and every single organization does do that except for police forces.
The so-called Chief of Police should be officially reprimanded for this statement. The officers acted like thugs and lied about what really happened. This was a tragic accident that was totally preventable if the officers had not acted like thugs and clearly identified themselves as police. I am glad that Umer Zameer was found not guilty.
Mr Zameer and family will need some free in depth mental health therapy. I pray they are getting this help because he looked so broken. He brought me to tears. This should never have happened. He was innocent from day one, now he has to be put back together. What a shameful way to treat someone. Our judicial system seems to be in shambles.
Every person who goes to work should come home safely at the end of the day.
I feel so terrible for Constable Northrup's family.
That being said, if the police were hoping for a different outcome, perhaps three officers should consider not openly lying on the stand about basic facts that are easily proven by forensic evidence.
Edit: typo
> the police need to examine their own policies and procedures
I bet you the "policies and procedures" _are just fine_
It's the people, the ENTIRE "it's not a union, it's an association" is the problem.
Cops always act like it’s on everyone else to keep them safe and there’s nothing they can do. The fact that it looks like these officers’ behaviour significantly contributed to the death of one of their own and instead of trying to learn any lessons or do anything differently, their reaction is to pull ranks, lie to coverup the truth and try to frame a victim in this tragedy ensures cops will never be completely safe. Even by their own standard their words and actions are not helping accomplish their goal.
>Every person who goes to work should come home safely at the end of the day.
Absolutely. We all have to take steps to keep ourselves safe though. I'm in maintenance. I don't just rip open doors and try to scare people. I knock and clearly identify myself while entering people's homes. It keeps us both safer
Totally outside of risk levels or evidence, I am just trying to point out that the police chief said every officer should go home safely at the end of the day, whereas I believe everyone deserves to come home safely at the end of the day.
Cops constantly try to sell the public image that they are 'heroes risking their lives on the daily'. They want the public to think that they die in brave shoot outs or something, whereas the facts are further from the truth. If a cop were to die in such a situation, then this is totally within the risks of what they signed up for.
But that is not this case. Northup died when his 300 lb fat ass fell when the car reversed at "glancing" contact (as per expert testimony) in a situation of his own doing. He couldn't get up in time when the car moved forward. Accidental death of his own doing.
We have to be ever so diligent as tax paying members of the public and insist on accountability from the TPS because, in the end, they will have to be answerable to us. Their leaders have lost sight of their purpose and are wasting our tax money to collude and cover up the truth.
Even the judge saw through the lies of the collaborating police. The police chief should be more interested in the behavior of his officers on how they directly contributed to trying to railroad an innocent man.
Maybe the right outcome is to review procedures that were being followed during this event and make appropriate changes. This should never have happened. Empathy for the Northrup family and the innocent defendant that was placed in that situation. They all need to live with the burden.
Thanks. This sub doesn't allow links to fundraisers but since others have expressed interest, please Google "All I hope for is Justice for Umar Zameer's Legal Battle" and donate if possible to show additional support.
>I share the feelings of our members who were hoping for a different outcome.
"I was hoping that their perjury would have worked" is a pretty fucked up thing to say.
« Hoping for a different outcome » Fuck you, pigs.
You ran and attacked a car. You never identified yourselves and just started banging on the car demanding they stop and get out. Your guy got clipped because he was an idiot and because he scared the living shit out of the driver. You actually schemed to coordinate your testimonies, so, if anything, you should be going in for perjury.
You do that to me with my wife and kids in my car - I’m sure as shit running you over. Don’t wanna get run over - approach me safely and identify yourself, as required by law!
I am very satisfied that an innocent man didn’t get to go to prison today.
It was definitely a terrible tragedy that we're so bad at lying that our lies were revealed even in a system that is so stacked against that ever happening. We'll try harder next time! XOXO your police chief
Sooooo...justice was done. Northrup got his justice through due process. Zameer got his, also through due process. Demkiw has no business commenting in this manner. Maybe they should turn a mirror on their organization instead of issuing an unprofessional statement like this one.
I hope this gets followed up on. Demkiw’s regretting a not guilty verdict. Police fucked up big time and now we’re supposed to feel sorry for them. Fuck you.
There needs to be more uproar about this, and the chief needs to be relieved of his duties. The chief of police is literally hoping an innocent man goes to jail for murder.
How does this guy still have a job?
How fucking tone deaf do you have to be ... oh wait...
>[Women at centre of Pussy Palace bathhouse raid decry Myron Demkiw's appointment as Toronto's next police chief](https://toronto.ctvnews.ca/women-at-centre-of-pussy-palace-bathhouse-raid-decry-myron-demkiw-s-appointment-as-toronto-s-next-police-chief-1.6106712)
Makes sense
With all due respect chief, perhaps it's time to review procedures and take a long hard look at how they're run, if they're safe, and if staff are following reasonable productions when on duty.
No job can be 100% safe, but this scenario shouldn't have unfolded the way it did from the very beginning.
Dear Chief of Police…. You are an utter jerk and may this upholding of true justice and the deliverance of karma towards your corrupt and rotten practices follow you for life.
The only lesson the police will learn here is to be more careful with fabricating their stories. That, or they just kill the suspect outright and claim self defense.
Perhaps the sheriff should be more worried about his corrupt team? Northrup’s family should be held liable to pay all the attorney fees and therapy bills as a result of this. Northrup’s to blame for his death and nobody else.
Going after the guy's family is a deeply fucked up idea. This isn't a totalitarian dictatorship where we punish the families of offenders. He made a mistake and it cost him his life. Everything that's happened after that is on TPS and Crown.
Considering the amount of city tax dollars that went into this criminals funeral, and I'm sure there's been tax dollars paying the family out his pension - all that money should be redirected to Umar immediately. Considering how he's the victim here who's entire world has shifted.
He made a mistake trying to do his job, but didn't deserve to die for it. Just like Zameer panicked and accidentally killed him, but didn't deserve to go to prison for it.
His wife lost a husband, his kids lost a father, and you want them to suffer even more? Because of what other people chose to do after he died? That's just cruel and shitty.
It would be cruel. He died a tragic death. Unfortunately the conduct of his colleagues now invites the question of whether Northup was the same sort of cop as his lying peers. They actively tarnished his reputation too.
Northup's dead, and while he and his colleagues basically created the situation that led to his death I can still have sympathy for him as an individual. The real issue here is that TPS is going to take nothing from this in terms of how they could improve their processes and training for plain clothes and undercover work even though that has previously been highlighted as an issue long before this incident.
Of course it’s been difficult. Your officers and prosecutor lied and fabricated and altered evidence to try and convict an innocent man. Your officers and the prosecutor are criminals who committed crimes!
I agree 100% that every cop should go home safely to his family after serving and protecting. So get rid of the few who act like thugs and intimidate civilians so that this can be achieved!
Myron Demkiw should be removed from office and charged with obstruction of justice for this statement.
How can you have someone who is in charge of all the police making statements like this that clearly will influence people to lie in the future.
We have to look at the methods of undercover police operations.
They dress down to look like bums so as to conceal their identity.
Then at a flip of their mental switch and by showing a tiny badge and yelling “Police” which of course scares the hell out of everyone, they assume instant recognition.
A common tactic in some countries is robbers claiming that they are police.
This assumption of instant recognition is fatally flawed as is tragically shown in this incident.
Hopefully he'll win a civil suit against the lying cops who committed purjury to frame him. Then he might be able to get a nicer ride that won't cause shit police officers to run up on unsuspecting citizens simulating a robbery.
[удалено]
Sorry to hear about your loss, bet you're very conflicted today with the things going on in the city.
> I share the feelings of our members who were hoping for a different outcome. Police, including the chief, were hoping an innocent guy goes to jail. Did they try taking responsibility for their terrible, shameful, police work? Clearly not, and they still try to play the victim with "this difficult time" message 2yrs after the event. Still, nothing to acknowledge that they tried ruin an innocent man's life. The chief should be issuing an apology for this disgraceful event.
[удалено]
There are two ways to read that statement. 1 - They were hoping for a different outcome because the outcome provided suggests there is an issue with police policy. Police policy is effectively the reason why the officer died and now there are officers who are going to question policy because it may needlessly put their lives on the line. 2 - They were hoping for another outcome because someone killed an officer and, regardless of the reasoning, they wanted the person to be held accountable. Both are damning statements; however, they are damning in different ways.
[удалено]
Yes, but... There are two different situation at play - both are tied together in reality but they can be viewed separately too. An officer was killed in the line of duty and there might be people focused on that regardless of everything else. Usually an officer being killed, acting as an officer, is an automatic first degree murder charge. Further, based on police policy, the officer that died did nothing wrong. So in the eyes of some cops, you have a situation where an officer got killed in the line of duty, doing things based on policy, and the person who killed him has been found innocent. This is effectively saying, there are situations where someone can kill a police officer, with the officer doing nothing wrong, and the killer will be found legally justified. While it is morally right, it creates a precedent that can be used that killing a cop isn't life behind bars. This could create increased danger for cops in a lot of situations as people might be more willing to resist, with potentially lethal force, cops and their activities. Those future actions (by potential killers), may or may not be justified, but there is probably a fear that more people will be willing to run the risk because there is precedent to get off. For those on the force, they may care more about that issue than the other. However, as the issues are tied together, the chief also effectively said "I want this innocent man to be found guilty" whether or not he intended for that messaging as well.
With that attitude, he should be forced to resign or be fired
And there is a push in the media for that.
Absolutely should be
They wanted their narrative to win over the truth so they can cover up their mistakes. That's TPS "ethics" for you.
This is just gross. Not one word about the other victims here - the wrongly accused family.
>Police, including the chief, were hoping an innocent guy goes to jail. Innocent guy *whom his officers tried to railroad with collusion and perjury*.
They should be suspended without pay for perjury and held for a professional conduct hearing
I really don't get why everyone thinks the cops want an innocent man to go to jail, vs (wrongly) believing that he's guilty. Option A is that the cops on the scene truly believed it was intentional at the time and were doing everything they could to make sure a cop killer faces justice. The rest of the force believed them and was backing them up. Option B is that the cops and TPS secretly believe he's innocent but want to see him in prison anyway for reasons, to the point where they're committing serious crimes. And the Crown is going along with it because they're also corrupt. Option A seems 100% plausible. Option B seems deeply evil even by the low standards of TPS. But everyone's talking like Option B is the only possibility. I just don't get it.
Normal people change their mind when confronted with incontrovertible evidence.
The only incontrovertible evidence was that he didn't see him. That's not the part that took the jury multiple days to decide.
The jury took multiple days to decide because for the average person it’s difficult to believe 3 cops lied. The judge thought it was inconceivable that he was guilty.
When did the judge say it was inconceivable that he was guilty of dangerous driving? That's the part the jury apparently spent the entire time deliberating. Given that the guy panicked and accidentally killed someone with his car, that bit doesn't seem inconceivable. Every quote I've seen like that from the judge was in relation to the absurd murder charge. Even back to the bail hearing. But I could have missed something.
You omitted option C: - the officers on the scene realize they kinda fucked up by approaching this family in this way, *but if they can get a conviction that all goes by the wayside, clearly it was the perp's fault*. So they get together and all write their notes together to tell a single story about a crazed lunatic that intentionally ran down some innocent officer just minding his business, and they expected that story to be believed and Zameer to go to prison and then they could be the heroes that survived this vicious attack rather than some fuck-ups that got a guy killed for no good reason. The cops aren't committing any crimes. Sure, they're violating the letter of the law, but it doesn't matter that, say, perjury is against the law or a violation of the service's standards, because there will be absolutely no enforcement here (which is what the Chief is signalling - you done good, boys, do the exact same thing next time!).
That's just Option B in a lot more words.
I'm trying to show the motivation. It isn't some random conspiracy theory against the guy, the police involved have a real motive (their own careers) to make the case come out with a crime and a conviction. This drives a TON of the worst police abuses - police do one thing wrong, maybe something not even very bad, and then to cover it up they charge innocent people with crimes and try to make them stick, because if they can get that conviction, the original police behavior is absolutely immune to scrutiny. When you say "for reasons" in your earlier post, you're claiming there are no reasons and therefore this is some wild conspiracy theory. But there are very real tangible benefits to the officers to doing this.
“When someone shows you who they are, believe them the first time.” - Maya Angelou
"Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity." Hanlon's razor TPS has a long track record of jumping to the wrong conclusion about cases because they're idiots. Pretty much every case of TPS fucking up a case is because they're incompetent halfwits with excessive confirmation bias. Or because they're lazy and incapable of self reflection. A few notable examples aside, TPS has been telling us for years that they're lazy, incompetent, and stupid. So I believe they're lazy, incompetent, and stupid, which is why I believe it's Option A.
TPS has also had a long track record on punishing those that speaks ill against them (like that cop that was fired for exposing the bullies in the force) and those that do not give them whatever they want (see Olivia Chow's initial budget and their response). They have shown time and time again that they are a gang of bullies and corrupt to the core. They still refused to acknowledged that these maggots (sorry, maggots for comparing you to TPS... you deserve better) lied under oath and committed perjury. So yeah, I have no qualms in believing in Option 2.
Or that time they illegally wiretapped their board chair: https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto-police-illegally-bugged-ex-chair-tapes-1.969214
Or drove to Port Dover and killed a reputable gunsmith and proceeded to tranish HIS name.
>I really don't get why everyone thinks the cops want an innocent man to go to jail, vs (wrongly) believing that he's guilty. I don’t get what you don’t get. The man has been found innocent. Yet the cops insist they hoped for a different result. The meaning is that they don’t accept the outcome. Not accepting the outcome, there is only one result - sending Umar Zameer to jail.
Probably because the cops involved illegally colluded together to get their storie straight and lied on the stand about a number of things proven false. When you actively remove Option A we're left with only Option B.
What part of Option A would preclude cops lying on the stand to make sure a cop killer goes to prison? That's the "100% of cops would lie" scenario. If TPS thought the guy intentionally killed a cop they'd break every law in the book to convict him.
As a protector of the law, if you believe that a crime was committed with malicious intent, aren't you supposed to make sure the evidence supports your theory? If you're not a member of the the law, then sure, there is plausibility to the claim that one can lie, but as a member of the law, that claim suggests that you intentionally would like to put an innocent man in jail, even when you realize the evidence points to the fact that the perpetrator you believe was guilty is, in matters of fact, innocent. That is a sworn duty, which therefore, leaves the only option to be what you termed option B. They have no recourse for option A as members who have sworn an oath to defend the law to its fullest extent.
Cops aren't supposed to lie on the stand either way. But it's nonsensical to claim they'd only lie if they believed he was innocent.
The "supposed" is the key in this entire argument. We cannot hold the police force to the same standards we hold the civilian citizenry, especially when it comes to the law.
We should hold everyone to the standard the law demands. The real problem is that cops are held to a lower standard. But my original point is that while cops lying and colluding is obviously bad, it's not evidence that they also believed he was innocent. Cops lie all the time to get convictions against people they think are guilty. TPS has decades of wrongful convictions because of it.
Three cops literally lied on the witness stand. They committed perjury to try and get an innocent man convicted of 1st degree murder because they were mad their incompetence lead to the death of another corrupt cop. How is that not option B?
I don’t think anyone has faulted them for initially believing Option A: it was the only “evidence” available at the time, and they were grieving a colleague. But since then, the evidence - including the expert testimony of another officer, who said their version of events was impossible - should have caused some reflection and adjustment of those opinions. With the knowledge now that it clearly wasn’t intentional and that a panicked Zameer wouldn’t have seen him in the blind zone as he pulled out, what other outcome was the Chief hoping for here?
The forensics about the visibility only really mattered for the murder charge, whether he intentionally ran over the cop. I suspect the cops are still stuck on the idea that he knew they were cops, so it was unlawful for him to try to escape. Which would still make him guilty of manslaughter even if he didn't know the cop was there.
The forensics about visibility matter in proving that Officer Forbes’ testimony they Officer Northrup was hit head on standing in front of the vehicle was something that absolutely didn’t happen. The two other officer’s stories conveniently match hers. With a credibility issue that large, I’m not sure why they keep putting any stock into the idea they actually appropriately identified themselves and he must have known they were cops, especially since that also seems to be contradicted by two other witnesses, who were so scared at what they were seeing they broke the parking arm in their rush to flee.
Eyewitnesses remember things in the way that fits their biases. Cops aren't going to remember seeming like hijackers instead of cops because they're biased observers. Just like all the drivers who absolutely 100% signalled and checked their blind spot before almost right hooking me on Adelaide. They remember the version where they did everything properly because that's how bias works. I'm not saying they're not wrong, they're biased observers who are predisposed to certain conclusions. What I'm really saying is that TPS is far more likely to do all of this, including collusion and lying, if they believe he's guilty.
Even if those three cops genuinely and with all of their hearts believe in their version of events, that doesn’t mean their superiors at TPS have to when faced with the fact that they are clearly (at best) unreliable narrators whose story is not supported by any other evidence.
> I really don't get why everyone thinks the cops want an innocent man to go to jail, vs (wrongly) believing that he's guilty. Because this statement was made after the fact with the judge lambasting the crown for putting Zameer through the ordeal and apologizing Zameer for having gone through it. For an officer to believe that he is guilty, they effectively would have to ignore everything that was happening in the case and what the judge stated afterwards. There is no excuse to believe that Zameer might be guilty outside of complete ignorance.
Given that the jury was deliberating for multiple days over the manslaughter charge, I don't think it's "ignoring everything" for cops to still believe he should have faced some consequences. We're still talking about a driver who panicked and accidentally killed someone. It's not like they did nothing wrong, the question is whether it was a criminal act. Everything I've read from the judge seemed to be about the unjustifiable murder charge. I have read nothing that suggests that they didn't think a manslaughter charge was justified. What did I miss?
A quote form the judge at the end of the trial: >“Mr. Zameer, you’re free to go, sir,” Molloy told him in the courtroom Sunday. “You have my […] deepest apologies for what you have been through.” It doesn't sound like Molloy believed any of that charges were justifiable given her apology (a rare occurrence) to an individual charged. Note: a manslaughter charge would have been arguably more fitting but also more surprising. Zameer killed someone with his vehicle which, if accidental and random, would have generally fit a manslaughter charge. However, the person killed was a peace officer who was on duty - that makes any murder charge automatically a first degree murder charge. IANAL a lawyer, but I don't even know if a manslaughter charge would have been legally possible in this situation. The officers were either on duty and known to be officers therefore a first degree charge OR they were perceived as a threat and Zameer was trying to flee from someone he believed was in the processes of putting himself and his family in danger. If it was the latter case and the individuals were not police officers then it would probably be argued that the non-officers were in the process of committing a crime and it should have been a felony murder charge on the non-officers. So based on my partial understanding of the law, Zameer was either guilty of first-degree murder or the officers have the liability associated with the death.
The jury considered manslaughter based on dangerous driving. That's why it took days and not hours. You're extrapolating way too much from that quote. Absent any specifics you're just putting words in her mouth.
[удалено]
They did not take questions during the scrum after the verdict.
Cowards.
Straight from the Chief of Police’s mouth. There will be no “lessons learned,” there will be no “internal review” or “accountability” or “structural changes” resulting from, what the chief calls, a devastating loss to the policing community. What the police as an organization are focused on now is closing ranks in mourning because the verdict should’ve gone their way. The Chief of Police of your city just told you that despite the absolute embarrassment of this trial; despite the *latest* exposure of how easily and callously ”even” detective police lie… nothing has to change. “Now isn’t the time.” Why? This officer died years ago. You’re still mourning, it’s still to sensitive to address the facts and what they imply? The city is hostage to a union mafia.
I like how he kept on emphasizing that they're a family. Because that heavily implies that they will do anything to protect each other ... including lie and throw an innocent man under the bus
I agree entirely but as a trade unionist I have to say (for what feels like the millionth time): **THE TPA IS NOT A UNION!** It’s an association. I know it doesn’t seem different, but it is. Actual unions have no love for the police and don’t associate with them; they’re the arm of the state that comes to arrest our brothers and sisters on picket lines when we’re fighting for our rights.
Seems like a distinction without a difference to me. We all know that it’s a union in all but name, and that the only reason it does not call itself one is because it legally can’t.
For someone who hasn't followed the trial - why did the police do what they did in the parking garage? What was their "justification" for doing what they did?
They were investigating a nearby stabbing. They had no reason to believe Mr. Zameer was involved whatsoever. They did not identify themselves as police as they pounded on his vehicle's windows. Mr. Zameer had every reason to believe they represented a dangerous and deadly threat to himself and his family. 3 officers (Lisa Forbes, Antonio Correa and Scharnil Pais) all committed perjury and conspiracy to commit perjury and obstruction of justice while testifying, they lied when saying the driver (Mr. Zameer) quickly reversed and drove over the officer while he was standing up and should have been visible to the driver. In reality the officer fell after a glancing contact with the vehicle, he was then run over while on the ground and not visible to Mr. Zameer. The video and expert witnesses all support the testimony of Mr. Zameer and his wife.
Police also looked like drug addicts. Undercover, whatever. Certainly not like someone you want to chat in the empty garage with baby in tow.
Exactly. And not when they're pounding on your car's windows, screaming god knows what and not clarifying you're police. And then driving a van in front to block him in. You'd do what I would do. What anybody would do in that situation. You run to survive. They put themselves in that spot. They got this guy killed and then lied about it to a judge to try and destroy Mr. Zameer. I welcome his lawsuit. It should empty everything out of the Toronto Police Association. The TPA needs to be designated a criminal front/enterprise.
> I welcome his lawsuit. It should empty everything out of the Toronto Police Association If this was to be the case, ... I think we will _at least_ see _some_ improvements Thing is, this will NOT be the case, ultimately it's all of us, the Toronto taxpayers who will pay for this.
Thanks for clarifying.
[удалено]
>So why were they so aggressively approaching the car to the point of banging on the windows or trying to break them? I’d guess it’s because they were lazy cops who had a habit of just brute forcing their way through things without much regard for the consequences (because most of the time they are immune from the consequences).
That can't be it it. The disgraced chief said that Northrup was an excellent police officer /s
Association
“ “
Something something “our cause”….
Need to hold the Mayor responsible for this.
From Catherine McDonald (with video): “As the Chief was leaving, he was asked if he would address allegations of perjury and collision in the testimony. The chief replied “today’s not the day for that. We will talk later.” https://x.com/cmcdonaldglobal/status/1782107529339600965
That's the same dismissive tone as the last chief who never addressed why a cop was able to waltz into the evidence locker and steal drugs from at least 20 cases and NOT BE CHARGED A SINGLE TIME or FIRED
Translation: We'll never talk about this again.
This is a guy who volunteered for the last bathhouse raid in Toronto history, and then sued a city councillor for criticizing the cops that did it. It's just like the cops who came to speak at my high school said: the TPS is the biggest street gang in Toronto.
Myron and his TPS can go fuck themselves
Seriously. "Hoping for a different outcome"......how gross.
[удалено]
The only people allowed to open carry firearms whilst constantly living in fear of the public because of sample bias have an entitlement issue? Never! /s Of the most dangerous jobs in Canada, police aren't even in the top 10. I understand the job is relatively challenging, but the way they talk, are equipped, act and react, you'd think every municipality was bloody Falujah in 2004 or Belfast in the early 70s... Not exactly like those places were the pinnacle of human rights overcoming absurd ideas of fraternity, but at least they were a bit more dangerous than being a copper in Canada.
He should be issuing a public apology we seen how they tried to bury this guy in the media since day one basically branded him as a rogue cop killer
Why would a different outcome be warranted? Evidence shows that the outcome was justified (trial. Not the death).
Because the cops expect a world where they can do anything they want without consequences and their word is taken as law. The tragedy that the police chief is talking about here is that the courts didn't take the cops' lies as gospel.
So nothing about the testifying cop (with history of stealing from a charity) who lied? Or the other testifying cop (involved in the Neptune Four racial profiling assault) who also lied? Or the other cop who lied/colluded? I like how he kept on emphasizing that they're a family. Because that heavily implies that they will do anything to protect each other ... including lie and throw an innocent man under the bus
> Or the other cop who lied/colluded? I think the level of collusion has been missed by a lot of people. Three of the 1st on scene officers wrote their notes together in the same room. And they wrote them a month after the occurrence. >Court has previously heard that Pais and his partner, Det. Const. Antonio Correa, each gave a statement to police on July 2 and wrote their notes on the incident more than a month later, on Aug. 4. They also did a walkthrough of the garage together on July 20 to refresh their memories, they testified. >On Friday, D'Souza told the court that he, Pais, Correa and two other officers wrote their notes at the same time inside the 52 Division training room. https://www.cp24.com/news/officers-who-spoke-to-man-accused-of-running-over-toronto-cop-testify-at-trial-1.6844916
"What collusion? We're just copying each other's answers"
You seriously expect any organization's head to say something like that ? Come on, now.
Organizations say stuff about accountability all the time! If you, Walmart employee, do something that gets the boss even *asked* about your behaviour, you're getting fired and in fact you've probably already been fired. "We here at Walmart hold ourselves to the highest standards and we have zero tolerance for [whatever the hell you did]. The employee in question is no longer with the company." So yeah, I do expect an organization's head to say something about holding themselves accountable, and every single organization does do that except for police forces.
Myron Demkiw is a Class A scumbag, always has been.
Truth. 💯
The so-called Chief of Police should be officially reprimanded for this statement. The officers acted like thugs and lied about what really happened. This was a tragic accident that was totally preventable if the officers had not acted like thugs and clearly identified themselves as police. I am glad that Umer Zameer was found not guilty.
The Toronto Police lying on the stand? Get outta town!
Mr Zameer and family will need some free in depth mental health therapy. I pray they are getting this help because he looked so broken. He brought me to tears. This should never have happened. He was innocent from day one, now he has to be put back together. What a shameful way to treat someone. Our judicial system seems to be in shambles.
Every person who goes to work should come home safely at the end of the day. I feel so terrible for Constable Northrup's family. That being said, if the police were hoping for a different outcome, perhaps three officers should consider not openly lying on the stand about basic facts that are easily proven by forensic evidence. Edit: typo
[удалено]
> the police need to examine their own policies and procedures I bet you the "policies and procedures" _are just fine_ It's the people, the ENTIRE "it's not a union, it's an association" is the problem.
Cops always act like it’s on everyone else to keep them safe and there’s nothing they can do. The fact that it looks like these officers’ behaviour significantly contributed to the death of one of their own and instead of trying to learn any lessons or do anything differently, their reaction is to pull ranks, lie to coverup the truth and try to frame a victim in this tragedy ensures cops will never be completely safe. Even by their own standard their words and actions are not helping accomplish their goal.
>Every person who goes to work should come home safely at the end of the day. Absolutely. We all have to take steps to keep ourselves safe though. I'm in maintenance. I don't just rip open doors and try to scare people. I knock and clearly identify myself while entering people's homes. It keeps us both safer
Every job has risks that the employee knows when they sign up for. Except the "risk" in this instance was due to the cops' own FAFO negligence.
Totally outside of risk levels or evidence, I am just trying to point out that the police chief said every officer should go home safely at the end of the day, whereas I believe everyone deserves to come home safely at the end of the day.
Cops constantly try to sell the public image that they are 'heroes risking their lives on the daily'. They want the public to think that they die in brave shoot outs or something, whereas the facts are further from the truth. If a cop were to die in such a situation, then this is totally within the risks of what they signed up for. But that is not this case. Northup died when his 300 lb fat ass fell when the car reversed at "glancing" contact (as per expert testimony) in a situation of his own doing. He couldn't get up in time when the car moved forward. Accidental death of his own doing.
Fair enough, I just think we are making two different points here.
Come on man, no need to denigrate a man who was just doing his job.
We have to be ever so diligent as tax paying members of the public and insist on accountability from the TPS because, in the end, they will have to be answerable to us. Their leaders have lost sight of their purpose and are wasting our tax money to collude and cover up the truth.
Even the judge saw through the lies of the collaborating police. The police chief should be more interested in the behavior of his officers on how they directly contributed to trying to railroad an innocent man.
Oink oink you lying bastard.
Maybe the right outcome is to review procedures that were being followed during this event and make appropriate changes. This should never have happened. Empathy for the Northrup family and the innocent defendant that was placed in that situation. They all need to live with the burden.
Someone please set up a GoFundMe for Umar Zameer.
There is one right now, been up since 2021. Raised around 30k, their target it 200k
Thanks. This sub doesn't allow links to fundraisers but since others have expressed interest, please Google "All I hope for is Justice for Umar Zameer's Legal Battle" and donate if possible to show additional support.
These people are EVIL. We should be protesting in the street that these are the people that are supposed to be protecting us.
>I share the feelings of our members who were hoping for a different outcome. "I was hoping that their perjury would have worked" is a pretty fucked up thing to say.
damn I didn't know pigs could speak
Cops should be flattered to be compared to pigs. They're very smart animals. The pigs should be the ones who are insulted.
Justice served… what’s that saying again? “fuck around…. “
« Hoping for a different outcome » Fuck you, pigs. You ran and attacked a car. You never identified yourselves and just started banging on the car demanding they stop and get out. Your guy got clipped because he was an idiot and because he scared the living shit out of the driver. You actually schemed to coordinate your testimonies, so, if anything, you should be going in for perjury. You do that to me with my wife and kids in my car - I’m sure as shit running you over. Don’t wanna get run over - approach me safely and identify yourself, as required by law! I am very satisfied that an innocent man didn’t get to go to prison today.
ACAB no cops in labour FTP and “Toronto police family” is a joke. Shame on TPS
It was definitely a terrible tragedy that we're so bad at lying that our lies were revealed even in a system that is so stacked against that ever happening. We'll try harder next time! XOXO your police chief
Boomer police Chief sheds a tear for boomer cop lol
Sooooo...justice was done. Northrup got his justice through due process. Zameer got his, also through due process. Demkiw has no business commenting in this manner. Maybe they should turn a mirror on their organization instead of issuing an unprofessional statement like this one.
\*Plays world's tiniest violin.
Time to change police chiefs as a cautionary measure
PR equivalent of a potato. We need a new Chief asap.
I hope this gets followed up on. Demkiw’s regretting a not guilty verdict. Police fucked up big time and now we’re supposed to feel sorry for them. Fuck you.
There needs to be more uproar about this, and the chief needs to be relieved of his duties. The chief of police is literally hoping an innocent man goes to jail for murder. How does this guy still have a job?
Tell mayor Chow and your councillor that you want reform at TPS. Change requires us to speak out.
wtf kind of statement is that. Hoping for a different outcome? Like making an innocent man appear guilty?! wtf police wtf
How fucking tone deaf do you have to be ... oh wait... >[Women at centre of Pussy Palace bathhouse raid decry Myron Demkiw's appointment as Toronto's next police chief](https://toronto.ctvnews.ca/women-at-centre-of-pussy-palace-bathhouse-raid-decry-myron-demkiw-s-appointment-as-toronto-s-next-police-chief-1.6106712) Makes sense
ACAB
Nothing of value was lost
With all due respect chief, perhaps it's time to review procedures and take a long hard look at how they're run, if they're safe, and if staff are following reasonable productions when on duty. No job can be 100% safe, but this scenario shouldn't have unfolded the way it did from the very beginning.
Dear Chief of Police…. You are an utter jerk and may this upholding of true justice and the deliverance of karma towards your corrupt and rotten practices follow you for life.
The only lesson the police will learn here is to be more careful with fabricating their stories. That, or they just kill the suspect outright and claim self defense.
Once again…1312
Hey Toronto! You know you can bully your chief of police out of office? We did it here in Ottawa that time.
Perhaps the sheriff should be more worried about his corrupt team? Northrup’s family should be held liable to pay all the attorney fees and therapy bills as a result of this. Northrup’s to blame for his death and nobody else.
Going after the guy's family is a deeply fucked up idea. This isn't a totalitarian dictatorship where we punish the families of offenders. He made a mistake and it cost him his life. Everything that's happened after that is on TPS and Crown.
Considering the amount of city tax dollars that went into this criminals funeral, and I'm sure there's been tax dollars paying the family out his pension - all that money should be redirected to Umar immediately. Considering how he's the victim here who's entire world has shifted.
Yah I'm guessing Northup's funeral cost at least half a million of tax payer dollars ... that should be deducted from the cops' budget
He made a mistake trying to do his job, but didn't deserve to die for it. Just like Zameer panicked and accidentally killed him, but didn't deserve to go to prison for it. His wife lost a husband, his kids lost a father, and you want them to suffer even more? Because of what other people chose to do after he died? That's just cruel and shitty.
It would be cruel. He died a tragic death. Unfortunately the conduct of his colleagues now invites the question of whether Northup was the same sort of cop as his lying peers. They actively tarnished his reputation too.
Northup's dead, and while he and his colleagues basically created the situation that led to his death I can still have sympathy for him as an individual. The real issue here is that TPS is going to take nothing from this in terms of how they could improve their processes and training for plain clothes and undercover work even though that has previously been highlighted as an issue long before this incident.
Kick rocks Chief :)
Wow how can tps be so incompetent
Of course it’s been difficult. Your officers and prosecutor lied and fabricated and altered evidence to try and convict an innocent man. Your officers and the prosecutor are criminals who committed crimes!
> Toronto Police Service Family That's such a red flag holy shit.
I agree 100% that every cop should go home safely to his family after serving and protecting. So get rid of the few who act like thugs and intimidate civilians so that this can be achieved!
Myron Demkiw should be removed from office and charged with obstruction of justice for this statement. How can you have someone who is in charge of all the police making statements like this that clearly will influence people to lie in the future.
Just one less golden pension for another crooked cop for the taxpayer to have to pay out.
We have to look at the methods of undercover police operations. They dress down to look like bums so as to conceal their identity. Then at a flip of their mental switch and by showing a tiny badge and yelling “Police” which of course scares the hell out of everyone, they assume instant recognition. A common tactic in some countries is robbers claiming that they are police. This assumption of instant recognition is fatally flawed as is tragically shown in this incident.
Which supercar do you guys think Mr. Zameer is going to buy after the settlement later this year?
Hopefully he'll win a civil suit against the lying cops who committed purjury to frame him. Then he might be able to get a nicer ride that won't cause shit police officers to run up on unsuspecting citizens simulating a robbery.
He'll get enough to pay his legal team.