Thank you to the sources that I used for this blog:
The SIU website: http://www.siu.on.ca/home.html
OPP Crime alerts: http://www.crimealerts.net/Southwestern%20Region.htm
Youtube: www.youtube.com
Tuttle, Steve “TASER International’s State of the Union." Law Enforcement Trainer 20:3 (2005): 22 - 26.
Also, thank you to Chief Derek Mcelveny, Media Officer Mark Cloes, and Sergeant Curtis Rutt for their time.
Tuesday, December 1, 2009
What Happens When the Police Do Something Wrong?
When a person commits a crime, they are arrested, and charged by police, but what happens when a police officer commits a crime or police misconduct? The SIU is called. The SIU stands for Special Investigations Unit, which is a civilian law enforcement agency. The SIU investigates incidents involving the police and civilians that have resulted in a serious injury or death.
How did the SIU come about? During hearings in 1988, many people expressed concerns about the truthfulness of the way police investigated other police. “Prior to the formation of the SIU, police forces investigated themselves, or in some instances, another police force was assigned to conduct the investigation. There was a strongly expressed belief that such internal investigations lacked the necessary objectivity required of policing,” says the SIU website. In 1990, a bill was passed to create the SIU to have a separate investigation unit to look into police conduct involving serious injury or death.
At first, the SIU was a band of disorganized, inexperienced civilians. Police never used to trust the SIU, but they had the public’s support. After many difficult investigations, the SIU started to hire retired police officers. This caused a problem in the public’s eye. “The public thinks that all police officers will protect another police officer. That’s not the case,” says Sergeant Rutt, an officer of Orangeville Police. The SIU has been run much better than what they used to be, the people on the team are experienced and qualified to ask the right questions and look for the right evidence.
“The mandate of the Special Investigations Unit is to maintain confidence in Ontario's police services by assuring the public that police actions resulting in serious injury or death are subjected to rigorous, independent investigations,” says the website.
The SIU charges only two percent of the investigations they make. This number reflects that in many investigations, police are not at fault, but the SIU still needs to investigate.
“I was involved with six SIU investigations,” said Sgt. Rutt, “and each time I was treated fairly, even though they had a bad reputation.” The SIU are not there to protect the police, they are there to do their job.
Civilians can rest assured that most of the police are not involved in any conspiracy, and the SIU is there to investigate every death or serious injury.
How did the SIU come about? During hearings in 1988, many people expressed concerns about the truthfulness of the way police investigated other police. “Prior to the formation of the SIU, police forces investigated themselves, or in some instances, another police force was assigned to conduct the investigation. There was a strongly expressed belief that such internal investigations lacked the necessary objectivity required of policing,” says the SIU website. In 1990, a bill was passed to create the SIU to have a separate investigation unit to look into police conduct involving serious injury or death.
At first, the SIU was a band of disorganized, inexperienced civilians. Police never used to trust the SIU, but they had the public’s support. After many difficult investigations, the SIU started to hire retired police officers. This caused a problem in the public’s eye. “The public thinks that all police officers will protect another police officer. That’s not the case,” says Sergeant Rutt, an officer of Orangeville Police. The SIU has been run much better than what they used to be, the people on the team are experienced and qualified to ask the right questions and look for the right evidence.
“The mandate of the Special Investigations Unit is to maintain confidence in Ontario's police services by assuring the public that police actions resulting in serious injury or death are subjected to rigorous, independent investigations,” says the website.
The SIU charges only two percent of the investigations they make. This number reflects that in many investigations, police are not at fault, but the SIU still needs to investigate.
“I was involved with six SIU investigations,” said Sgt. Rutt, “and each time I was treated fairly, even though they had a bad reputation.” The SIU are not there to protect the police, they are there to do their job.
Civilians can rest assured that most of the police are not involved in any conspiracy, and the SIU is there to investigate every death or serious injury.
Survey
I conducted a survey of 44 students in the Lauier - Brantford campus. the survey was of the student's opinion of the police. The following graphs are the results of this survey.
The following graphs are the result of the student's general opinion of the police:
The following graphs are the result of the student's general opinion of the police:
Interac Scam: Telemarketers Do It Again
The OPP of Brant County advises the public to be extra wary of telemarketing calls. There is an ongoing fraud reported in the Southern Ontario area. The calls are about a $2000 cheque being mailed to the residence. The caller states to contact Peter Lang upon receiving the cheque. The caller also insists that this cheque is issued by the Interac Association of Canada. The OPP knows of this fraud and wants the public to be alert to this telemarketer. Do not give out personal Information over the phone, and be wary of to-good-to-be-true deals from unknown companies.
Monday, November 30, 2009
School Violence
Death or injury of a child is a horrid thing. Many parents will do anything to protect their child from the violence of the world. In this case, the violence happens right before the child’s eyes, in a place intended to be a safe learning environment, school.
Ever since Columbine Massacre, schools in the US have greatly increased their security. Buildings locked, doors monitored, faculty and staff required to wear ID, metal detectors, cameras, strict dress code, and see through backpack are just some of the ways they have tried to prevent school violence. Other schools enforced anti-bullying policies, and zero-tolerance approached to weapons and threats.
Why exactly would a student, a child nonetheless, want to pick up a gun and kill their peers? Most of these violent offenders do not wake up one morning and decide to kill, rather they plan, plot, and acquire weapons in a mechanical manner. Whenever a school shooting or other act of violence occurs, people desperately search for answers. They want to know how such a thing could have happened, what caused it, if it was led up to by warning signs, and whether it could have been prevented.
One of the most common catalysts for the violent acts in schools is bullying and harassment by classmates. People who were bullied as children are more likely to suffer from depression, and the bullies themselves are more likely to engage in criminal behaviour later in life. This is why many schools are adopting a bully free attitude, cracking down on bullying and the bullies.
How does this relate to the police? The police are the ones who have to go into a school and deal with the children when school violence erupts. Whether it involves beatings, knife attacks, or shootings, school violence is a complicated and difficult issue – one for which there are no clear-cut solutions. Psychologists, educators, and law enforcements are continuously seeking better ways of identifying the root causes of school violence. By gaining a greater understanding of the problem, expanding public awareness of it, and learning more about the psychology behind violent behaviour, they hope eventually to find the key to preventing school violence before it happens.
Ever since Columbine Massacre, schools in the US have greatly increased their security. Buildings locked, doors monitored, faculty and staff required to wear ID, metal detectors, cameras, strict dress code, and see through backpack are just some of the ways they have tried to prevent school violence. Other schools enforced anti-bullying policies, and zero-tolerance approached to weapons and threats.
Why exactly would a student, a child nonetheless, want to pick up a gun and kill their peers? Most of these violent offenders do not wake up one morning and decide to kill, rather they plan, plot, and acquire weapons in a mechanical manner. Whenever a school shooting or other act of violence occurs, people desperately search for answers. They want to know how such a thing could have happened, what caused it, if it was led up to by warning signs, and whether it could have been prevented.
One of the most common catalysts for the violent acts in schools is bullying and harassment by classmates. People who were bullied as children are more likely to suffer from depression, and the bullies themselves are more likely to engage in criminal behaviour later in life. This is why many schools are adopting a bully free attitude, cracking down on bullying and the bullies.
How does this relate to the police? The police are the ones who have to go into a school and deal with the children when school violence erupts. Whether it involves beatings, knife attacks, or shootings, school violence is a complicated and difficult issue – one for which there are no clear-cut solutions. Psychologists, educators, and law enforcements are continuously seeking better ways of identifying the root causes of school violence. By gaining a greater understanding of the problem, expanding public awareness of it, and learning more about the psychology behind violent behaviour, they hope eventually to find the key to preventing school violence before it happens.
Sunday, November 29, 2009
Home Cleaners Charged for Theft
On Nov. 18, OPP County of Wellington responded to a call of reported theft in Puslinch Twp.
Cash was reported missing from the home, said the victim, and suspected a cleaning staff member. Cameras were installed to watch the home for incidents in the future. A video of two workers stealing cash from the homeowner’s wallet was shown to OPP on Nov. 25.
Two women have been charged with Theft under $5000. Kimberly Anne Auliffe, 40, and Danielle Linton, 22, will appear before Court on Jan. 4, 2010.
Source: http://www.crimealerts.net/wellington.htm
--INK--
Cash was reported missing from the home, said the victim, and suspected a cleaning staff member. Cameras were installed to watch the home for incidents in the future. A video of two workers stealing cash from the homeowner’s wallet was shown to OPP on Nov. 25.
Two women have been charged with Theft under $5000. Kimberly Anne Auliffe, 40, and Danielle Linton, 22, will appear before Court on Jan. 4, 2010.
Source: http://www.crimealerts.net/wellington.htm
--INK--
Friday, November 13, 2009
Questions and Answers with the Brantford Chief of Police
As the Chief of Brantford Police, what is your role when it
comes to the public?
The Police Service Act of Ontario states, "The duties of a chief of police include, administering the police force and overseeing its operation in accordance with the objectives, priorities and policies established by the board under subsection 31 (1: ensuring that members of the police force carry out their duties in accordance with this Act and the regulations and in a manner that reflects the needs of the community, and that discipline is maintained in the police force; ensuring that he police force provides community-orientated police services and; administering the complaints system in accordance with Part V."
The Police Services Act of Ontario, which I am referring to, is 568 pages.
Section 4 of this act refers to what the municipality shall provide by way of adequate and effective police services. The "Core Police Services" fall under the following five headings, crime prevention, law enforcement, assistance to victims of crime, public order maintenance,
and emergency response.
In your opinion, should the police care about their image and
their relations with the public?
The founder of modern day policing Sir Robert Peel, said, "The basic mission of the police is to prevent crime and disorder." He believed that the police are the public and public are the police. This basic philosophy has been the guiding light for policing since Peel said it in 1829. I have grown up in this community, I live in this community, I raised my family in this community, and I just happen to be the chief of police. I care deeply about the image this service has with the public as does every officer with whom I have the pleasure of serving beside.
What type of activities/services for the public are you involved
with? How do they help the public?
We provide direction to the public through programming focusing on the five core principals as stated above.
Can you give me an example where your role with the public has
been difficult?
Having recently completed 30 years of policing I have reflected on the challenges our officers face everyday and it is very difficult to find one challenge that is greater than another. We respond to just over 45,000 calls for service a year. Our role as peacekeepers is a difficult role at the best of times. We are in some cases the last line of defence for some people. In some cases, there is no one else that will, or can help, and we are usually dealing with people who are in conflict. It is our responsibility to attend and gather evidence of whatever crime that has been committed. We do so impartially, we are to put this evidence into a format acceptable to the court, assist the Crown in the presentation of this evidence and it is the courts responsibility to determine guilt.
Over the course of my career, this responsibility has gotten increasingly more complicated. Others in the criminal justice system will take days, weeks and sometimes months, to dissect what, in some cases, our officers have done after having nothing more than a split second to react. As I stated before we are simply the conduit for information to the court. We depend on the eyes and ears of the public to give that evidence in order that the court can draw the correct conclusions. It isn't about "winning or loosing,” but rather the presentation of clear and concise
evidence.
What message, if any, do you have for the public?
Remind the public we do not write laws. We are bound by the same sets of laws as everyone else in this community, province, and country. The police must remain impartial. We are trying to find the best evidence possible given any set of circumstances. It's one thing to know someone has committed a crime, it's another thing to prove it "beyond a reasonable doubt" to a third party. We need the public for us to do our jobs. We need the public to understand and take responsibility for their actions. Be aware of the circumstances, be aware of the worse case scenario, and always be prepared with an alternative plan should you find yourself in an unexpected situation.
--INK--
comes to the public?
The Police Service Act of Ontario states, "The duties of a chief of police include, administering the police force and overseeing its operation in accordance with the objectives, priorities and policies established by the board under subsection 31 (1: ensuring that members of the police force carry out their duties in accordance with this Act and the regulations and in a manner that reflects the needs of the community, and that discipline is maintained in the police force; ensuring that he police force provides community-orientated police services and; administering the complaints system in accordance with Part V."
The Police Services Act of Ontario, which I am referring to, is 568 pages.
Section 4 of this act refers to what the municipality shall provide by way of adequate and effective police services. The "Core Police Services" fall under the following five headings, crime prevention, law enforcement, assistance to victims of crime, public order maintenance,
and emergency response.
In your opinion, should the police care about their image and
their relations with the public?
The founder of modern day policing Sir Robert Peel, said, "The basic mission of the police is to prevent crime and disorder." He believed that the police are the public and public are the police. This basic philosophy has been the guiding light for policing since Peel said it in 1829. I have grown up in this community, I live in this community, I raised my family in this community, and I just happen to be the chief of police. I care deeply about the image this service has with the public as does every officer with whom I have the pleasure of serving beside.
What type of activities/services for the public are you involved
with? How do they help the public?
We provide direction to the public through programming focusing on the five core principals as stated above.
Can you give me an example where your role with the public has
been difficult?
Having recently completed 30 years of policing I have reflected on the challenges our officers face everyday and it is very difficult to find one challenge that is greater than another. We respond to just over 45,000 calls for service a year. Our role as peacekeepers is a difficult role at the best of times. We are in some cases the last line of defence for some people. In some cases, there is no one else that will, or can help, and we are usually dealing with people who are in conflict. It is our responsibility to attend and gather evidence of whatever crime that has been committed. We do so impartially, we are to put this evidence into a format acceptable to the court, assist the Crown in the presentation of this evidence and it is the courts responsibility to determine guilt.
Over the course of my career, this responsibility has gotten increasingly more complicated. Others in the criminal justice system will take days, weeks and sometimes months, to dissect what, in some cases, our officers have done after having nothing more than a split second to react. As I stated before we are simply the conduit for information to the court. We depend on the eyes and ears of the public to give that evidence in order that the court can draw the correct conclusions. It isn't about "winning or loosing,” but rather the presentation of clear and concise
evidence.
What message, if any, do you have for the public?
Remind the public we do not write laws. We are bound by the same sets of laws as everyone else in this community, province, and country. The police must remain impartial. We are trying to find the best evidence possible given any set of circumstances. It's one thing to know someone has committed a crime, it's another thing to prove it "beyond a reasonable doubt" to a third party. We need the public for us to do our jobs. We need the public to understand and take responsibility for their actions. Be aware of the circumstances, be aware of the worse case scenario, and always be prepared with an alternative plan should you find yourself in an unexpected situation.
--INK--
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
