Always take Canadian police “intel” with a grain of salt. They aren’t like American agencies who abide by the constitution and basic premises of the rule of law. A couple of poor nutters who had their lives dragged down by disgusting tactics that are not fit for a democratic nation.
[quote=“shockedcanadian, post:1, topic:49197”]
Always take Canadian police “intel” with a grain of salt. They aren’t like American agencies who abide by the constitution and basic premises of the rule of law.
This is the same case that the FBI had been working on with the RCMP and quietly backed off and didnt pursue. The reasons for this are simple, they knew early on that this was a fabricated case by the RCMP at best, an excessive abuse of authority, misrepresentation and outright criminal at worst. This fact alone differentiates the FBI from the RCMP. Laws, rights of the individual that you in America take for granted are trampled on in Canada frequently. It is a part of our historic reliance on the monarchy. You rely on your best agencies to defend these rights, in Canada these equivalent agencies see citizens as nothing more than a means to an end, whether for budget purposes of political benefit.
If you were ever looking at model of policing that you would NOT want, it is Canadas. Supremely unaccountable and dishonest, the RCMP and their surrogates have done more harm to Canada and their allies than you can imagine. When I listened to Paul Ryan talk about his concerns for potential gun restrictions and due process concerns it really hit home for me. The fact that he would fight and argue on principle; even if (especially when) it is a contentious and emotional issue is a telling sign. Due process, rule of law have taken a back seat in Canada for nearly a century with the RCMP, only now are the courts and civil rights groups getting their message across. It is why many more Canadians and journalists are rejecting the vile that is sprouted about America and are looking to America as the model we should be looking at, questioning our own. A model that focused on civil liberties and basic democratic premises.
You can be sure just stating this as I did would cause you trouble in Canada, that alone is scary.
Here is a very key issue that differentiates Canada from America, please consider the statement (from the article):
Unlike in the United States, entrapment arguments in Canada are heard and ruled on by a judge only after an accused has been found guilty, whether by jury or by judge alone. This is because entrapment is seen to be an abuse of process not against the accused but against the reputation of the entire legal system. In the U.S., a jury will decide on entrapment as part of its verdict, whereas in Canada entrapment arguments are heard following the jury’s verdict.
Therefore, what would disgust you, the FBI and law enforcement as underhanded, illegal and undemocratic strategies to basically manufacture or create criminals is looked at as open game for police in Canada, the courts will deal with the determination after the poor soul has been found guilty. What consequences does the agent pay for ruining this persons life if entrapment is decided? None whatsoever.
A few years ago an FBI operative was working on a case of a suspect radical in America who was Canadian by citizenship. The FBI was investigating the case and they themselves decided that it had no merit because they believed their own officer coerced, influenced and entrapped the person. THAT is how the honest police a nation. They accept responsibility and take their oaths seriously, choosing to abide by the most important and valuable of principles, over stretching the truth and getting a collar.
You can’t “entrap” anyone who doesn’t have the propensity for larceny in the first place. You can’t “entrap” a law-abiding, INNOCENT man. If he CAN be “entrapped” then he’s not law-abiding in the first place.
There are a lot of injustices in the world. Wannabe terrorists who were coaxed ahead by police is pretty far down on my list of sympathies.
There is a major point missing here. When police entrap, misrepresent and actively radicalize citizens, there is the risk of far greater damage and harm to others. Whether they engage in violence themselves or actively recruit and radicalize others who engage in violence. Furthermore, wasting resources and chasing rabbits takes away from work on legitimate, serious, often organized threats. T
You can look at any terror attack in the world, many of which have Western citizens as their victims; and you will see someone radicalizing and inspiring behind the scenes, directly or indirectly. When you have police forces misrepresenting and manufacturing these threats simply to justify their activities or drive budgetary increases than you have a problem. A very serious problem when it is unidentifiable unless someone blows the whistle on it. This is just one case that fortunately found the light of day.