On Thursday 02:20 the VPD got a call saying that a man was abusing his wife, so they rushed over to the complex as fast as they could, and arrested
and started beating the man who answered. They said he resisted arrest and so beat him but through a translator (he doesnt speak english) Yao Wei Wu
said he did not resist because he did not realise they were police, and they had guns. They were plainclothes officers, so perhaps they were on
Asking his name and such revealed they have the wrong man because they have gone to the wrong floor! The chief Jim Chu found out and went to apologise
in person to the man and issued a public apology for both the act and wrong information saying he resisted arrest.
Now I would say for certain it is not racism, just that they thought they had a scumbag (I mean what would you do if you saw someone beating his
wife?) and acted on impulse. But Goddd now the police here are jumping in without forethought. You are not suppose to put emotion before logic in
service. You are supposed to act through the law and leave your personal opinion out of it!!
You can recognise me as I am always defending police because they are demonised as a whole. When a judge makes a bad call its just him, when a banker
commits fraud its just him, when a cook spits in your food, its just him, but when a police officer does something wrong, all police are suddenly the
Thats the mentality here. I think that is what the people in power want. They want people to mis-trust all police so they will DEMAND something else.
Maybe soon enough we will get a federal gestapo to make us feel safe?
People seem to think of police as gods subconsciously. Police are human, they have all the same flaws and capabilities as all people. So there will be
police who make mistakes and police who follow the mob mentality: they knew a man was beating his wife and acted on impulse. So it is possible if they
are told 'this man is a terrorist' they could act on impulse too. Most police would not seize legal firearms and hurt anyone innocent; it just
depends on what they 'know' about you. Imagine how easy it is to put up a commercial demonising some one or group, and in the media, and then it
will convince otherwise good people to do bad. So you are not paranoid to be wary of police, or any armed persons for that matter. But most of all be
wary of the people telling them who is bad.
Anyway back on topic, they said they do not need an independent and are doing an internal investigation, such is the way it always goes. I am putting
my money that they just acted without confirming and the chief sympathises with their reason, just not their action, so maybe they will not be
disciplined. I can bet they wont be in fact, or there will be some obscure reference in the newspaper and no one will know for sure.
I think it goes without saying they should be heavily disciplined... discharged, no, I can say for certain if I thought someone was beating their wife
what I would do to them, just, I would make SURE they were first (and I am talking about out of uniform, IN uniform you are NOT PAID TO JUDGE!). Not
even confirming the right floor, and right person, is beyond reckless and unforgivable. They should have to pay him out of their own pockets, because
a crime is a crime even with the right motivation behind it.
CBC News with Video
I want to add under "More video" on the right hand side is the full version of the apology that was on the news. From my psychological perspective
he seems very deflective and predisposed, just kind of saying generalisations that will make people happy. And he works quickly to not let follow-up
questions. But it is exactly what a PR person does.
[edit on 22-1-2010 by Ridhya]