Toronto Police Kill 18 Year Old Alone On Streetcar. Caught on Video. I Am Speechless.

Winnipeg, Manitoban here.

1. The beheading near Brandon. The kid was already dead and the rest of the passengers were off the bus. Deep down I wish they had just shot him but really, we try to be civilized here.

2. I am 54 years old and have never heard of the 21 foot rule. If that means I can be shot for no other reason than disobeying that rule, shouldn't I have heard of it by now. (lived here all my life)

3. I raised 2 boys in the north end of Winnipeg (one is a dentist and the other a private contractor) and taught them at least one thing. Fear Cops. Not respect them, that is earned. Fear them, do as you are told. My oldest dropped his girlfriend off at a sports bar on McPhillips and went home to sleep to get up for work and saw a unmarked car following him. (unmarked as in just a normal car, someone following him ) He stopped in front of his house, and two guys in normal clothes started running at him. He started running for the house. Thank GOD the officers identified themselves as cops at that moment. They asked him why he ran...........He said, I live on Redwood and when 2 guys start chasing you, you probably don't have long to live. #ing cops is all I have to say.

This killing in Toronto is murder.

reply to post by Caroline13456

Born and raised in T.O.all I can say is that the local radio station [talk 640] ,basically has talked about nothing else during the morning segment with John Oakley ,all I hear is that the police have little recourse in those situations ,most of the callers back in some way Toronto Police Services.
All I can say is that I give up ,government accountability has all but disintegrated when it comes to foreign occupation
the law is created as per corporate interests, meaning ?"The military does whatever the f****ck it wants"now your going to see this agenda spill over into civilian policing,the cop is suspended with pay until all this blows over,this is not an isolated incident.
" Now in war we are confronted with conditions which are strange
If we accept them we will never win."-George S. Patton

Originally posted by FraternitasSaturni

Originally posted by Hefficide

I counted nine shots, in two clusters. It is glaringly obvious that the first cluster ( three shots ) was more than enough to deal with a knife wielding man who did not even appear to be attacking or trying to attack. The next six shots, I can only assume, were to make sure that he never got back up. I cannot imagine him being a threat after already being shot three times and put down.

IE the last six shots were murder. Plain and simple.

Do I pull knives inside public places and scare the living crap out of everyone and force everyone out of public places under knife threat? No.

Quit forgiving criminals, blatant threats to society and people that dont contribute with anything but with fear and insecurity towards law abiding innocent citizens.

That being said... I seriously doubt much was lost besides 8 extra bullets since 1 well placed should have done its job.

Exactly! We have NO IDEA what this criminal did before the video starts, or who he injured or threatened with the knife. He was told, repeatedly, to drop the knife, and he didn't do it, and started to exit with it. Looks justifiable to me.

Why his being "alone" on the bus matters at that point, I can't imagine.

I don't know if the officers involved operated according to "rules of engagement" for these situations or not. Assuming that they did, I think the rules have to be rewritten.

There is no way that someone armed with a knife should be fatally shot when cornered by police on an empty transit vehicle.

Toronto cops don't carry Taser. It has to be brought to the seen by a Sgt or Supervisor. The Sgt has just arrived when the shots were fired.

What is now speculation is the bullets might not have killed him it could have been the tazor. They are know to complete stop the heart if someone has a heart condition. I would say he had a heart problem after taking 9 shots.

Remember the man who was tazor at the Vancouver airport by the RCMP. He
has a heart condition and died after being tazored.

This just came in from the Toronto Sun,and to all those out there who think there is more to the story there is ,if this officer had to use a .40 caliber or 9mm [they are switching over to a .40 caliber] then he should not be in civilian law enforcement end of discussion, rubber bullets, tear gas ,stun gun [bean bag gun],tasers, police dogs should I go on with the very accessible alternative resources that TPSB has or are you still sold on the knife can be a "projectile defence" was in the military for 5 years that conduct wouldn't have even flew in Afghanistan,dont worry though we will have drones and unmanned tatical land weapons in civilian policing within 2 years
Toronto Sun Newspaper

Const. James Forcillo ID'd as cop in Sammy Yatim shooting 91 BY CHRIS DOUCETTE ,TORONTO SUN FIRST POSTED: TUESDAY, JULY 30, 2013 08:29 PM EDT | UPDATED: TUESDAY, JULY 30, 2013 09:01 PM EDT James Forcillo 14 Division Const. James Forcillo has been identified as the officer who fired the shots that killed Sammy Yatim. Article 1 Change text size for the storyPrint this story Report an error More Coverage Playing the race and religion card Answers needed in Yatim shooting Cop in shooting of Sammy Yatim suspended with pay Police Chief Bill Blair vows answers in TTC shooting of Sammy Yatim Sammy Yatim's final moments on shocking new video Tears, anger at rally for teen shot dead by cops on streetcar Teen shot on streetcar to cop: 'You're a f------ p---y' Topics Sammy Yatim shooting TORONTO - The governing body that oversees the city’s cops vows to do all it can to find out why an officer, identified Tuesday as Const. James Forcillo, shot and killed Sammy Yatim on a streetcar over the weekend. The 14 Division officer has yet to speak publicly, but his lawyer said he’s “devastated.” “We are waiting for the investigation to proceed,” Peter Brauti told the Toronto Sun Tuesday. “It’s important that people don’t rush to judgment because not all of the evidence is yet available.” Police Chief Bill Blair suspended Forcillo, a member of the service for six years, with pay on Monday. The Toronto Police Services Board said Tuesday members are anxiously awaiting the results of simultaneous investigations — by Ontario’s Special Investigations Unit and Blair — into the shooting that killed 18-year-old Yatim and sparked widespread public outrage after witness video was posted to YouTube. “The board assures the community that it is fully committed and determined to do everything in its power to pursue answers to the questions which are troubling us all and to ensure that appropriate action is taken as called for by the investigations,” TPSB chair Alok Mukherjee said in a statement. After offering “sincere sympathy” to Yatim’s family, he went on to say the board “recognizes the serious concerns” of “members of the community at large” in the wake of the teen’s death. “Like Mr. Yatim’s family and other Torontonians, the (TPSB) seeks to understand the tragic events that transpired (early Saturday) in order that appropriate action can follow,” Mukherjee said. He said the board believes the two investigations are of the “utmost importance” and members support the chief ’s “unequivocal commitment to do his part to obtain the answers that we are all seeking.” The SIU, which investigates any serious injury or death involving cops, is probing Forcillo’s actions and that of 22 witness officers. Blair, who has pledged to “co-operate fully” with the SIU, is required under the Police Services Act to review the policies, procedures and training related to the fatal shooting as well as the conduct of all involved coppers. The chief must report his findings to the TPSB within 30 days of the completion of the SIU’s probe. The TPSB has made it clear to Blair that his review should be “comprehensive” and include “sufficient detail to address the very serious questions” the board has regarding Yatim’s death, Mukherjee said. — With files from Sam Pazzano

Originally posted by ProphetZoroaster
Toronto cops don't carry Taser. It has to be brought to the seen by a Sgt or Supervisor. The Sgt has just arrived when the shots were fired.

What is now speculation is the bullets might not have killed him it could have been the tazor. They are know to complete stop the heart if someone has a heart condition. I would say he had a heart problem after taking 9 shots.

Remember the man who was tazor at the Vancouver airport by the RCMP. He
has a heart condition and died after being tazored.

he died because the weapon was not used properly..he was tazed 5 times, the company who manufactures the tazer says that is not to be used like that..also he could very well have lived if the emt personal were allowed to treat him as they requested..but yes the tazer has caused many deaths..much less so than bullets i will add

Seems the 'American disease' is spreading north of the border...

they do not owe YOU serve and protect YOU gunssavelives.net... serve them advancedspiritualresearch.files.wordpress.com...

reply to post by InvasiveProbing


Not sure what that disease is, but;

If it consists of shooting people for no good god damn reason, then I hope not.

Originally posted by elysiumfire
DynaMike:

Speaking from experience, they should have used less-lethal munitions. I have deployed the bean bag on knife wielders several times and it is completely effective. We also have flash bangs and tear gas as an option. The TASER would be a last resort as it has a 15-21 foot reach and is highly inaccurate and ineffective if both probes do not connect for reasons such as clothing or a miss etc.

Well I anticipate the shooters either get fired or a huge suspension. They really need to train these guys before letting them loose on the streets. They make good cops look bad.

Commendable post, Mike, more for its last sentence (highlighted) than anything other that it states. If you had used the word 'tactics' rather than 'munitions', you would have heard the applause I'd have given you all the way across the thousands of miles that separate our countries.

Thank you. The verbiage "less-lethal munitions" is the actual legal term applied to any weapon utilized in law enforcement that is used for these tactics. They do not use the term non-lethal because if one were to use it and then shoot someone point-blank with a bean bag in the face, they would probably die and the term would be used against the department in a law suit. But that is besides the point.

If the department does not issue less-lethal munitions or train to handle these scenarios in a less lethal capacity then shame on them. You're really using a cannon to kill a fly in that respect if an officer is only afforded a gun or a taser as a tool to assess the situation.

Nowadays, the role of an officer has changed from a simple quarrel dissolving, theft investigating, ticket writing profession to something that really requires a higher level of education and training. There is absolutely nothing that can prepare you for this job fully less than a four year law degree and about five years in a special weapons and tactics unit. And even then you might come across some mind bending scenarios.

My point is that while individual performance can be evaluated, the real burden to prepare these cops are on the police departments. Training an officer from every day joe schmoe to fresh on the street rookie probably costs about $80,000 to $120,000 depending on the area. This money is not just training, it is also the cost to employ them during training and pay for equipment.

If I had to guess how much it would cost to train an officer to be highly proficient in scenarios such as this, I would double it to about $250,000 or equate it to five years on the job experience plus intermittent training scenarios.

But, the world needs officers all the time and people don't want to pay for the training. They sometimes meet in the middle, cut corners like a business and things like this happen. Of course, there are some people who just don't get it and shouldn't be officers in the first place. That could very well be the case here as well. Based on my experience I tend to lean on the former.

reply to post by Hefficide


I'm not sure I follow you're mindset. In my head one shot= an officers intent to kill the person, while 15 shots or 100 shots= an officers intent to kill the person.

I am not defending the shots in this scenario but there have been instances where we have had to shoot and shot more than once. The reason being is because- and this is not for every scenario but I can help give you another point of view- when you shoot you are so hopped up on adrenaline your aim is probably about 1/2 to 1/3 as accurate.

In the last shooting I was involved in the suspect, who just shot and killed his girlfriend and the shot at us, was shot at 30 times from our assault rifles while only 16 bullets struck him. And that was from about 40ft away. which is nothing for a rifle. But it was dark, he was moving, we were moving, and he wasnt going down fast enough to make us stop pulling the trigger. This is because they too are experiencing an adrenaline rush and they are not going to feel the effects of the shots until quite a few long seconds later- sometime after they pulled the trigger many times in the direction of the officers.

I know this is a different scenario but I wanted you to understand that if the decision to pull the trigger was made, it was made indefinitely. And when you pull the trigger you do it until you have stopped the threat.

Again I am not defending their decision to use lethal force but the first 3 of 6, 4 of six, or even 5 of 6 shots may have missed or have been less effective, I don't know. I dont know enough of what occurred before or even during the event that caused them to utilize it, but from my opinion based on exactly what I can see I personally do not agree with the decision to use lethal force at all.

I hope this helps clarify any question you had.

Originally posted by Skywatcher2011
Ohio police are just as brutal....

Oh wow! Haha, I found this video interesting. I always mentally train myself for instances I have not encountered and for the life of me I have no idea how I would have handled this.

So the old lady had a knife apparently and the cops were called. If I had to take an educated guess she was probably experiencing dementia and had some violent episode. Maybe she wanted to kill herself?

I don't know how I would've handled it. To be honest I would've felt more comfortable to drive by and say I never saw her than to have been forced to take her into protective custody.

How would you have handled it?

Maybe I think inside the box too much but for every move I make, such as deploying a taser or pepper spray, I foresee the woman falling to the ground and everyone bull rushing me the same way they did on the take-down.

Maybe I could've found a big piece of wood and swung it hard to the tip of the knife so it stuck and then just pulled (hopefully the knife was sharp!). Oh boy what a humdinger!

reply to post by Dynamike


I appreciate the reply Dynamike! Though it is probably not coming across well in this particular thread, I do, in fact, respect law enforcement and peace officers. That respect is actually fueling some of my disgust for what I have seen in this incident. The actions of bad cops, after all, effect the good ones far more than they do those who are not in law enforcement.

It is a shame and I just wanted to be clear that I am not seeking to paint with broad brushes.

Having gotten that out of the way...

My issue - other than with the fact that I sincerely believe deadly force was not required ( yet ) in this situation is with the fact that three shots were fired, followed by a period of silence lasting at least 2-4 seconds, and then six additional shots.

I am experienced with firearms and weapons and can understand the adrenaline angle. While not a peace officer, I was raised by and around many combat veterans and was also taught that, should I ever have to pull a trigger, to empty the clip.

That particular aspect of it I understand and get...

But that pause... that short cease fire...

It leaves me feeling as though neither adrenaline nor battle-discipline were behind the last six shots. They appear to be an after thought or caused by a second "trigger" ( not the one on the gun, the one in the officers mind ). The first three shots? I can buy those as fear, adrenaline, concern, self-preservation, etc.

Those last six shots... they seem very deliberate - and an entirely different animal.

Anybody who sides with the police on this one, please give your head a shake and recognize that yes, while it is true this boy was carrying a weapon.

A. There were no hostages on the street car with him, meaning there was no immediate need to act, and much more negotiation could therefore be implemented.

B. He never even stepped out of the streetcar with the weapon, and the policemen were not within 5 feet of the streetcar, also had the option to not get closer, and knew they had the advantage of massive amounts of back up and firepower at their disposal.

C. That one officer who approached the streetcar progressively after he shouted "If you take one step closer to me.... Is a complete hypocrite, having advanced in on the boy, is a disgrace to the police force and a lousy human being for having shot this boy 9 times!!

This officer, and this officer alone should have his gun and badge taken from him, and should arrested and held awaiting a court date for a sentencing. You can call it whatever you want, and of course his buddies in blue will probably back him, and I doubt much will come of this, but that was murder plain and simple. Obviously not in the 1st degree and , not premeditated. But anybody could see that this guy with the knife was clearly mentally ill, for all we knew he was hallucinating, or was extremely paranoid somebody was out to get him, and grew hostile when a swarm of policemen surrounded him and aimed guns at him.
The tradgedy is we will never get to know what was going on inside of his head, in those last moments of his life, he wasn't even given that chance, because some hot head GI Joe type figure had to try and be a hot shot and end this boy's life, without ever finding out what provoked this.
There are procedures put in place for these instances, and given the circumstances ( knife , not a gun), no hostages etc.. this should have ended in the boy being tasered and handcuffed, or worst case scanerio, if and only IF he truly emerged in as a true threat, shot in the leg and , disarmed and handcuffed.

Now I'm not naïve, what he was doing was criminal and if he was holding hostages, I would not be typing about police brutality that ended in unwarranted death here. But the fact is they're were no hostages, excessive force was used ( 9 shots), and if you truly watch the video start to back, you will know this was not a panic move nor an accident where multiple police officers shot due to fear of their own lives. It was one officer who provoked the entire thing.

I truly hope and pray we get thugs like this out of the police force, it's a scary thought when a a GI joe want to be, can walk around wielding a badge and a gun and feel like he is above the law/ This man should be arrested

Originally posted by ProphetZoroaster
Here's the deal.

The kid pulls a knife on a crowded bus and orders everybody off for unknown reasons. Once the police arrive he then refuses to drop the knife and finally begins to advance on them. Then he obviously was shot and killed.

actually from what i hear from TTC drivers, the STREETCAR (lets start at least getting that small point correct, it was NOT a bus), was "crowded" by the driver and victim. 2 people does not a crowd make. could not the police have BACKED AWAY, thus letting him get off and thus not only be more visible, but easier to apprehend? you can't even claim there is a danger of him getting in the driver seat and taking off. even if he did figure out how to make it go, it doesn't have any real acceleration, and would have been EASY for an officer to grab the pole cable as it went by pulling the pole off of the overhead immediately stopping the streetcar because of no more electricity.

Where is the tragedy in this? I can understand the outrage at amount of lethal force involved especially considering there was non-lethal force available, but we are still talking about a knife wielding man who had threatened the lives of others. A knife wielding man who refused to drop his weapon and who was warned to not take any steps forward.

the "tragedy" is the fact that there were MANY OPTIONS available to the officers, they didn't have to IMMEDIATELY jump to using DEADLY FORCE. it is not very clear on what "threats" he might have made towards the driver (seemingly the only other person on board at the time). drivers are supposed to get off the vehicle if they feel they might be threatened and can do so safely. so we can't even at this point be sure there was ANY THREAT MADE. it does seem that not only did the driver feel safe enough to leave the vehicle, that he also used the CIS system to put in a trouble call. i have also heard that this victim may have had issues understanding English, add to that stress from feeling threatened by seeing GUNS POINTED at him he may not have UNDERSTOOD what was being said to him.

Obviously the officer involved probably doesn't need to be walking a beat if this is how he reacts to stress, but the tragedy involved isn't that a young man was killed. It's that a guy trying to serve the public is going to be crucified for reacting extremely poorly in a bad situation. The tragedy is that people will rally behind a kid who apparently wanted to commit suicide by cop.

edit on 30/7/2013 by ProphetZoroaster because: (no reason given)

if this is the way the "officer" handles stress he should NOT even BE a COP. the tragedy is NOT that this "guy trying to serve the public is going to be crucified for reacting extremely poorly in a bad situation" it is that he was ALLOWED to be in this position to begin with. there IS NO SUCH SIGN that he was "trying to commit suicide by cop". and of course the "people" will rally behind someone who was NEEDLESSLY GUNNED DOWN BY OVEREAGER COPS.

DynaMike:

If the department does not issue less-lethal munitions or train to handle these scenarios in a less lethal capacity then shame on them.

Many thanks for responding, Mike, and for the clarification. Nothing of what I wrote in my post to you is to be perceived as criticism, but merely as observation...likewise in this post.

Does, or should the training have an emphasis on proportionate response? At what point does 'common sense' override 'training'? These are not questions I am asking you personally, I am simply thinking out aloud.

If Yatim had hostages, even while only having a knife, part of the officer's actions might very well have been seen as justified if the situation was deteriorating towards Yatim harming one of the hostages. The thing is he didn't have hostages, so the only people he could have potentially brought harm to was himself, and any of the officers in attendance. However, the likelihood of him actually harming an officer was extremely low, Yatim as a threat was pretty much contained...yet, he still died in a hail of bullets. The use of the taser after he had been shot was a redundant and cynical application. For all the psychological issues Yatim carried, he should be alive and well today and being counselled through them. Instead, he received incompetence and failure not just from the officer whom shot him, but from every officer (each of whom will be calibrating the rightness of their own actions against that of their colleague) who was there.

The point is, this is just another one of a very long line of incidents in which police functioning and tactics broke down, and it would seem by their continuance, the issues are not being properly addressed (if at all), and it is very damaging to society. Each incident an officer attends has to be assessed on merit, but to my mind, the goal should always be for an amicable and peaceful resolution using the minimal amount of force. Response has to be appropriate and proportionate, firm and fair, and must be seen as such. If it was, you would see a remarkable decline in the claims of excessive force and police brutality, and possibly a warming to the profession, instead of this cold and silent distrust that seems to exist.

It's been great talking to you. Best wishes, and 'be careful out there!'

reply to post by elysiumfire

Does, or should the training have an emphasis on proportionate response? At what point does 'common sense' override 'training'? These are not questions I am asking you personally, I am simply thinking out aloud.

It HAS to have its emphasis on proportionate response as a priority. Threats come in all shapes and sizes and you shouldn't be able to respond to a "threat" from a child acting up with a blade the same way you'd respond to a 260lb power lifter who is also known to have a hatred of cops.

IvanAstikov:

It HAS to have its emphasis on proportionate response as a priority. Threats come in all shapes and sizes and you shouldn't be able to respond to a "threat" from a child acting up with a blade the same way you'd respond to a 260lb power lifter who is also known to have a hatred of cops.

Absolutely, Ivan. Each incident attended must be assessed on merit, with appropriate and proportionate response applied.

However, in this incident, I cannot reconcile the cop's actions in my mind. I am desperate to give him the benefit of the doubt, and some support in some way, but I can't.

The more I think about it, the more likely that Yatim was shot and killed out of 'rage'. Yatim's goading and provoking was simply too much for this one particular cop to accept. He lost control of himself, bang, bang, bang, and quickly realises what he's done, and then with further anger, as if to place blame squarely on Yatim, he empties the rest of his magazine into the lad. How utterly laughable and ridiculous was the use of the taser? I think we can all work out why it was deployed...a cynical attempt to suggest Yatim was still a threat, so as to lend support to the murderous actions of his colleague.

Originally posted by nightbringr
reply to post by Rocker2013

 

I stand corrected, a knife wielding man threatening people is never responsible for actions.

Did he threaten anyone? Show me the evidence that he did, because everything I have seen suggests that the driver evacuated the vehicle and the kid didn't actually threaten to harm anyone.

And you would also agree I suppose that mentally ill people, depressed people, or suicidal people should all be executed too? Hitler thought the same thing.

There are so many members here displaying a complete disregard for Human life, it's actually making me feel ill.