Trial reveals how police treated a homeless man
A current trial reveals how two SPVM cops treated a homeless man during an incident in 2010. Driving someone from downtown to Ste‑Anne and dropping him by the highway in March is not just cruel, it’s dangerous, and according to this piece, police have been in the habit of doing this to people with no resources, just to get them off their patch.
Ephraim 13:58 on 2022-11-29 Permalink
Please, someone tell me that SPVM cars have GPS? Please, tell me that if they exit the city limits, it sounds an alarm? If the answer to these questions are NO, then the problem is entirely the responsibility of management. Questions should have immediately have been asked once the car leaves jurisdiction. And if no one asks, it applies consent.
Cadichon 14:07 on 2022-11-29 Permalink
Sainte-Anne is within SPVM’s jurisdiction.
Ephraim 14:09 on 2022-11-29 Permalink
Aren’t there 4 cops involved? Pierre-Luc Furlotte, Luc Gauthier, Patrick Guay and Alain Poirier. This trial appears to be only for Guay and Furlotte. And they are TRULY dispicable people… https://montrealgazette.com/news/local-news/montreal-cops-confinement-trial putting a bag over his head and threatening to execute him. The problem isn’t simply that they should be prosecuted… a review of the entire police hiring system has to be put in question. From those who gave them the psychological tests all the way to those who hired them and finally to those who were their supervisors.
And of course, they are suspended… are they being paid? Collecting their pension? Why were they not terminated? Is the brotherhood standing behind these men? If they are, can we now start to question the brotherhood? Who’s paying for their lawyers… let’s show entirely how despicable these people are…
Ephraim 14:10 on 2022-11-29 Permalink
@Cadichon – But it is not that station’s jurisdiction. Going far out of the jurisdiction of your station should immediately throw up flags! If you are working at station 15, driving out to Ste-Anne should be suspicious as f***
walkerp 16:26 on 2022-11-29 Permalink
Just a couple of bad apples, right?
Ephraim 20:10 on 2022-11-29 Permalink
If some of the reporters would ask the right questions and report them, they would show that this is a top down problem. Who signed on the gas station receipt showing that they had travelled more than usual? Who didn’t report the car out of the station? How did they leave the territory without anyone knowing? Without the GPS reporting? How were they out of radio control for other calls without someone knowing? There are page and page and pages of questions…
Chris 21:48 on 2022-11-29 Permalink
>Just a couple of bad apples, right?
The SPVM has over 4500 officers, so… basically: yes.
walkerp 08:33 on 2022-11-30 Permalink
I’m still waiting to encounter a good one.
dwgs 10:02 on 2022-11-30 Permalink
” His allegations went ignored for eight years until a special police squad assembled by the provincial government was ordered to investigate a variety of claims of alleged corruption within the Montreal police internal affairs division.”
Yup, just a couple of rogue cops, nothing to see here.
MarcG 13:27 on 2022-11-30 Permalink
‘We define bad apple as “someone who creates problems or causes trouble for others; specifically, a member of a group whose behavior negatively affects the remainder of the group.” This term is often misunderstood to mean that a troublemaker’s behavior is not representative of the whole group, but the proverb this term originally comes from is “one bad apple spoils the whole barrel.”‘ – MW
walkerp 15:40 on 2022-11-30 Permalink
Ah thanks MarcG for that clarification. I think to extend this metaphor, it’s the barrel that is rotten and spoils all the apples once they get put inside (though many are also already rotten to begin with).