Disabled man dead after confrontation with OPP

[Frankie3s]

ELMVALE – A woman who last night witnessed an OPP officer shoot a mentally disabled man to death in his driveway in this quiet farming community northwest of Barrie, says she didn't see anything in the man's hands during the confrontation.

http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/article/655356



If the preliminary facts are true, then everyone should be worried that this could happen to them (disabled or not). People shouldn't have to be afraid of police. Who can you trust?

[spintheblackcircle]

If the preliminary facts are true, then everyone should be worried that this could happen to them (disabled or not). People shouldn't have to be afraid of police. Who can you trust?

What "facts" are those? The witnesses from x distance away who are second guessing themselves or generally unsure?

Just curious...

[luca_pacioli]

This is really sad. I was disappointed to hear the results of this, especially considering that Doug Minty was disabled.

Somehow I don't think we will get the full story.

From that article there are no details that can be confirmed, just vague assumptions from the supposed "eye witnesses" that the media needed in order to get a sensational news store. The person who is disable may have had nothing in his hands, but it sounds like the media printed whatever they could find because the police most likely told them "no comment".

What "facts" are those? The witnesses from x distance away who are second guessing themselves or generally unsure?

Just curious...

Exactly.

Fyi ~ Interesting Read:

Eyewitness identification evidence is the leading cause of wrongful conviction in the United States. Of the more than 200 people exonerated by way of DNA evidence in the US, over 75% were wrongfully convicted on the basis of erroneous eyewitness identification evidence. In England, the Criminal Law Review Committee, writing in 1971, stated that cases of mistaken identification "constitute by far the greatest cause of actual or possible wrong convictions". Yet despite substantial anecdotal and scientific support for the proposition that eyewitness testimony is often unreliable, it is held in high regard by jurors in criminal trials, even when "far outweighed by evidence of innocence." In the words of former US Supreme Court Justice William J. Brennan, there is "nothing more convincing [to a jury] than a live human being who takes the stand, points a finger at the defendant, and says 'That's the one!'"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eyewitness_identification

[Frankie3s]

What "facts" are those? The witnesses from x distance away who are second guessing themselves or generally unsure?

Just curious...

Note the word preliminary was used. But I have a feeling that the police may have overreacted. It will be interesting to see how this story unfolds.

[mtbmxrider]

I'm from Elmvale, and was pretty shocked to hear about Doug...I can tell you that the woman who saw it all happen is fairly traumatized about it considering the cops literally "opened up" on him; I'm talking about multiple shots. Doug was mentally challenged, and wouldn't harm anyone. He was just upset about a certain salesman who wouldn't stop pestering him. Doug had no weapons on him, but reportedly began moving closer to the police officers to confront them about the salesman and then that's when they opened fire.

We don't have a police station here, so it was out-of-town cops who did it.

[Ojam]

Note the word preliminary was used. But I have a feeling that the police may have overreacted. It will be interesting to see how this story unfolds.

Preliminary does not modify the word facts to mean "not facts".

[Frankie3s]

Preliminary does not modify the word facts to mean "not facts".

No it means early findings until proven otherwise.

[spintheblackcircle]

Note the word preliminary was used. But I have a feeling that the police may have overreacted. It will be interesting to see how this story unfolds.

Ok...based on what knowledge/experience?

Do you work as a police officer or are you in emergency services in general?
Do you work in a capacity where you have to deal with people with this man's specific disability (not noted) and/or work where you deal with issues that you figure are likely (again no way of knowing) to have been presented in this case?
Are you an MD specializing in mental health/disability issues?
Are you a PhD who has done his/her doctorate in mental health/disability issues and can present some likely assumed presentation of this individual?

Or are you a lay person, who has no idea what happened, that has some sort of issue with cops/authority/entitlement issue whatever and decides to stick his 2 cents in on an issue where you have NO IDEA what exactly went on or remote frame of reference...

[monty613]

But I have a feeling that the police may have overreacted.

Ok...based on what knowledge/experience?

based on it being a mentally handicapped person who apparently wasn't armed?

[Ojam]

No it means early findings until proven otherwise.

No it means Early evidence that is actual, and verifiably true. Which there is none. You have a women saying he might, or might not have had something in his hands and a bunch of random people saying "He never bothered anybody"

The woman, a next-door neighbour of Doug Minty, 59, of Lawson Ave., said it's possible he was holding something that she couldn't see. Another witness, who was across the street, thinks she saw something fly out of Minty's hands when he fell but it may have just been his glasses

I'm not saying if the OPP were justified or not, nobody here can.

[watungga]

based on it being a mentally handicapped person who apparently wasn't armed?

+1

Simple math, spintheblackcircle dude!

Either 1 or 0. Acted or over-reacted. Under-acted means they could just pissed off ad leave the mentally handi-capped alone.

[spintheblackcircle]

based on it being a mentally handicapped person who apparently wasn't armed?

So from the sounds of it you are giving the deceased the benefit and not the police in this situation based on a newspaper article and the enclosed written accounts of 2 people who are unsure/renegging on what they might have seen.

Again, if you have experience in the fields that I have outlined, and can comment from best extensive knowledge on similar situations or assumed patients, then go ahead.

I work in emergency services (not police), and I can assure you based on thousands of calls with police, that they hold the utmost restraint (certainly with deadly force) in the vast majority of occasions where warranted.

Watungga, you may find this hard to believe, but all situations in life and especially in conflict aren't as simply as the binary 1 or 0, black or white. I'm sure I could enter in situations where you have had conflict in your life (not as escalated as this, but we don't know) and show you other options other than a 1 or 0.

[watungga]

Watungga, you may find this hard to believe, but all situations in life and especially in conflict aren't as simply as the binary 1 or 0, black or white. I'm sure I could enter in situations where you have had conflict in your life (not as escalated as this, but we don't know) and show you other options other than a 1 or 0.

Well the police gets to the first instance of deciding what to use, gun or no gun. In vast majority of occasion, the outmost restraint is always based on not to use this deadly weapon. What about tasers and batons, or their skills in close combat .... seems like they (police) don't know your options other than 1 or 0.

[dragon_drift]

What happened to using a baton or taser. Gunshots against an harmless man? That's weak.

[BornRuff]

Ok...based on what knowledge/experience?

Do you work as a police officer or are you in emergency services in general?
Do you work in a capacity where you have to deal with people with this man's specific disability (not noted) and/or work where you deal with issues that you figure are likely (again no way of knowing) to have been presented in this case?
Are you an MD specializing in mental health/disability issues?
Are you a PhD who has done his/her doctorate in mental health/disability issues and can present some likely assumed presentation of this individual?

Or are you a lay person, who has no idea what happened, that has some sort of issue with cops/authority/entitlement issue whatever and decides to stick his 2 cents in on an issue where you have NO IDEA what exactly went on or remote frame of reference...

If your looking to only talk with PHD's and MD's, this isn't the place you should be.