Clinton Jaws - Civilian Review of Police Actions | #ClintonJaws 52

Episode Date: November 20, 2020

Civilian Review of Police Actions. Retired police officer podcast. Crazy people are demanding police to enforce with un-safe use of force techniques. Police are run by civilians and no one is saying anything. Former cop, RCMP cop talks about the CRCC, Civilian Review Complaints Commission. I also talk about meeting a comedian Dan Duvall at the Queens in the Nanaimo, who will be my guest later in the month. Dan Duvall "Hate Locker" https://podcasts.apple.com/ca/podcast/the-hate-locker/id1397648744 -masks, covid, covid 19 and no one smiling. https://www.clintonjaws.com/

If you're wearing a mask and somebody farts, do you smell it? The answer is yes. Yes, you do. I ask myself, what are masks? Are they even really doing anything? It seems like everybody's wearing one, right? Everybody's wearing a mask. That's confusing weird times right now.

I don't like it. I can't stand it. Just being honest. I go into a grocery store. I'm not wearing a mask. I'm not saying I'm cool. I'm just not wearing one. But everybody else is.

Thank you, I guess. I don't know. Is it doing anything? I'm so tired of looking at people who are wearing masks. I can't tell. They're not smiling. So I stop looking at people. I just put my head down because I don't want that uncomfortable, awkward moment of me smiling and not knowing if they are. Because when I smile at somebody who's wearing a mask, I'm thinking they're not smiling. I don't like that person now. Strange. I went into the Max gas station yesterday.

Yesterday it was? And I was yelling for some Advil, something like that, okay? I said, I have Advil. Can I have some Advil, please? And she's looking for the Advil bottle. And I'm like, regular strength, Advil, please. Regular strength. And I'm like, why am I yelling?

Okay. They're wearing masks, not ear protection. Why am I yelling at her? Thank you. Odd. It's just odd. I don't even know why I'm talking about this. I come down here.

I don't really know what I'm going to talk about sometimes. And this is the day. Really? I reviewed an old Facebook post that I posted back in March 12th from a buddy. Facebook deleted comments that were made on this thread. And I said, not to toot my own horn. But March 12th, I said, This thing, you can wash your hands as many times as you want.

It's not going to do anything for you. Washing your hands is not the problem. Washing your hands is not going to save you from getting COVID. N95 masks are. They're the most effective. Facebook started deleting shit that I was saying on my buddy's Facebook account. Weird. But it's funny how I knew, and I said that it was airborne.

I said, COVID is airborne. back on March 12th. Why am I saying this? Am I just trying to prove that I'm really, I got it right? I don't know. Well, how did I know that? It's airborne, guys. Are masks really doing anything?

Are they? If you could smell somebody's fart, are they doing anything? Are they protecting you? It's aerosol. It's airborne. Droplets. There are so many spikes right now in COVID cases.

Like it's going through the roof, right? It's going through the roof. everybody, practically everybody's wearing a mask. Why is it going through the roof? If everybody's wearing a mask, why is there spikes? I don't like how they shut everything down. I don't like that things are being shut down. I don't like seeing businesses.

Businesses that will never come back ever again. We're listening to doctors. We're listening to the government. Going to cancel schools. Schools are going to be shut down. Christmas. Any minute now, Bonnie Henry is going to mention Christmas. What's you mentioning now?

let's have a bubble of six people. Only so many people allowed in your house. Can you believe they're running the country and we're listening to it? Why? Did you know there's 40 million people that live in California? More people live in California than all of Canada, I think. From the age of 18 and under, guess how many deaths they've had from COVID? Two.

It affects the older population, but yet everybody else, I hate saying that because my parents are older. But they know better not to go out. I think you should be given the choice. If you don't want to get COVID, then you don't go out. You stay home. But I think I should be given the choice if I want to go to a restaurant or a bar or a nightclub. Bonnie Henry says, no, you've got to close down at 10 or 11 now. No more alcohol after 10.

Can't do that anymore. Can't have TVs on that are going to be louder than your voice. Strange. We're listening to this shit. Dr. Tam is saying don't have sex, but if you do, where are? a mask. Could you imagine? She said that. She also has an idea of if you do do it, don't do it missionary style. Try other positions like reverse cow person. I don't know. When we look back at this, I think the real numbers aren't going to be COVID. Like BC, right now, BC, how many people are

in ICU from COVID? 50. 50 people are in ICU. you. Okay. Let's shut down the world over that, I guess. I don't know. I don't know. At the end of the day, when this is all over, we're going to look back and we're going to go, COVID didn't. You know what killed? Depression killed. Suicides killed. Cancer screenings down. Cancer killed. Those are going to be the real numbers. Domestics up, right? Marriage. Done. Divorces. But now we keep on listening. Trudeau, Trudeau, Bonnie Henry and safety boy, Mike Foreignworth, Dr. Tam.

Christmas is coming, and I know this is lame. I know I have a point. It's just kind of confusing right now. I'm going to tell you something fun. I'm going to tell you something positive? I don't know. I went the other night. And you guys, I want you to know about this.

There's a place on Vancouver Island. it's called the Queens. It's called the Queens Nightclub, okay? Practically grew up there, but they had comedy night. I went to comedy night because I had the choice and it was great. If you live on Vancouver Island, I recommend you go to Queens and go to comedy night. Went and saw a bunch of comedians. The place was unbelievable. Have you ever went to a bar or a restaurant and you went inside and you sat down and about 15 or 20 minutes later you finally got a drink? Maybe I am high maintenance, but I can't stand that when you sit down and you wait 20 minutes for a drink. I've said to the wife before, let's get out of here. I don't want to be here. Let's go somewhere else. This is a joke.

Why can't a restaurant, if I owned a restaurant or a bar, and the moment somebody came in the door, I would say to them, what can I get you to drink? That'd be the first thing. That's all people want, isn't it? Maybe I'm the weird one. I don't know. I go into Queens nightclub. It's all spread out. great atmosphere yes nobody was wearing a mask they all had the choice i think that's how it should be you should be given the choice everybody spread out but i sit down at my at my table the waitress immediately comes to me and says what can i get you i say brian ginger make it a double less than 60 seconds i had my drink all night long and i had about five or six she would get me my drink in less than a minute.

It was unbelievable. I tip her 30 bucks. She did a great job. Guys, go to Queens. If you want a night out and it was nice to get out. Go to Queens. I see in a comedian, Dan Deval from Victoria. Funny, he has a great couple of bits,

especially the bit about his mom and owning a podcast. Anyways, I don't want to burn the bit, but it was really good. And we started talking. He has a podcast called, called the hate locker. I've watched it a few times. It's pretty good. And I invited him on this show, if we're calling this a show. And he said yes. And I don't know, about a month he's going to sit down with me. We're going to talk. He said to me, I told him what I do. And he told me he hates cops. And I said, man, you got to, okay, you got to do a podcast with me about that. I want to hear all about.

So as we're going to talk about, we're going to talk about stand-up comedians and him hating cops. Point is it was a good night. It was nice. It was nice to get out. And I recommend the Queens. I don't know. I come down here and I don't know what to say sometimes and I just kind of blabber on. Yeah.

Thought I'd talk about the Queens. I know it's not all that interesting. I know. It's just kind of, it's been kind of confusing lately. Kind of confusing. I'm bored out of my mind. The families quit smoking. The kids.

They kicked the habit. But it hasn't been fun. The wife doesn't watch this stuff. So she's not going to know about this. And I probably shouldn't be doing it. But I put on an old jacket today this morning. And I found gold in it. This is going to be gross.

But it is absolute gold. It's an old cigar, probably from a couple years ago. And, man, nothing looked better. When I pulled it out, it felt like I pulled out $100, like $100 bill. but when you retire it's not like smoking cigarettes right it's just smoking a cigar and that's what I feel like doing right now

I don't know if you're supposed to inhale them that is heaven heaven this is my cheesecake I hate cheesecake I hit it when people say oh you devil did you just give me a piece of cheesecake this is

parents aren't going to like this part I want to talk to you guys about the Civilian Review and Complaints Commission Board do you guys know about this board I've talked about it before but everybody's talking about it. The MPF is talking about it. A lot of people at the parliament hearings,

the SECU meetings that they have on safety and safety committee board. And I don't even know what these guys do, but they have a bunch of meetings every month or so. If you guys don't know, the CRCCC is a board that reviews complaints. They stick up for bad guys. plain and simple. That's what they do. And they're getting really popular. They're getting very popular. Everybody's talking about it. Even the MPF is talking about it. So what happens if, what happens when police go out and they arrest the bad guy? Bad guy doesn't like the outcome. So bad guy

goes to the police and say, I want you to investigate this. They do sometimes. Sometimes they don't. But if they don't like the outcome, they could go to the CRCC. And they will do this. investigation. And they, after their investigation, they come up with findings and recommendations that they give to the commissioner. The commissioner either disagrees or agrees with it. Now, what's the big deal? That's not a big deal, right? Well, yeah, it is. Because I have a lot of time on my hands, and I want you to see what I see. You got it. You got to see how these guys think. They're minds. I want you to see them. I know you, I know you, I know you, I know you, don't know who these people are. I'm getting to know them. You ever wonder when you're a cop

and you're sitting in the GD pit and you're like, you're complaining about something. You're like, what? I got to go to domestic and I have to arrest the accused even though the victim doesn't want charges. I have to. I got no discretion. You ever wonder? And you're like, who's coming up with these decisions? Who's making these decisions? I found those people. It's a bunch of white shirts. I used to always say it's a bunch of white shirts sitting sitting around a table coming up with these stupid decisions. These are the people who make the decisions and I'm going to show you in a second

after I take a sip. I probably shouldn't have lit this. Now when I say everybody's talking about the CRCC, they really are talking about it. The MPF talked about it. We got an email the other day from the MPF talking about the CRCC. MPF was talking about a case that happened where it was an in-custody death.

The guy had a stroke, really sad. He ended up dying. And in the email, they sent an email to a CBC or a CTV or a global somebody news reporter and in it the MPF says we encourage Commissioner Lucky to respond to the CRCC's proposal proposed recommendations as a priority

so that clear and appropriate policies and procedures may be put in place to guide our members civilians guys are going to guide you guys do you have a problem with that maybe because I do Wait till you see these people. Wait till you hear their outcomes. I want you to understand their minds.

Let me say that sentence again, okay? Make it a priority so that clear and appropriate policies and procedures may be put in place to guide our members as required to avoid any repeat of these tragic incidences. So civilians are going to tell you how to police. How many times does that happen in my career? don't even know. But there's been a lot of times in my career of them sitting around. I'm like, who's making these decisions? Turns out, some of them are civilians. How can a civilian tell me what to do? How can a civilian tell me how to police? They can't. It's impossible. They can't, unless they have use of force training, unless they went to RCMP depot for six months,

unless they were caught for years after that. Then maybe they could have some insight. But they're going to tell us about policies and procedures and what we need to do. Isn't that a little insane? Are I the only one? I think these people are lunatics. I do. I looked up what it takes to become part of this board. Maybe I have it wrong, but you have to have some kind of law.

You have to go to school for law. A lot of them are lawyers. And they're dictating how you police. No civilian will ever. understand how you how to become a cop unless you are a cop that's just the way it is i didn't understand it before i was a cop i want you to meet the chair of the c rcc okay she went to a they have these meetings they've had about five meetings about systemic racism did you guys even know that and they all sit around and they talk about systemic racism or what they could do about it here she comes say hi to her

and keep in mind these people these are the ones that are telling you how to police. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Good morning. And thank you for this opportunity to speak to today. She can't even speak. Her name's Lahi or Laffey.

I think it's Laffey. Okay. Now you know what she looks like. Let's keep on going. Your chair. Okay. Okay. Good morning.

And thank you for this opportunity to speak to you today on the subject of systemic racism in policing services in Canada. Here we go. right, we're going to learn all about systemic racism. Why am I still talking about this? Because I can't help it. What do you got to say, Laffey?

Policing services in Canada. The civilian reviewing complaints commission for the RCMP is an independent body established by Parliament. The commission makes broad-ranging recommendations regarding policies, procedures, and training with the ultimate goal of improving policing and enhancing RCMP accountability. They're going to improve policing, guys. She is going to improve policing, guys. policing.

The minister of public safety recently indicated to this committee, indigenous people, black Canadians, and other racialized people experience systemic racism and disparate outcomes within the criminal justice system. Did you know that? Can I have an example? No, you can't. You're not going to get it. Just believe it.

I must point out the work of the commission is not immune to the long term and ongoing effects of systemic racism. For example, it has been reported that there is an over-representation of police use of force incidents involving indigenous and racialized people. Give me an example. Can you? No, she can't. However, many of these use of force incidents do not result in a public complaint. So why is that the case? In the Commission's Northern British Columbia investigation, which was undertaken as a follow-up to a human rights watch report, we asked members of indigenous communities why they

do not make use of the complaint system. We found out that many indigenous people are either unaware of the public complaint process or do not trust it, difficult to navigate. However, the Commission has taken some action to improve the accessibility of the public complaint system, including making the public complaint form available in 16 different languages. We most recently worked very closely with the territorial government of Nunavut to ensure that the complaint form and additional materials on the complaints process were available. in anuctitude. Where?

Anyway, she's saying that none of people are complaining about police. That's bottom line, okay? Trust. In terms of the RCMP, I must highlight that the commission's lens tends to focus on individual allegations of bias, discrimination, or racism. We do not get complaints of systemic racism as a rule. It is only when we take a step back

and analyze our findings that the systemic nature of racism becomes apparent. How so? How does it become apparent? Is she going to tell you? No, not really. And she just said, she just proved that there really isn't systemic racism because nobody's really complaining about it. Did you hear that? It's kind of a big deal, isn't it? We do not get complaints of systemic racism as a rule, huh? What do you mean? You're telling me that people aren't complaining. All your complainants aren't, the bad guys aren't complaining about systemic racism. racism? Now this committee watching that hearing this, they don't like that. They're, they don't like hearing evidence. What? No. You watch you watch the reaction to what she's saying.

She just admitted a point against systemic racism. Everybody listening doesn't like it. She doesn't even realize that she's done this, that she's sticking up for systemic racism not existing in policing. Under the RCMP Act, the only way that the public complaint process works is if people trust the system. The only way the system works is if people trust it. Her system. And I'm going to read something to you after this.

That's going to just blow your mind. It blew my mind. You can't trust these guys. These guys are wing nuts. You guys are wing nuts. You're talking out of your ass. You don't know what you're talking about. Of course you don't.

You're not a cop. you're not supposed to know. You only know if you're a cop, if you went to use of force training. After I read to you what I found, you're not going to trust the system. The system is designed to fail. Because civilians, this lady is the one that is trying to control the system. This lady. Oh, Laffy.

This is just unbelievable. I find it unbelievable. So on average, we receive 3,000 to 3,500 complaints per year, and we tend to send about 2,800 of those complaints over to the RCMP. Over the course of the past five years, we've received 76 complaints that deal with bias, racism, or discrimination. Bias, racism, or discrimination? So, 76 cases of it. We don't know how many cases of racism. She blumps it together with bias and discrimination and racism.

76 complaints. Let's just go ahead and say it's 76 complaints of racism, which it isn't. I reviewed all 2020 summaries from these guys, their reports, and I could only find one that somebody complained of racism, that they did this because of the color of my skin. And it was their outcome, their recommendation was not founded. They didn't go along with it. Now, think about that for a second.

3,500 cases a year. That's 17,000, it's around 17,000 complaints that they deal with, that they have dealt with in the past five years. Out of all those cases, they got 76 cases of people complaining about racism. That's it. I don't know, is there 37 million people that live in Canada? And you got 76 cases? Now, you better believe the people listening to. this and you're going to hear it. They didn't like the sounds of that. She just told you

that nobody's complaining about systemic racism. Kind of a big deal, isn't it? The only people complain in it, complainant is the government, lucky. And these people, this parliamentary committee, I don't even know what they are, tell you the truth. Hey, I don't know. They sit around and make important decisions though. Listen to what this guy says. I can't figure this guy if he's for the police or against the police. Don't see, I'm... I was just asked by one of the members to... Repeat that last assistant.

Repeat that last stat. They're, okay, they're in shock that she just said that. Only 676 out of 17,000 or 37 million people have complained about racism by police. We received... Over the course of the last five years, we have received 76 complaints that deal with racism, discrimination, or bias.

Okay, thank you. Oh, Gary don't like that, does he? So they were asked, okay, you got to repeat that. Okay, we can't even fathom that you just said that. That can't be. This is going against everything we've been saying. Okay, this guy. Pierre?

Thank you, John. So this ratio is minor if we look at the total number of complaints. So 76 out of 2,800. So it's good. No, no, no, no, no. 76 out of 17,000. Nobody even corrects them. It's not what she just said.

Anyways. Listen, man. Now they start asking her, what do they do? I'll get back to other members of this committee freaking out about the 76 case thing that she just said. but I'm kind of all over the place. But now they're asking for her advice, her advice on what the police should correct.

You recently published a review of the services use of force. How do you foresee improvements involving wellness calls and de-escalation? In terms of wellness calls and de-escalation, there's two things that really need to be looked at. The first thing that is critical is training. Police officers need to be better trained. to be able to handle those particular situations. She's telling you that you need to be better trained to handle these situations.

Who is she? She's teaching you guys. She's going to teach you guys about de-esculation. This lady is going to teach you out about de-escalation and respondent to mental health calls. All right. Is that better? I need to speak to you today on the subject. Now you need to hold the microphone back from your...

Okay. A Deb 2 don't avoid 2,500 I'm not getting translation. Sorry, I'm not getting translation chair. Oh, sorry. Translation.

Because I'm not sure how to change to the French piece. So the first thing that is critical is training. Police officers need to be better trained to be able to handle those particular situations.

Hell so. She doesn't know. Of course she doesn't. How does she know? Have you ever been on a ride-along, Laffey? Like, you don't know. What are you talking about? And she does give you any examples, of course, right?

That means no longer taking a command and control approach, as I indicated in my statement, and looking towards a greater de-escalation. So that is the most important thing. You will no longer take a command and control approach. Do you understand me? Do you understand me? You will focus more on more. de-escalation, okay?

You show up to a call. You don't take control of that call. No, no, you don't. You let the bad guy take control. There's no more commanding. It's more de-escalation. More hands up. More Johnny, are you going to be okay?

More this shit. Because they have a problem with what I don't know. I really don't know. I don't even know what to say. such an idiotic statement made by a civilian, of course. Of course civilians are going to say that. They're not police officers. You will not.

You go to a mental health call. Throw command and control out the window. You take a step back. You let the bad guy dictate what's going to happen. I don't know. I don't know. The second thing is that there needs to be greater efforts made on the part of provincial and territorial governments to provide greater mental health.

and so that police forces can, when it's required, they can work with individuals so that de-escalation is made more possible for individuals that are in crisis. I don't even know what she's talking about. What the fuck? All this bullshit. They don't even give examples of what they're talking about.

Give me a situation. Give me an example. They never do. Tell me about systemic racism today. They can't. They can't. more de-escalation. You need to respond to mental health cause better.

And when you do, don't take a command of control approach. Isn't it funny how she criticizes the police? I believe that there would be value in having a member of the commission that is indigenous. We're called members, not commissioners, just to clarify. And I also believe that, yes, we would be strengthened by having indigenous investigators. but we do need to move forward with having a greater indigenous footprint here at the commission. What's that? They have no indignuous investigators on her board? What? She's criticizing the police, not being diversified enough. Is that the word?

But yet she has no indignious investigators on her board. It's a little racist, isn't it? Maybe you should make your own bed before you try to make an RCMP bet. I don't know. That sounded dumb, but you know my point. Clean your house before you try to clean other houses. Yeah, something like that. Oh my God. It's amazing.

Isn't it amazing? What a wing nut. These are the people making the decisions on how you're going to respond to calls, guys. And I would argue that we need a central agency in Ottawa that looks at Canadian police that looks at, again, as we've heard, oversight run by civilians to shape policing so that it stays on track without spending a lot of money or without making a lot of big changes. But you need some civilian influence. And I think the problem is most of the influence the RCMP is internal and it doesn't get any better as time goes on. Why do you need civilian influence? I'm just curious why.

My wife's a nurse. Should there be civilian influence Well, they are civilians. But it's like me creating a board and saying, you nurses aren't doing your policies and procedures correctly. I don't know. I know fucking nothing about nursing. They know nothing about policing. Why would there be civilian insight into this shit?

I can't tell my wife. I can't mention anything about proper policies and procedures on nursing. I can't. They can't. either. You have to live it. Okay, here comes Madame Kara. She's not happy with this stat. She's not happy with this evidence of 76 cases.

No, no, no, no, no. Madame Kara, three minutes, please. Thank you, Chair. I'll start off, thanks again for everyone for being here again. I'll start off with Ms. Lahai. Ms. Lahai, can you please clarify for me again, the number of complaints that you get and how many you get based on race and discriminating?

Why? She's already said it twice. Now she has to say it a third time. Why? Why does this lady need to hear it again? She's not happy. So the number of complaints that we receive on a yearly basis is between 3,000 and 3,500. One of our allegation categories, the categories that we have of allegations do not include discrimination or racism. But I can tell you that over the course of the last five years, we've received 76 complaints that deal, with racism, bias, or discrimination. Those are fighting words. I'm telling you right now, those are fighting words. I mean, that number is quite low. I mean, that number is way too low. There's got to be a reason for it.

We can't just leave it at that. Let's come up with a reason why it's low. Okay. Well, I mean, if you compare that to the realities, and especially the realities of the racialized communities and perhaps the testimonies that we've been hearing. What realities? What realities are those?

Kiar. Is that your name? Those numbers are low compared to the realities. We don't know what she's talking about. Nobody tests her. Perhaps the testimonies that we've been hearing. How are you tracking that they're based on racism or discrimination? We're tracking it because the individuals actually indicate

that they believe that they've been discriminated against based upon based upon race or culture or religion. They're tracking it naturally, is how they're doing it. They're naturally tracking it. They're not pressing it. So the individuals actually come out and oftentimes it'll be complaints with respect to officer conduct, perhaps a negative attitude and the individuals will frame it by stating that they believe that they've been discriminated against based upon race.

And I put my house on it that the people that say, I believe I've been discriminated against because of my race, that this committee, her committee has not founded one allegation. I put my house on it. Why aren't they asking that question? They should be asking her, Laffey, can you tell me how many times your board agreed with the complainant bad guy saying this happened to them because of their race? nobody asks her that question instead their focus is it's got to be wrong 76 that's got to be wrong that's got to be incorrect it goes against everything that we've been trying to do here you're taking my power away laughing by saying this you're saying my work doesn't mean anything i got to stick up for this somehow can you just clarify you know you need more clarification right just clarify

okay can you please clarify clarify what given that there's a clear differential of results of racialized people. I hope you're not concluding that since there's a low number of complaints based on racism, that there is little or no systemic racism within the RCMP. I hope you're not. I hope you're not concluding that because that would be very racist of you, you white privileged lady. Are you racist?

I hope you're not saying that just because there's a low number that there's not systemic racism in policing. I hope you're not saying that. Are you saying that? Is that what you're saying? Huh? Oops. It's exactly what she's saying. But she won't stick up for herself.

Because that's not why she's there. She's there to say there is systemic racism in policing, even though she's given evidence against it. I wouldn't dare. Are you kidding me? I'm a white privileged lady. I wouldn't make that conclusion. No, no, no way.

Thank you, Mr. President. Thank you, Mr. Chair. My question is for Ms. Laet, for people who want to... I don't know. This is the only one. This is the only person I like, and I just thought I'd show her for a good reason, right? My God. Okay, so Jack Harris hears this, and he's got a question. He can't believe it's only 76 cases. How do we twist this into what I want to hear? It would happen if someone made a complaint of excessive use of force. There was an indigenous person, but didn't mention or complain that it was because...

I was indigenous, would that be treated as a racially based complaint or no? No, of course it wouldn't. Does this question even make any fucking sense? What would happen if an indigenous person complained about excessive use of force and said, didn't mention it was because of his race, would that be classified as a what? Why would it be classified as a racially basest complaint? What's he getting that? He's getting that something.

Right? This is a stupid question. Let's see where he's getting at. Or racially based... Routinely make findings and recommendations in our reports that speak to the importance of cultural sensitivity. I understand. I understand that. You count as 76.

So if I made a complaint as an indigenous person, but I didn't say... No, it is not, but it doesn't mean that we wouldn't address it. No, no, no, no, no. That's good. That's what I wanted to hear. Okay, they're just not complaining about it. They don't make the decision. We make the decision.

as of the committee. That's what he was getting at. And I don't even really fully understand it. I got to think about it for like three days. But he's saying, I think. Hey, you know what? They're just not telling you. But we know it was based on race.

Police were rough with you because it was based on race. That's why there's only 76. Really, there's thousands. thousands upon thousands. He's trying to understand the stats, guys. What do you mean are you trying to understand it? There's 76. At a 17,000 or 76 out of 37 million.

No, no, no. I'm trying to understand the statistics. Can you tell me why you don't publish your reports and recommendations, except in the case of public interest matters? Because you could easily allow the, public to see what the recommendations were, what the facts were without disclosing privacy. Yes, you're correct. So the Privacy Act is the main reason why we do not do that. But if you go to our website, you will notice that we have begun to publish summaries of the complaints that we have

and we are going to continue doing that going. Oh, yes. Let's take a look at one of those summaries. Let's really dive into their mind for a second. I did. I find it shocking. It's shocking. This is how these guys think. Remember earlier she's saying you've got to trust our system? Listen to how they're investigating this complaint. Listen to their recommendations and findings. You have to listen to this. There's about 25 complaints right now. If you go to the CRCC website, there's summaries of investigations. They write up these summaries in the way they want you to read it. They leave out important facts in these summaries. So I pulled one. Maybe I've been hypoise this up a little bit too much. But to me, it just shows me how much these guys are actually

wing nuts. Their thinking is insane. It's insanity. These are the people that they're asking you to trust. Here's an example of one. And you could read it. Okay? You could read it. This lady, okay, she's the bad guy. She calls up police. And she says her husband stole her boat. And she wants him arrested. She wants us taken care of. The police obviously say, sorry ma'am, this is civil. That's a civil issue. We can't arrest. Police can't arrest. He has every entitlement to that boat, just like she does. So she says, over the phone, it was a 911 call, by the way. She says over the phone that she had a gun and would take care of the problem herself. police show up obviously they arrest her obviously for uttering threats right and they bring her back to

the detachment a classic domestic type file well it is it's it's a k file it's a domestic file bad guy doesn't like she doesn't like the treatment she goes to the complaint to the police she says the police do little or nothing about it she goes to the crCC CRCC investigates it and this what they say. They've identified serious deficiencies with the public complaint investigation process. The critical findings of the commission were as follows. You got to listen to some of these. You've got to listen to them. I'm going to try not to get angry. It was unreasonable for the RC&P members to arrest a complaint at her residence without judicial authorization. It was unreasonable for them to arrest her without a warrant. That's what they're saying, unless am I crazy man and not reading it,

right? They're saying that you need a warrant, guys, to arrest people. Could you imagine? Every time you wanted to arrest somebody, you had to type out a warrant for three or four or five hours, have somebody, another cop, go to that location, contain the location until you're right up the warrant that allows you to arrest this person. This is their thinking. You don't need a warrant, But this committee is too stupid to know that. These are the people that are overseeing you and coming up with decisions. Policies and procedures. These are the people that we're supposed to trust that know nothing about policing.

Of course you don't need a warrant. That would make policing impossible. You wouldn't be able to arrest anybody if you needed a warrant for their arrest. Let's keep on going. It was unreasonable to request consent to search the house from the complainant's minor daughter. So what happened was the police went in there, 14-year-old daughter in there. After they arrest Mommy, they asked the daughter, hey, do you mind if we look around for the gun? Police have to look around for the gun, guys.

Every domestic, we cover it off. Do you have access to firearms? Are they in the house? If not, do your parents have one? Any family members have firearms? You've got to cover that shit off. And they're saying it was unreasonable for them to, ask the minor daughter if they could search the house.

When I went into a house, I would sometimes say, hey, do you mind if I leave my boots on? And if they would say no, I would do it anyways. It's common courtesy. Hey, little girl, do you mind if we look around? They weren't asking, they were telling her. But they make mention of this. It's just they don't get it.

They don't get it. They never will. Let's keep on going. They kept bad guy in cells for 10 and a half hours. and the committee's upset that the police didn't articulate the reasons for detaining the complaint in cells for 10 and a half hours whatever whatever i mean she's lucky she even got out and she wasn't held for court right she's probably held in cells for the investigation to be somewhat complete to find the victim we don't just we don't just release people without contacting the victim

the victim in this case being the husband that took the boat, we got to let, the police got to track down the husband, let them know what was said. They have to investigate who might have a firearm. They can't just let this lady out, get possession of a firearm, and do what she said she was going to do. There has to be more statements taken, more interviews. So she's lucky it was only 10 and a half hours. This committee has a problem with it. Why?

Because they're not cops. They don't get it. This is their thinking. These are the people we're supposed to trust. These are the people that are coming up with decisions telling you how to police. De-escalate more. You need to respond better when you go to mental health calls, do we? Why? Why do we have to do that? Why do we have to do that?

Because you said so? Who are you? It's crazy. I try not to get worked up. Oh, I love this one. RCP members unreasonably impeded the complainant from closing her door. It was unreasonable. So they knock on the door, complainant answers it. Why am I calling her complainant because they are?

Bad guy answers it. They probably put their foot in the door, right? Because she goes to close the door. No, no, no, no, no. No, you're under arrest for uttering threats. You've opened the door. I'm not going to let you shut it. If I let you shut it, I'm not doing my job as a call.

That's how you police. Thank you for opening the door. Okay, she, you show up. They don't open the door. Go get a Feeney warrant. Sure, whatever. You know if you know she's in there. But you open the door, jackass, you're getting arrested. There you are. I'm not going to let you close the door. The committee wants you to let them close the door. So they, so bad guy can carry on with their lives. Why are we sticking up for bad people? This is insane. Police are the bad people though, aren't they? That's how it's painted. This committee wants us to do backwards policing. Is this boring shit?

I find it fascinating. I find it interesting that the world is just confusing me. It's confusing me now that I've retired. I can't believe how many crazy people are actually running Canada. They came up with a bunch of recommendations for the police to follow. You want to hear them? Here they are. Listen to this.

Members should receive operational guidance, respecting the legal requirements to attend a residence to arrest the person. The legal requirements. If you have reasonable and probable grounds to arrest somebody, you do it. Was there a crime? Was there a crime committed? Yes. Do you have powers arrest?

Yes. But they, members need operational guidance? They're saying that the members that went to the house were wrong for arresting this lady. When we know it was perfectly, perfectly handled by the book. But they're trying to rewrite this book. their own crazy book. Members need operational guidance on the policy regarding detention. What's that?

They don't say what that is. But what's that? You don't release somebody. You don't just release people immediately. Sometimes you've got to do an investigation. Sometimes they stay in cells over the weekend. Sometimes you do a JJP hearing. She's lucky she got out.

It doesn't say whether a JCP hearing was conducted or not, but I don't think there was. I think she was released on a PTA, problems to appear in an undertaking. One of the identified RCP members should receive operational guidance with respect to the importance of proper note-taking. Why?

Why? They love saying this. If you review these 25 and 2020, 25 summaries in 2020, they love, that's just something that they say, yeah, better note-taking. You have a civilian telling you that you need to take better notes,

but what they don't understand is Sometimes your notes are done in the car on your computer. A lot of times I would go to a call. I would even pull out my notebook from my tits. I would go and I sit in my car and I would type it out on the computer. That's my notes. Do they know that? Bet you they don't.

A senior RCMP member should apologize to the complainant, bad guy. On the RCMP's behalf for the police having trespassed on the complainant's residence. They're saying that the police trespassed. on the complainant's residence. And the RCMP need to apologize for that. Yeah. I don't even know where to start with this. I am so worked up.

I can't even say anything that is going to make sense. They're telling cops that when you go to somebody's house after they've committed a criminal offense and knocking on the door is trespassing. Isn't that something? Even though we know trespass in the criminal code, is trespass by night, starting at 9 o'clock at night. Meaning, you have no reason to be on somebody's property past 9 o'clock just lurking around. That's the only criminal offense when it comes to trespassing.

It's not trespass by day. You can't trespass by day. The file probably happened during the day. There's a reason why it's not trespass by day. Could you imagine if people weren't given the right to knock on doors during the day? How many offenses would be happening during the day? Every time the mailman came to your door and gave you mail or put mail through the mail slot? And we deem that as stress?

I was just so stupid. It's so stupid. This is their thinking. This is their mind frame. They're saying police are trespassing by knocking on a door. What do you say to it? You can't even reason with crazy. You can't.

You can't reason with crazy. You can't even... I don't even know what to say. I'm speechless. when I see this. They're telling police that they can no longer knock on people's doors to conduct an investigation. We should just leave as is. There's so many good points I could come up with right now, but I'm just not doing it.

I know I'm not. Maybe it's because it's just so dumb. It's such a stupid comment. We need to go apologize. To the shit rat for trespass. Could you imagine? I wouldn't do it if somebody told me. Hey Clint, you got to

You got to go to their house And you got to apologize that You trespass on their property What? It doesn't even exist They want you to do something that doesn't even exist No, they didn't trespass I don't know

It's almost over This is what they write The RCMP Commissioner agreed With most of the commissioner's findings And recommendations What? And I'm like, no, there's no way lucky agreed with it i have a lot of problems with lucky but there's no way in her right mind

she agreed with trespassing and arresting this person and asking the daughter to look for a gun there's no way she agreed with this shit so i dug deeper right i kept on reading the commissioner disagreed saying that detaining the complainant in cells was fine okay good okay thank you lucky the commissioner also disagreed with the finding that the complainant was impeded. Sounds like she was disagreeing with a lot. The commissioner said no. The police officer responded to a 911 call and a firearm threat and that their common law duty to protect life and safety was engaged at the time.

So then putting their stopping the door for being slammed in their face was the correct response, obviously, right? Thank you, lucky. The commission disagreed with the conclusion reached by the arched. RCMP Commissioner and maintained its position that the complainant only incidentally mentioned that she had a firearm and told the police it was made unjust that she was just kidding. Guys, the complainant was just kidding that she had a firearm. There were no exigent circumstances requiring immediate entry by the RCMP because she was just

kidding. Could you imagine if police police that way? Hi, ma'am. Yeah, you said you were going to kill your husband and that yet with your firearm. Oh, you were just kidding. Oh. Okay, maybe you shouldn't do that next time, okay? Okay, thank you.

Leave and... What the fuck. That's how they want you to police. That's how they want you to police. She was just fooling around. I was just fooling. It was just jokes. Police, you're supposed to take this shit as joking around.

It was just made in gist. Isn't it funny? They don't mention anything about the trespassing comment that they made. He says so ridiculous, so idiotic. There's no mention of it. There's no mention that the commissioner agreed with the trespassing or not. Of course, of course you didn't. Maybe I'm making it a big deal,

making it more of a big deal than it actually is, but I think this is a massive deal. That the MPF in an email is giving almost credit to this board, this board that shouldn't even exist. This board who is doing a terrible job, were given credibility to them. This board should never be mentioned by the MPF. It shouldn't even exist, and we shouldn't be given them credit or credibility.

We shouldn't have them involved in anything. It's insane. Not only were they trespassing. They unlawfully arrested her. And when they arrested her, they evicted her out of her house. They kidnapped her. That's kidnapping. I mean, you could go on and on with this craziness.

And they left a 14-year-old at home alone. That's child abuse. And after they evicted her from her home and arrested her and took her liberty away, they searched her, committing sexual assault. Like, this is their thinking, guys. I think I'm done. I think I'm done. I don't know.

What? I've been on here for two hours and just rambling about a topic. I like to talk about topics. that get me going, bug me. They might not be interesting to you, but it's interesting to me. Call the hotline number. I want to hear from you. 604-3302512. Subscribe, please. Subscribe to my channel. I need more subscriptions. And I appreciate it when you subscribe. Bye-bye.