CANADA - shooter in RCMP vehicle & uniform, 22 killed (plus perp), Portapique, NS, 18 April 2020 #3

[Amoca]

I, frankly, do not entirely understand the hue and cry for an "inquiry". Having said that, there have been a couple involving police in BC that have seemingly been successful. However, in general, they seem to be unwieldy, expensive monoliths that attract a never-ending stream of lay-people intent on repeating ad nauseam their subjective experience of being victimized while producing no clear way forward.

In this case, there is a contingent of Nova Scotians utterly committed to the beliefs that the police and the government are profoundly corrupt as evidenced in social media groups, and even in some MSM, such as MacLean's Mag. It is not difficult to imagine that an inquiry in this situation would be overwhelmed by dozens of individuals intent on discussing their beliefs and various "proofs" of that alleged corruption. It is obvious that any outcome that does not reach that conclusion will not be accepted, and will be met with further claims of corruption. The primary reason for demanding an inquiry appears to be to put people, especially police officers, under oath in the believe such an oath will induce someone who is corrupt to cop (no pun intended) to the truth. It seems likely, also, that such an inquiry would attract a good deal of pro and anti-gun lobbyists demanding an audience.

Clearly, there were mistakes, serious mistakes - mistakes that very likely resulted in people losing their lives. It seems highly unlikely that the panel review will not uncover at least some of those mistakes and failings, and that a panel will make related findings and recommendations. Equally likely, those findings will point to short-comings in the RCMP - training, equipment, staffing, decision-making, reporting, experience, supervision, etc., whatever. That, and gun violence, in general, and questions about whether it is possible to identify and flag individuals with this killers potential in advance and what can be done, if anything, to prevent such a psychotic break, would seem to be more appropriate subject matter for full blown inquiries.

I have always been pro police, pro RCMP and proud to live in a safe, sane country and province. But 22 people were brutally murdered, at least 2 dogs were killed and 2 others were shot, 3 other people including spouse were injured. This stinks. What stinks most is the fact that they never stopped it at Portapique. They never looked further, even after being told by a living bystander, that a vehicle had left Portapique across a field. Every person who died AFTER Portapique, may have been saved if timely and accurate information had been sent from the RCMP to us, the province, with one single important phone notice. Not via twitter.

 

[Satchie]

In this case, there is a contingent of Nova Scotians utterly committed to the beliefs that the police and the government are profoundly corrupt as evidenced in social media groups, and even in some MSM, such as MacLean's Mag. It is not difficult to imagine that an inquiry in this situation would be overwhelmed by dozens of individuals intent on discussing their beliefs and various "proofs" of that alleged corruption. It is obvious that any outcome that does not reach that conclusion will not be accepted, and will be met with further claims of corruption. The primary reason for demanding an inquiry appears to be to put people, especially police officers, under oath in the believe such an oath will induce someone who is corrupt to cop (no pun intended) to the truth. It seems likely, also, that such an inquiry would attract a good deal of pro and anti-gun lobbyists demanding an audience.

I agree.

The killer is dead and so it seems someone has to be put on trial and found guilty and made to pay a price.

IMO this gives some people the illusion that they have some kind of control over the world. That never again will anyone ever be murdered. That police will always be there, ready and waiting to arrest the bad guy, and no one will ever die from being in the wrong place at the wrong time.

IMO, if that's what you want, hire bodyguards to protect you, cause the government's not in that business.

 

[MistyWaters]

I have always been pro police, pro RCMP and proud to live in a safe, sane country and province. But 22 people were brutally murdered, at least 2 dogs were killed and 2 others were shot, 3 other people including spouse were injured. This stinks. What stinks most is the fact that they never stopped it at Portapique. They never looked further, even after being told by a living bystander, that a vehicle had left Portapique across a field. Every person who died AFTER Portapique, may have been saved if timely and accurate information had been sent from the RCMP to us, the province, with one single important phone notice. Not via twitter.

I’m not convinced a public inquiry will provide the answers people hope to find.

A public inquiry is not a trial, nor does it assign blame nor accountability for wrongdoing. The purpose is to look at the facts and then make recommendations for the future, hopefully to prevent a similar reoccurrence. However even the recommendations are not legally binding and one of the complaints is often very few are implemented, for example:
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/lond...-ltc-public-inquiry-recommendations-1.5462824

I think the nature of your comments refers to that of a civil suit.

 

[Satchie]

I’m not convinced a public inquiry will provide the answers people hope to find.

A public inquiry is not a trial, nor does it assign blame nor accountability for wrongdoing. The purpose is to look at the facts and then make recommendations for the future, hopefully to prevent a similar reoccurrence. However even the recommendations are not legally binding and one of the complaints is often very few are implemented, for example:
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/lond...-ltc-public-inquiry-recommendations-1.5462824

I think the nature of your comments refers to that of a civil suit.

Good point. Possibly, people want a public trial precisely so they can identify individuals and allegations that will enable them to sue them.

Whereas, the government could not be so irresponsible as to order a public inquiry that would expose the individuals called to testify, to civil lawsuits. I have no idea how they could prevent that from being done.

 

[newguy123]

Given what I know about the differences between an inquiry and a review, my vote for inquiry is based on that it seems to be the more in depth and thorough option. (I may be wrong). I do like the idea of being under oath. That is not because I fear police corruption, or gov't "cover up", but rather, in something of such a gravity as this situation, if something is to be said, make it under oath and "official". To me, if you have something of importance to say, have it sworn in. In my eyes it is not a "trick" to induce the truth, though I admit there are many out there pushing agendas and no doubt want to use it as such. That is sad.

I honestly think the situation in Portapique was on such a scale that it overwhelmed the police. It was not incompetence, it was just beyond what they had trained for. I cannot blame them for that. Imagine arriving in the dark, in a huge crime scene with conflicting accounts, reports of fires, murders, and who knows what else. In the dark you are to send your people in to make sense out of chaos, not knowing what lurked in the shadows. The fire dept and the paramedics of course are waiting for the area to be secured.......it was just unprecedented.

As Amoca wrote above though, what happened after Portapique is completely different. Let us hope there are answers.

(After I posted this I saw other messages and just wanted to add I never factored in the idea of civil lawsuits based on sworn testimony. But I do hope that is not the reason for one option over the other.)

 

[MistyWaters]

We don't need to see her, her face could be blacked out. She doesn't even need to speak, just write the words. The people from Portapique already know who she is, so hiding her face is perfectly fine, maintains her anonymity to the rest of NS (and the world) while providing answers. She CAN help the families, and it seems she either chooses not to, or has been told not to. I know she feels guilty. She's guilty of staying with her abuser for almost 20 years, while STILL involving her neighbours (like Brenda whose other name escapes me, who spoke about the shooter's spouse being hit and choked (and Brenda then moved away) requesting help, then going directly back to the abuser. I was abused too, but I left and NEVER went back. You have to know when enough is enough. Living in a gilded cage, is still living in a cage.

In a CTV Atlantic poll published today, which usually has about 1600 responders on serious matters, over 7000 responded to the latest poll, 72% of us, want a PUBLIC inquiry, not a 3 person in house team.

I‘m just curious, if you’d mind, could you give a hypothetical example of the type of answers the common-law spouse might offer that might be helpful to the victim’s families.....assuming her mental well-being is at a point where this suggestion would be considered and this is something the families want?

That she willingly relinquished her full entitlement to GWs estate without a legal battle was somewhat helpful to the families I’d presume but I can’t think of anything more she could say or do to ease their grief. I’d guess either didn’t see this tragedy looming or if she did, she was ill-equipped to take preventative action due to fear/spousal abuse. But either way, as we know she wasn’t responsible for the tragedy nor was she able to prevent it, I can’t think of anything she has to say that would be helpful to the families of the victims who lost their lives. JMO

 

[MistyWaters]

Given what I know about the differences between an inquiry and a review, my vote for inquiry is based on that it seems to be the more in depth and thorough option. (I may be wrong). I do like the idea of being under oath. That is not because I fear police corruption, or gov't "cover up", but rather, in something of such a gravity as this situation, if something is to be said, make it under oath and "official". To me, if you have something of importance to say, have it sworn in. In my eyes it is not a "trick" to induce the truth, though I admit there are many out there pushing agendas and no doubt want to use it as such. That is sad.

I honestly think the situation in Portapique was on such a scale that it overwhelmed the police. It was not incompetence, it was just beyond what they had trained for. I cannot blame them for that. Imagine arriving in the dark, in a huge crime scene with conflicting accounts, reports of fires, murders, and who knows what else. In the dark you are to send your people in to make sense out of chaos, not knowing what lurked in the shadows. The fire dept and the paramedics of course are waiting for the area to be secured.......it was just unprecedented.

As Amoca wrote above though, what happened after Portapique is completely different. Let us hope there are answers.

(After I posted this I saw other messages and just wanted to add I never factored in the idea of civil lawsuits based on sworn testimony. But I do hope that is not the reason for one option over the other.)

How I see it is if those directly involved feel the police are to blame for the killer’s actions, then that’s the role of a civil suit, which indeed assigns wrongdoing.

But if what they want are changes to involving the actions of police forces in general or amended mental health legislation, that’s the objective of a public inquiry. Either way, I would anticipate hefty arguments to be made by opposing groups who support individual rights and freedoms.

Just my own opinion, the final RCMP report may answer many of the questions that presently prevail, much like the Toronto Greektown and the BC shootings. In advance of the reports, public demands were made for inquiries into those tragedies as well. I’d expect the final report pertaining to this tragedy to be released far sooner than a public inquiry would ever begin. Canadian courts are already backlogged because they’ve been shut down for jury hearings since last March.

 

[MistyWaters]

Good point. Possibly, people want a public trial precisely so they can identify individuals and allegations that will enable them to sue them.

Whereas, the government could not be so irresponsible as to order a public inquiry that would expose the individuals called to testify, to civil lawsuits. I have no idea how they could prevent that from being done.

As it appears the police responded and until the next morning they were unaware the killer had escaped Portapique in a police cruiser, the larger question would be to what extent are police accountable in preventing any killer’s future actions?

 

[newguy123]

I guess I am naive in thinking the "truth" is an entity unto itself and not something to be used to pursue litigation. My intention was finding out what happened, not in using that collection of details to assign blame, beyond the gunman that is.

 

[Oscarjackson12]

We don't need to see her, her face could be blacked out. She doesn't even need to speak, just write the words. The people from Portapique already know who she is, so hiding her face is perfectly fine, maintains her anonymity to the rest of NS (and the world) while providing answers. She CAN help the families, and it seems she either chooses not to, or has been told not to. I know she feels guilty. She's guilty of staying with her abuser for almost 20 years, while STILL involving her neighbours (like Brenda whose other name escapes me, who spoke about the shooter's spouse being hit and choked (and Brenda then moved away) requesting help, then going directly back to the abuser. I was abused too, but I left and NEVER went back. You have to know when enough is enough. Living in a gilded cage, is still living in a cage.

In a CTV Atlantic poll published today, which usually has about 1600 responders on serious matters, over 7000 responded to the latest poll, 72% of us, want a PUBLIC inquiry, not a 3 person in house team.[/QUOTE

We don't need to see her, her face could be blacked out. She doesn't even need to speak, just write the words. The people from Portapique already know who she is, so hiding her face is perfectly fine, maintains her anonymity to the rest of NS (and the world) while providing answers. She CAN help the families, and it seems she either chooses not to, or has been told not to. I know she feels guilty. She's guilty of staying with her abuser for almost 20 years, while STILL involving her neighbours (like Brenda whose other name escapes me, who spoke about the shooter's spouse being hit and choked (and Brenda then moved away) requesting help, then going directly back to the abuser. I was abused too, but I left and NEVER went back. You have to know when enough is enough. Living in a gilded cage, is still living in a cage.

In a CTV Atlantic poll published today, which usually has about 1600 responders on serious matters, over 7000 responded to the latest poll, 72% of us, want a PUBLIC inquiry, not a 3 person in house team.

I doubt that she is even allowed to speak publicly about what happened. There is still a police investigation ongoing. She also went through a very devastating and traumatic ordeal ... I would be shocked if she ever opened up publicly.

As for people demanding answers and an inquiry, I totally understand that. Families need to understand what happened and how it happened. So do members of the community. I would feel exactly the same way if that was my family killed. However, a public inquiry would take a min of two years. But I can’t blame them at all for wanting that.

 

[MistyWaters]

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-scotia/mass-shooting-unsealed-search-warrant-documents-1.5664913
N.S. mass shooter allegedly had guns, drugs, secret rooms, court documents say
“The man responsible for the mass shooting in Nova Scotia had a stockpile of guns and drugs, and false walls and hiding spots on his properties, according to newly unsealed court documents that summarize police interviews.

Provincial Court Judge Laurel Halfpenny MacQuarrie on Monday released some previously redacted sections of search warrant applications filed by the RCMP........(more)

 

[tayaway]

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-scotia/mass-shooting-unsealed-search-warrant-documents-1.5664913
N.S. mass shooter allegedly had guns, drugs, secret rooms, court documents say
“The man responsible for the mass shooting in Nova Scotia had a stockpile of guns and drugs, and false walls and hiding spots on his properties, according to newly unsealed court documents that summarize police interviews.

Provincial Court Judge Laurel Halfpenny MacQuarrie on Monday released some previously redacted sections of search warrant applications filed by the RCMP........(more)

What a nutter. The community sure went through h*ll with that guy around.

 

[Errrr]

I honestly don't mean to victim shame.
Amoca, I did not see any "shaming" in what you wrote. But, if I was the "ex" I'd probably keep a low profile at this point. For some she will be a lightning rod for their anger. I do believe many will also relegate her to second class victim status because she had been with him for so long. Who would want to be in her shoes right now?
Having said that I do understand what you wrote and have felt the same......that some of his victims were, in his warped mind, perceived to be candidates for sheltering her. If it is true, imagine how awful you would feel. Even if it is not true, imagine how awful she feels having been with him and seeing what unfolded. Guilt by association in many people's eyes. Even if she tells all she knows (and there is no reason to suggest she is not doing that behind the scenes right now), some will view it as trying to clear her conscience as a form of absolution. She is in a no win situation.

Since I know her name, I’m sure all the locals do as well. There’s no point in connecting a whole country with her when we have nothing to do with this.

 

[Errrr]

As it appears the police responded and until the next morning they were unaware the killer had escaped Portapique in a police cruiser, the larger question would be to what extent are police accountable in preventing any killer’s future actions?

If every cop were trained to the level of JTF2, and then dropped into the backwoods of Nova Scotia for 25 years, I wonder how much training they would retain?

 

[Amoca]

I‘m just curious, if you’d mind, could you give a hypothetical example of the type of answers the common-law spouse might offer that might be helpful to the victim’s families.....assuming her mental well-being is at a point where this suggestion would be considered and this is something the families want?

That she willingly relinquished her full entitlement to GWs estate without a legal battle was somewhat helpful to the families I’d presume but I can’t think of anything more she could say or do to ease their grief. I’d guess either didn’t see this tragedy looming or if she did, she was ill-equipped to take preventative action due to fear/spousal abuse. But either way, as we know she wasn’t responsible for the tragedy nor was she able to prevent it, I can’t think of anything she has to say that would be helpful to the families of the victims who lost their lives. JMO

That's immaterial, that she relinquished her role of Executrix to the estate. We're not huge "sue-ers" here in Canada compared the the States, though the families ARE suing the estate, as they should.

I want to know from her, what he said, and what he did. Where he started, and where he stopped. What did he SAY leading up to this- it didn't happen in a vacuum, and he didn't suddenly just "snap".
This was thought out, his escape was planned, the back roads he chose were great to use as escape, we see cops on those roads but honestly, not so much now the main detachment is in Enfield not Stewiacke, and I've driven 120 kms an hour on every back road I've driven for the last 40 years. Been stopped exactly once, in 40 years of speeding 40 kms over the speed limit.

But- They have overturned the original plan and have called a FULL PUBLIC inquiry. There will now be some kind of answers.

 

[newguy123]

Facing backlash, Ottawa announces full inquiry into N.S. shootings - HalifaxToday.ca

Just saw this.........

 

[Lexiintoronto]

Facing backlash, Ottawa announces full inquiry into N.S. shootings - HalifaxToday.ca

Just saw this.........

Bill Blair
@BillBlair

“We’ve listened to Nova Scotians. Please see my statement.”


https://twitter.com/BillBlair/status/1288202222417960960?s=20


I’m greatly relieved by this for all of the loved ones involved, and first responders. And for the entire NS community.

 

[LadyL]

Warrant alleges NS mass shooter was seasoned smuggler of narcotics and guns

 

[tayaway]

I want to know from her, what he said, and what he did. Where he started, and where he stopped. What did he SAY leading up to this- it didn't happen in a vacuum, and he didn't suddenly just "snap".
This was thought out, his escape was planned, the back roads he chose were great to use as escape, we see cops on those roads but honestly, not so much now the main detachment is in Enfield not Stewiacke, and I've driven 120 kms an hour on every back road I've driven for the last 40 years. Been stopped exactly once, in 40 years of speeding 40 kms over the speed limit.

But- They have overturned the original plan and have called a FULL PUBLIC inquiry. There will now be some kind of answers.

She must've filled LE in on all the info she had. We need to be patient, and I agree, his actions didn't come out of nowhere.

What a relief to hear there will be a public inquiry.

 

[Bo.Jack]

Police Corruption? Nova Scotia Shooter - Behind The Scenes
Nova Scotia Shooter Behind The Scenes with Paul Palango a former senior editor at The Globe and Mail and author of three books on the RCMP, the most recent being Dispersing the Fog, Inside the Secret World of Ottawa and the RCMP. His work on the Nova Scotia massacre has been published in MacLeans and the Halifax Examiner..

Interesting observations about the girlfriend and he says more info coming out about her..