Reader “Boudica” asks;
“Is it just me or do you find it strange that the name of the person who self immolated recently at the Toronto Tim Hortons was never released?”
Perhaps our legions of curious readers can ferret that out….
update Several commentors have pointed out that his identity has been withheld “due to the family’s wishes”.
Well, big whoop. When one chooses to exit in a manner that places the public at significant risk, which destroys the property of others and closes down part of a metropolitan area, one should expect to forfeit the “right to privacy”.
Afterthought – has anyone else forgotten the March 8 announcement of the Tim Horton’s opening at the Canadian base at Kandahar? And it’s unreasonable for people to ask who was responsible for a gasoline fueled explosion in one of their restaurants in Toronto less than a month later?
One more point before I cook supper.
I am waiting for a terrorist attack to shake up Canada into understanding what is as stake.
If it weren’t for the denial of our beloved Left, we wouldn’t have to have people die to make the point.
As it is … this will be necessary if we and our US neibors are going to bring peace and democracy to the Middle Yeast Infection and them move on to better things.
If there is an attack .. Oh God … let it be in Toronto. That is where it will do the most good.
Imagine if you will (Twilight Zone music in background) The CN Tower falling directly on top of the CBC building.
(Actually, Bruce, with respect to the law, and not to get too into it, for it to be a crime you to prove both elements the crime – the actus reus and the mens reus.
The actus reus is a simple objective fact: was the “act” expressly prohibited under the Criminal Code. As Chris pointed out, causing your own death is not a criminal act, but causing an unlawful fire is.
The mens reus is a subjective test and does indeed look at the intent of the accused. Did he or she intend to take the prohibited action, the actus reus? If not no crime.
In your examples, there may be a crime but you have to figure out which one. The “thin skull” rule is applicable to civil cases where, indeed, you look at the harm caused from the victims POV. If you hit smacked someone on the head and they died, you intended to hit them – so there is a crime – but you didn’t intended to kill them – so it’s not murder but manslaughter (akin to reckless disregard). In your other example, if you intend to set fire to your shop – criminal arson – you could be guilty of manslaughter (criminal disregard) but not murder since you did not intend to kill anyone. Some exceptions, like if you intended to burn down a theatre knowing there were people in it but assuming they could get out and that sort of thing.
Sorry for the law class, folks. The lawyer in me couldn’t let that one go by.)
bcl: “or lets just say brown skin people” – how telling
Looks like Bryceman beat me to it. Sorry to have to put everyone throw Criminal Law 101 not once but twice this evening!
Ted
Cerberus
through not throw
Time to rest my fingers, obviously.
Thanks for the back-up Ted. I don’t suppose Bruce’s admission will be forthcoming, though.
Why do I have the impression that some people on this site are not concerned with public safety don’t even suffer from paranoia, but instead are panting for evidence to support the sum of their terrorist fears and, hence, their political views?
If you feel the Toronto Police Services (TPS)negligent in their duty to protect the public, you can bring any concerns or information you may have to the attention of the Solicitor General of Ontario. In case it hasn’t occured to you, the OPP, RCMP and CSIS would cooperate very closely indeed with the TPS in any terrorist matter, so if there is a conspiracy, it would involve all levels of government including your very own Conservative Feds. You can always start uncovering the conspiracy at the top.
As I suggested to our illustrious Sentinel a few days ago, beat the bush for terrorists, look under all beds for reds, and check everyone you meet for extra-terrestial alien status, since their non-existence has never been proved conclusively either. But don’t expect to be taken seriously.
It’s “mens rea” and the thin skull rule means you take the victim as you find them. In other words, if your victim has an existing condition, your liability or guilt is not lessened because you had the poor judgment to pick a weak victim.
This has been revisited and expanded by our SCC on several occasions.
Are you a lawyer? I hope not. If you don’t believe me, look it up.
Pls insert a comma between “safety” and “don’t” in line 2.
Ted, appreciate the factual examination.
Suicides are. Depending on fame or lack of are treated individually by papers. Its not a matter of decency . Its a matter of relevancy. Surly in times like these, they can be more forthright?
All they have to say is A name . If its a suicide no one will judge anyone. Hiding names, just smells to high heaven with something like this on a National level.
Most post here trying to wake people up knowing the longer we sleep the more blood will be spilled. Not hoping for a blood bath. Its you Liberals that have hid your faces in the sand, bare assed. Crying racism while around you 2000 years of history is burning. Its always the left that�s the last to see. This time your actually apologists for these monsters. I bet the Ukrainians while being starved purposely amongst plenty. Ordered by a Stalinist Russia for there own good, to begin collectivization. 7 million dead. I am sure they appreciate the lefts blindness there as well. For Uncle Joe. For there own good.
There is a bigger issue here. That being. Freedom to publish names of suspects, Children that are killers, Actually convicted rapists, Child molesters & all manner of human scum. In the name of privacy of the Family, leftists have hidden societies worst garbage for there so called good. Ignoring the fact most of these families are screaming for attention, at the lack of Justice.
Its the lefts way of protecting there favorite cause. Criminals of any stripe. The law, allowing Serial killers even the vote. Should have caused the public to see the glazed over Socialist mentalities with there real reasons why. They don’t want there pet projects (Criminal of the month) named.
We have become so accustomed to this form of Dhimmitude. We don’t even realize it . In the end that is the lefts form of submission. Political correctness gone mad. Trying to engineer reality from a sick social theory, into fact. To stop people from seeing the obvious . Just make it taboo to talk about certain subjects. Or call them racists. Never let truth stand in ones way.
Make it up as you go. The Lefts credo. Never answer a question just denounce.
You, like your Islamofacist buddies want us under your submission & to shut up. By you, I mean the Liberal left & there kibbles & bits doggy friends the NDP.
Its time we got real news , if not for community safety than out of a sense that every life has meaning, & violence to one is force applied to all. Only than will we gain our liberty back. We hide victims like the middle ages hide there leapers. Hoping it does not happen to us. We throw them onto the Suttee�s bonfire to burn, than forget. No widows(victims ) allowed. Lets get our liberty back. Lets not allow the censers to win. To make ignorance a virtue. To hide behind euphemisms to misdirect us into the trap of there Dhimmitude.
Justice must be seen to be done for it to be Justice. Enough of the weasels hiding among us.
I am waiting for a terrorist attack to shake up Canada into understanding what is as stake.
How did that work out for Bush in NYC in the last election? I think New Yorkers know very well what is at stake. That doesn’t mean they had to buy into what Fearless Leader told them was the solution.
Sorry guys, “thin skull” is as deeply-entrenched in our criminal law as it is in our civil law. Lead case these days is R. v. Smithers 1975. Blaue, (UK 1975) even extended it to a Jehovah’s witness who refused a blood transfusion and died from injuries; the court ruled that regardless of whether a transfusion might have saved the victim, the accused was guilty of murder since the assault triggered all subsequent events.
As to the arson case I cited, I have CONVICTED a person of non-capital murder, in Canada, under those circumstances. In the absence of specific mens rea, a court can and does rule that a person engaging in an act that is so reckless that he is deemed to have criminal culpability if something unforeseen results from his original act. In other words, courts rule that the accused SHOULD have anticipated a broad range of consequences that could stem from the initial activity.
Other criminal convictions resulting from lack of specific mens rea? You are approached downtown by a shady character, offered a Rolex watch (not a knock off) for $100. You buy it. You are liable for a conviction for possession of stolen property. Why? It’s called “willful blindness”. Any reasonable person should know that you can’t buy a $6000 timepiece for a hundred bucks. It doesn’t matter that you don’t know exactly whether the watch was obtained from a fraud, theft, robbery etc…the law imposes penalties if people do not act in a reasonable maner.
OK…no more law lessons, time for dinner…
Sorry if this has been said but generally the police dont release and the newspapers do no print the names of suicides.
Generally done, not out of respect, but out of the desire not to encourage the practice by providing publicity.
There are many sucicides in the city of toronto every week, often they are jumping on the subway tracks, or until recently off of the bloor viaduct on to the Don Valley Parkway.
No reports because they dont want to provide post death “glory”….
Revnant Dream, how about a less incoherent stream-of-consciousness nightmare?
OK Bruce…ummmm…
I haven’t reviewed Regina v. Smithers…but I doubt (and would be shocked to see) that the words “thin skull principle” were used in a criminal case.
As for non-specific mens rea and “willful blindness”…I am not arguing against either of those concepts or that they exist. Again, they go towards my initial argument that the crime is graded on what the offender knew or should have known. You had indicated that I had had that backwards. I don’t think I did and I think you made my point.
Sorry to go into the legal lessons. But I think that this point is important to make and to understand. Left-wingers rely on the average person not being aware of this distinction and they use that ignorance to try and push forward their ideas that society should accept laws that allow for people to be punished for what the victim says that they suffered.
In the early 90’s the NDP government in BC tried to pass a law making it illegal to write or say anything that someone might find offensive. If it weren’t for the people who pointed out that laws aren’t based on claimed suffering, they might have gotten more support.
The initial argument that I was making in this thread was that, just because this (apparently)disturbed person did something that had an impact on the local public…that doesn’t make his crime any “more serious” than it would be if he had flamed himself alone, inside of his own deep underground bunker.
Wow, is there a full moon tonight or what? Everybody just seems so venomous…on both sides of the spectrum. How’s about we all take a nice deep breath and inject some civility back into the discussion.
I don’t think anyone is right or wrong in this case about whether or not to release the name. It’s a case of “the public’s right to know” (that has been exercised in the past by the media in relation to suicides) versus the desire not to glorify the suicide or not inflict additional angst amongst the family. I see it as a toss-up.
I think a reasonable case can be made for both sides of the argument…there are some relevant national security issues with a possible attack on a Tim Hortons (as a response to them opening up in Afghanistan), so it would be nice to get more information…at the same time, give the family a break.
Howsabout we just agree to disagree…or is that asking too much? I know it is fun to argue and vent, but…
I agree with Ima, this is a tough call. If someone decides to kill himself by swallowing a bottle of pills in his bathtub, his identity is not really the public’s business. But if he say, flies his plane into city hall, his family would have no reasonable right to expect that his identity be withheld.
This Tim Hortons self-immolator is right in the in-between zone. No need to draw a line right down the center and start shooting.
Unless you see bigcitylib…
It is a bit bizarre indeed to have such viciousness over a mere name of a mere nobody.
I’ve tried to be civil because I frankly just don’t get it. I don’t get the idea that there is a “right to know” in this case. Is there an example of the police releasing a name of a suicide against the wishes of the family? If there was, then this would be unique. I think the practice of the police is to release the names of the deceased only after the family has been informed and then only if there is no objection. Please correct me if I’m wrong.
So the fact that there were elements of the story that looked like a terrorist attack does raise the spectre of an attack, but after the police have laid the issue to bed, to claim that there is something suspicious is, IMHO, to malign the cops who walk the street. They have said clearly and succinctly that there was no criminal activity.
Given the facts we know – a guy poured gasoline on himself in a bathroom and the gasoline was set on fire deliberately – I don’t see why exposing the suffering family to public and media scrutiny serves any purpose whatsoever, especially any security purpose.
Ted
Cerberus
Well, I’m completely with Kate on this one.
Very strange that the facts surrounding an explosion IN A PUBLIC PLACE, which was cordoned off for hours, involved security–or fears for the public’s safety, at any rate–and which involved one man’s death (and there could have been other deaths if the explosion had not been contained) has been more or less hushed up by Toronto authorities “out of respect” for the wishes of the deceased’s family.
With all due respect to his family, it seems to me that the public has a right to know who this man was in order to, as someone else pointed out, discover what groups he might or might not have belonged to.
Though I believe in law enforcement and feel we need a lot more of it–and realize what a thankless task policing is, especially when they’re more likely to be criticized than praised for a very difficult job–I don’t exactly trust the “powers that be” (the mayor and other elected TO officials) to be openly transparent about this case. I can just see them hushing/covering up facts that would be uncomfortable to disclose, like the nationality and/or religious affiliation of this man. It would be just like them to reason something like this: If we tell people that he was ____________, there might be a backlash towards this group, and we can’t have that. Though I agree that any hypotheticial backlash would be senseless and against the law, I don’t think that out of fear of something which might possibly happen, the mayor and other officials should withhold pertinent informatin from the public ABOUT A VIOLENT ACT THAT TOOK PLACE IN A PUBLIC PLACE. It would also be very pertinent for the public to know that the man, if it is the case, is not a ____________. Whatever the situation, the public needs more info.
More questions are stirred up by the mayor and the police not being forthcoming with the facts, and a soupcon of doubt lingers in one’s mind: What else are they not telling us? And why are they not telling us?
BTW bcl: Lay off if you can’t be civil. And stop imputing motives and mindsets to those of us not on your wavelength. I could tell you all sorts of things about me that would prove that I am not in the least racist, but it would, as the Bible calls it, be throwing pearls before swine. Sorry to have to be so blunt, but you’ve pushed a bunch of buttons once too often. Stop being such a nuisance.
Ever think he had a huge insurance policy and they don’t pay off for suicide. Family might want to try and get the money.
For pities sake dont kick BCL out Kate, ever since Bloom County and Andy Gapp left the newspapers I need some laughs
Just a question. Why does a family who’s loved one died in service of his country have no rights of privacy … but someone’s family who didn’t does?
agitfact
But was I wrong? Insults by you not withstanding.
You prove what I say about the lefts creed. Detract, deflect, distract, denounce.(O:}
I agree Ron Rob.Kinsella’s blog used to have “John” who morphed into “Joanne” sometime around the time of the election.
Bcl is Kate’s “Joanne”.
Or maybe its another post election morphing…
Bryceman:
We’re going to have to agree to disagree, I suppose, but I enjoyed the discussion.
Embodied below are a couple of excerpts from R. v. Paul Douglas Smithers (SCC 1978; note the reference to thin skull:
… “manslaughter is the causing of death of a human being by an unlawful act, but not an intentional act.”
…”If a person goes to rob someone, and he strikes him on the head while robbing him, and he just intends a light tap, but the man has a thin skull and suffers shall we say severe brain injury, it is not a defence for the robber to say he didn’t know the man had a thin skull, and that no one else, or few others, would have had such, would have received a brain injury from that tap. A person takes his victim as he finds him. The severity in this particular case or the kick is for you to decide upon. But even if it was not severe, if you find it caused death, the severity is immaterial, but the severity may be something for you to consider as to whether or not it was the cause of death�”
I apologize to any blogee if belabouring this point has induced glassy eyes and/or boredom. (hey, I’m a shameless type “A”, I can’t let it go .. 🙂
Ural, I will sugest an answer, but no one will like it.
The family of one who dies in the service of his country is a rich PR mine. They do have a right to privacy, but they might feel that exercising it would deny their loved one the hero status conferred by publicity. Personally, I did not need the news clips of Pte Costall’s wife and mother breaking down on receiving the national flag and his beret and medal, but others may have felt their patriotism stroked.
In the case of a suicide, I would leave it up to the family. They are punished enough already, and face a life sentence of guilt and regret. On the other hand, I know the father of a drug addict who killed himself in despair, and the father went public and lectured youth and parents’ groups about drugs.
Oh, and if you want any more references to thin skull in Canadian judgments, I’ve got 788 of them…
Revnant, if you expressed opinions clearly, we could discuss whether they were wrong or not, but I am not going to try to deal with an incoherent and partially incomprehensible stream of statements. “Incoherent” and “partially incomprehensible” are accurate descriptions, not insults. And I was in fact hoping that you would clarify your rant.
Spare me the reflex “leftist” accusations; they reveal less about me than about you. Do believe what you must, as I am sure you will.
To bigcitylib – just a thought but its highly unlikely you’d see a right wing uprising in Toronto for any reason. Can you think of one where the two or three right wingers in Toronto would stage an uprising?
Whether or not the combusted one intended to fry himself is completely irrelevant. What is relevant is that a man entered the most iconic of Canadian businesses of the past decade, one that has been in the news for several reasons lately (IPO, Afghanistan), at one of the busiest intersections in the country, with a gascan, and ignited it inside. If he survived, his name would certainly not be kept secret, as he would become one of the country’s most notorious criminal defendants in the months and years to come.
Kate is absolutely right, we have a right to know his name. Call me what you will, but I think it is very important to know if this was a young Muslim male. Why is it not a distinct possibility that this guy ignited himself by accident while attempting to set up a terrorist act? Just because the Toronto Police declare it was a suicide of an anonymous man, are you ready to just believe it and move on?
Ural: “Just a question. Why does a family who’s loved one died in service of his country have no rights of privacy … but someone’s family who didn’t does?”
Who says they don’t? Can you give me an example where a family asked the military not to release their names? The example isn’t relevant because the army has different protocols than the police. The police followed ordinary protocol having determined there were no reasons not to.
I just find it quite bizarre, to be frank, that there is this conspiracy rising up that this guy was some sort of terrorist and, within an hour of the incident, a dozen police officers, the Chief, the mayor, the feds have all got together to conspire to keep this silent, hush hush as some are saying up above.
Most cases of suicide do not have the name released. Where does this “right to know” the details of a police investigation come from?
In this case the police concluded there was no security threat and that the family, who would have been hounded by the media and, clearly, by conservative bloggers if the name was released, deserved to grieve in piece.
Sometimes this place just goes kinda weird and wonky. Like the tinfoil hats over at rabble where everything is a conspiracy of some sort.
Strange reaction to what are pretty self-evident facts.
Ted
Cerberus
agitfact,
Your comments are the perfect reason why you should spend more time masturbating.
Thats “peace” dammit not “piece” unless your trying to make bad puns Ted.
Ted,
Ditto.
NCF TO: I’m fully ready to believe that terrorists are complete and utter idiots, but even this case would stretch the limits of a terrorists idiocy.
Pouring gasoline on your body… in a closed off room… in a closed off cell within that room… without enough gasoline to cause an explosion… when no one is nearby… on a quiet warm Sunday afternoon when few were around…
Cripes, I only wish they made more terrorists like that!
Ted
Cerberus
Touche, Douglas. The fingers and the brain are tired, but the work on my desk is now done.
G’night.
Ted
Cerberus
And by the way, the TRUTH is that Krispy Kreme is behind it all: they set him up and then started planting rumours that this was a terrorist threat being covered up by the Toronto police, the Ontario Solicitor General’s Office and Stockwell Day (as Minister of Public Safety) and even got the second Tim Horton’s store to shut down for a few hours the same day. Their evil American plot is to convince Canadians that they take their lives into their hands every single time they step through the door to order a double double with a box of timbits to go.
Ted
Cerberus
Iz Ok.Ted I wuz jus funnin ya.
Goodnite.
Aqitfact: “Incoherent” and “partially incomprehensible” are accurate descriptions, not insults.
Common sense isn’t your strongest suit is it? Revant tells it like it is. Whether I agree with him or not, he is at least sincere. Just because you don’t get or don’t agree with Revant’s points, he’s incoherent and partially incomprehensible. Don’t waste a good man’s opinion by trying to make him explain himself. If you didn’t get the first time, your not ever going to. Your just not programmed to.
“In this case the police concluded there was no security threat
and that the family,
who would have been hounded by the media and, clearly,
by conservative bloggers
if the name was released, deserved to grieve in piece[sic].”
Ted:
I understand from what I have read
that the family have returned to their home
in ‘south Asia’
(where they can grieve in peace)
I’d just like to make the following observation:
The leftists (yeah, yeah, yeah, I know you don’t like that terrible epithet, but… boo-hoo!) seem obsessed with trying to convince the people that there’s nothing to this but some sad guy who took his own life… move on…
As if the leftists have seen absolute, 100%, a posteriori conclusive proof to back up their adamant statements and belittlements of those who genuinely believe in erring on the side of public security.
Nothing new on the part of leftists.
Just an observation. No need to crap on me for it.
Grace Adams, I’m sorry, but I lack the mental deficiencey that would make that good man’s sincere rant clear.
Sentinel, since you can’t show the “absolute, 100%, a posteriori proof” that extra-terrestials don’t exist, you should keep looking for them.
“Sometimes this place just goes kinda weird and wonky.” You are so right, Ted.
I just find it quite bizarre, to be frank, that there is this conspiracy rising up that this guy was some sort of terrorist and, within an hour From Ted (12:05 a.m.): I just find it quite bizarre, to be frank, that there is this conspiracy rising up that this guy was some sort of terrorist and, within an hour of the incident, a dozen police officers, the Chief, the mayor, the feds have all got together to conspire to keep this silent, hush hush as some are saying up above.”
Please don’t play the “conspiracy” card, Ted. There is no attempt to suggest a conspiracy (doo-doo, doo-doo), simply a reasonable expectation that public officials charged with the safety and protection of their citizenry fully disclose the details of a most bizarre incident in one of–if not the–largest city in Canada.
As for your comment, “”Most cases of suicide do not have the name released. Where does this ‘right to know’ the details of a police investigation come from?”
You’re right; we never hear–nor should we–about most suicides, because THEY ARE PRIVATE EVENTS. In the case of this man, his successful attempt to immolate himself took place in A PUBLIC PLACE WHERE HE PUT A NUMBER OF OTHERS POTENTIALLY AT RISK AND AT ONE OF THE MAIN INTERSECTIONS OF ONE OF CANADA’S LARGEST CITIES.
If 9/11 had never happened, if we weren’t participating in a war in Afghanistan, if there weren’t threats against our way of life being monitored daily in the U.S.–and, one hopes, in Canada as well, given that we are on Osama Bin Laden’s list of countries that need to be taught a lesson–this suicide would be just a blip on the news of the day.
As it is, circumstances have changed since 9/11 and reality dictates not talk of conspiracy–your word–but sober, vigilant attentiveness to what is going on around us.
If the officials who are witholding this man’s name and the full circumstances surrounding his death are not giving the public the information we need to know for our protection and the protection of our children, then they are not fulfilling their public duty to keep us abreast of events that impact our lives.
And in order to dispell the feelings of many that they ARE witholding full disclosure for reasons known only to them–but suspected by many of us–they need to tell us a lot more and not hide behind the “respect for the deceased’s family” as the reason they are withholding his name.
What don’t you get about this? It was not a private act. If he had wanted it to be a private act, he would have stayed home.
There was no charge leveied on the estate ( and should have been as suicide is illegal and so is arson) so the police can limit public access to their investigation. The recent “biker” murders is anoither example of the closed mouth policy of police.
Ya know when it comes right down to it the police have always been restrictive of public access to police info and so has the court with their recent “pubic black outs”.
Seems both the police function and the justice industry think the public are too unsavory to be informed let aloe involved in the law enforcement and jury systems…..serfs are kept in a “need to know only” basis.
WHY NOT READ THE OBITUARIES EVERY DAY IN TORONTO NEWSPAPERS?
I realize the family might not put in an obituary but most do.
Look for date of death, suddenly, no visitation etc.
BCL will surely be able to find it.
Suicides go into an information black hole and never re-emerge. No one really knows why. We all know they walk in front of Go trains and throw themselves in front of subways etc. but nobody ever speaks of it. TABOO. Who decides societal taboo’s anyway?
I think Kate (and many people on this Blog) yearn for an act of terrorism to justify their hatred for Muslims (or lets just say brown skin people because I doubt they could tell Muslims from from anyone else that origonated in that part of the world).
I suspect it is you who truly yearns for such an act, so you can throw yourself even more wholeheartedly into self-righteous denunciations of “racists!” and take great pleasure in the frisson such “speaking truth to power” gives you.
Face it: as I’ve said before, leftists – or more specifically, Guilty White (big city) Liberals – are motivated in part by a desperate desire to be thought of as cool and righteous by non-whites, and indeed if most Muslims were pinker than Presbyterians you’d probably see the issues here more clearly.
Last month 2 people were caught dumping manure on Emerson office. Police caught them. No names were ever released. All we knew were they came from New Westminster.
What were the privacy concerns there?
Marc Lepine and his real name comes up again. How come this is never bandied about in the press?
Young offenders too never have there names broadcast. Who does this protect? Family members of the criminals?
Free and open discussion in our society means exactly that. Little by little pieces of the puzzle are obscured. Like Lepine, what is the cause of his violence and is it endemic to Canadian society or was it a problem brought here by an immigrant father?
The leftists place this game to further their own ends. They have created the victim industry.
enough
I’ve always had trouble with other people deciding what I should and should not know, see, hear, read, etc (within reason). In Canada the media seems to be too hyper-sensitive (read politically correct) for my liking. Are our police forces much different?
Do you think his name will ever be released and if not, why?
Of course we have a right to know. I was born in Toronto and I’ve lived here all my life. Having become the great left wing bastion it’s become, based on assholes like ‘big city liberal’ moving here, we’ve lost many rights due to political correctness. A killer at large is described without colour (unless of course he’s white), so nobody – the police, the media, etc – will be tagged with being ‘racist.’ Meanwhile the killer is free to kill again. That’s why, over the last years, few violent crimes in this city have been solved. Fantino had statistics on what ethnic group is overwhelmingly responsible for most of the gun murders in Toronto – right down to what country they immigrated from. He wasn’t allowed to release the report. More people died. More continue to die.
Yes, it is our right to know.
Statistics don’t lie. The Liberal/left does. And because of that, they are an accessory to the crimes commited by the criminals they protect. Let the victims blood be on their hands.
You got something to say ‘big city liberal?’ Say it to my face. I’m waiting for you to reply – where and when?