|
flamebait resume advice (pg. 83)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| Magadansky |
| You said it was in the morning and, if you aren't psychotic (doubtful), I guess you were stoned since your actions were absurd - assaulting a cop "for fun", trying to break in the store and refusing to ID yourself. |
|
|
| w_ashley |
| quote: | Originally posted by Spam
What in the hell is hard to understand about "Get down now."?
|
The absence of "you are under arrest get down on the ground now with your hour hands in clear view if you fail to comply I will spray you with OC spray. "
shouting Get down is not clear communication. It isn't even a sentence. It was an irregular situation and frankly I wasn't physically responsive at the time, I was pretty much stationary and responding instinctively. Since he was being oppositional his comment didn't strike me as something that would be beneficial to myself on an unconscious level, I didn't really have time to think about it consciously I just didn't have enough time after being dazed by being physically moved and jettisoned. I was behind the situation, and wasn't given time to acknowledge the situation.
| quote: | | And you want to be an english teacher? When a cop tells you to "get down", you ing drop to the floor before he tazes your dumb ass (or, pepper sprays you back in 2003/2004). |
The cop was already attacking me I felt threatened I did not feel he was acting for my benefit and he had intent to cause me harm, since he didn't respond to me informing him he was causing me harm when he grabbed my wrist. He frankly just appeared to be out of touch and physically confrontational.
| quote: | | BTW, you mentioned in an earlier post that you pushed him "just for fun"... when did this happen, |
Greg wasn't the cop, but he was a friend of that friend I mentioned who died of cancer in the summer of 2008, Steve Sejeki. We have hung out a few times both before and after the incident. He has also had some things happen to him from the police. Like getting his drivers license confiscated by them, etc..
None the less one day before the incident while steve was still alive, Steve drove myself and a couple other friends in his van to pick up another aquantaince who was working at a wood production plant. Anyway Greg came with steves friend Ian - but my old friend Rafal Gora at the time introduced me to greg years before when he worked at Jumbo video on Bridgeport. To make a long story short we were joking around and I nudged him a bit, I felt he responded pretty sourly but we were on amicable terms not to long later. It happened outside steves van years ago. I didn't expect him to be upset but he was, he might have been joking but I honestly did feel sorry for pushing him and after guaging his reaction I probably wouldn't have done it if I could of gone back.
It was related to some type of joke - we actually had a discussion about it. Steve is dead but a few other people who were there could potentially remember the situation.
| quote: | | youīve left that detail out of every single re-telling of your fable. You canīt just push an police officer "for fun", thatīs assault. |
Greg wasn't as far as I was aware a cop, nor is he now. And I didn't push the cop, I've never pushed a cop, I've never attacked a cop ever as to resist or fight them.
| quote: | | And like Moral has already pointed out, all of your arguing ignores the fact that you should have just gone to the next store. |
You clearly arn't reading it was early in the mornign and this was the only 24 hour convience store in that part of town that I was aware of.
| quote: | | Instead, you excalated the situation to the point where you were ARRESTED for your actions. |
| quote: | | How can you not see how stupid that was? |
Because it was my rights being violated not the other way around. You are saying it is stupid to stand up for your rights, you should just be treated like . Sorry I value my rights, and I'm willing to communicate to express that. If other people resort to violence to deprive me of my rights, it is them who are issued and in wrong.
| quote: |
Btw, the laws were no different in 2003 than they are now, at least in regards to providing ID. ID MUST be provided once itīs been asked for. |
You are wrong. ID is only required to be shown on just legal grounds. In the case of purchase it was specifically stated if the person was beleived to be under the age of 19 in January 2004. You are wrong.
| quote: | You state that she asked for your ID before stating that she believe you "looked" 23. That means you MUST provide ID, no matter what she believes your age to be. Consider the following situation:
|
You are wrong, quote your sources if you have legal backing other than BS to this.
| quote: | | -Minor asks for a pack of smokes |
I wasn't a minor your situation is not the same.
| quote: | | As for discrimination of sale. That law references price, not the ability to sell the item to begin with. You canīt sell a chocolate bar for $1 to one person, and then turn around and sell it for a $1.25 to another. |
| quote: | | But, you CAN refuse sale to anyone you want. |
Actually you can't. Public sale must be offered to anyone who wishes to buy. Sale discrimination is illegal. It is illegal to refuse to sell to black people cause they are ******s. Or chinese people because they are chincs. It is likewise illegal to not sell to someone because they are male. You are unfortunately wrong. The only grounds for refusing a sale in ontario of goods offered to the public are on merits of law. Once again if this is not the case present the information otherwise you are talking.
| quote: | | In fact, you can refuse ENTRY to the store to anyone you want, that is your right as a retail establishment. Thatīs why the crack-heads begging for drug money stand OUTSIDE the Macīs Milk, they arenīt allowed in! |
While store owners can refuse entry to a premisis they own on just grounds, such as beleiving the person to be causing a distrubance, there are different classes of establishments. A public store, is open to the public during specific hours. IN order to prohibit someone rights of access you must obtain a court order, since it is public space. Everyone of the public can have access on equal grounds. Owners can set general entry rules such as requirement to be dressed a certain way eg shirts and shoes. But they can't deny someone who meets all entry requirements because they don't like their hair style if there are no hairstyle rules in place or laws allowing that type of discrimination. Regardless of what you think public store space is public space, not private space. Once again if you doubt this is the case in ontario show me the law cause you are bsing this convulting how you think it works when it isn't there.
Someone in charge of a property can request someone leave for reasonable grounds, such as loitering (usually for a given time frame) but these rules are usually mitigated by by laws or provincial laws. Owners cannot arbitrarily deny access to the pubilc to their store without reasonable grounds. Goods offered to the public are accessable to the totality of the public if it is a public business. The public has public access to those areas unless there are grounds for them to be told to leave on reasonable grounds such as no intent of conducting business on the premisis as made available to the public. I was there for a purchase. |
|
|
| noikeee |
| quote: | Originally posted by ********
niether the police nor manager indicated this.
Once again you are convoluting yourself. Nor was this the law if my legal age was not in question. Know the law for ONTARIO in January 2004, not from wherever you are from. Never in the span of this incident was this the case. The police wern't even aware of the cigarette issue at the time of arrest as far as I can tell. The manager said nothing the whole time. |
Why did the cop arrive there then, if nobody informed him of the issue?
You see, William, people aren't perfect and it's entirely possible that the clerk or the cop or both might have done some mistake in their actions. It is reasonable that you could be annoyed by the situation. What isn't reasonable is pushing and pushing and pushing "for your rights" and "protest", not listening to what they were saying, and escalating a lame meaningless situation into a full blown court case. A normal person would've tried to understand the position of the clerk and the cop, and conceded by just leaving the store or doing whatever the cop said, even if they felt they were wrongly treated - because that would save them a whole load of unnecessary headaches.
We have read enough of your posts here to notice that you can sound pretty intimidating, and as yourself acknowledge it, you are "a little out of the norm". So it's no wonder the clerk would be scared less when the situation started getting tense, and the police would be more keen to suspect your intentions and protect her from a possible violent breakdown on your part. What a normal person would've done in your position, even if wanting to claim your own rights, would be to reassure everyone immediately that you were friendly when things started getting tense.
I am curious about your "protest" in court too - so basically you entered a random court session and stayed there silent, and didn't sit down when the judge told everyone to? What were you expecting to achieve with this? How do you think people would even understand this protest?
The main point in all this, is that nobody from these episodes sound like they were out to get you, they were behaving normally. This is just more and more proof that you tend to see conspiracies where there isn't, and that inventing conspiracies is what you resort to when you don't get your way. |
|
|
| Chris Crossland |
| That's why he should be locked away. Obviously he's not fit for society. |
|
|
| Theresa |
| quote: | Originally posted by ********
niether the police nor manager indicated this.
Once again you are convoluting yourself. Nor was this the law if my legal age was not in question. Know the law for ONTARIO in January 2004, not from wherever you are from. Never in the span of this incident was this the case. The police wern't even aware of the cigarette issue at the time of arrest as far as I can tell. The manager said nothing the whole time. |
Good lord, what does it take to get this through to you.
Without any information, just from looking at him, I think Obama is African.
Am I right? No.
Do I know that chances are, despite my initial judgment, that I may be wrong about him being African? Yes.
As such, I indicate my uncertainty by asking for concrete evidence (his birth certificate).
The bottom line is that no matter how old she have thought you were, if she asked for ID, it meant that she was uncertain. There is absolutely no reason she would ask for ID otherwise. You not providing the ID, from my own personal experience, would have probably solidified her position that you were not of age to buy cigarettes. As such, she had no obligation to sell them to you.
Please verify that this was in Forwells on Lancaster, as in light of new information, I am beginning to think you are giving false information, or we have a bizarre coincidence. |
|
|
| w_ashley |
| quote: | Originally posted by noikeee
Why did the cop arrive there then, if nobody informed him of the issue? |
You arn't reading. I asked the clerk to call the police. Likewise in the crown disclosure(the prosecutions case given prior to the actual case) it indicated that someone else had also used the payphone to call the police. Although I cannot confirm this because I didn't see it. However facts presented by those people were inaccurate so I really don't know if they also called because there are false statements in some of the other witnesses statements.
| quote: | | You see, William, people aren't perfect and it's entirely possible that the clerk or the cop or both might have done some mistake in their actions. It is reasonable that you could be annoyed by the situation. What isn't reasonable is pushing and pushing and pushing "for your rights" and "protest", not listening to what they were saying, and escalating a lame meaningless situation into a full blown court case. A normal person would've tried to understand the position of the clerk and the cop, and conceded by just leaving the store or doing whatever the cop said, even if they felt they were wrongly treated - because that would save them a whole load of unnecessary headaches. |
Dude I wanted to buy a pack of cigarettes. both me and the clerk felt I was of age. I bought a pack from the same clerk previously. (although it was players because the store didn't carry my belmont mild kingsize) (she stated my brand was players in the court hearing - anyone who knows me I only bought belmont - the purchase of previous purchase of players was a single exception to this. The fact she sold to me previously then refused sale this time was just stupid on her part.
| quote: | | We have read enough of your posts here to notice that you can sound pretty intimidating, and as yourself acknowledge it, you are "a little out of the norm". |
If people are biased due to how people look that is their own bias.
I wasn't intimidating when I requested the cigarettes, it was only after being treated rudely that the sitaution changed. Also I never tried to intimidate so if people look at someone who is fit and think oh my god I am in so much trouble. That is their own issue not mine. Fact is I didn't attempt to intimidate so I feel no fault for that fact.
| quote: | | So it's no wonder the clerk would be scared less when the situation started getting tense, and the police would be more keen to suspect your intentions and protect her from a possible violent breakdown on your part. |
Honestly she brought it on herself for being stupid in how she handled the situation. She wasn't grounded rationally.
| quote: | What a normal person would've done in your position, even if wanting to claim your own rights, would be to reassure everyone immediately that you were friendly when things started getting tense.
|
I followed the law. She violated her own store policy. Who here is the norm?
| quote: | | I am curious about your "protest" in court too - so basically you entered a random court session and stayed there silent, and didn't sit down when the judge told everyone to? |
The judge didn't tell everyone to be seated. He asked the people in the bar area to take a seat. Not all be seated. He was speaking with the bar area when he asked them to take a seat. I approached the bar but did not enter as I was waiting for the judge to give me permission to present to the court.
| quote: | | What were you expecting to achieve with this? How do you think people would even understand this protest? |
I was providing judicial review of breach of process. Judges in ontario are peace officers and there are certain times when you are both legally allowed and obligated to present information to a judge.
In this instance indictable offences, and assurance of non continuance of the breach was stopped if at all possible. The police weren't responding to corruption of justice informations and the justice of the peace would not accept the information laid.
| quote: |
The main point in all this, is that nobody from these episodes sound like they were out to get you, they were behaving normally. |
If you think it is normal then the problem is that it was normal illegal conduct that violates the rights of citizens. That isn't acceptable.
| quote: | | This is just more and more proof that you tend to see conspiracies where there isn't |
I honestly beleive there was a conspiracy to provide false information particularly in the instance of them stating I pushed Mary.
I think the cop may have just lied to cover his mistakes.
Although the issue is that the false information was provided in the witness report meaning the time for a conspiracy to be formed was next to none, unless the prosecutor doctored the crown disclosure to include false information about the facts, as I never obtained them myself as I was prohibited from communicating with anyone involved. And I was self representative.
| quote: | | , and that inventing conspiracies is what you resort to when you don't get your way. |
The doctor situation was definitely intentional.
As for "conspiracies"
If they new one another they may have lied to cover each others statements.
Once again all I know is that there were perjuries, I didn't witness them agree to lie or frame me up. Although it is likely to have occurred at some point.
The stuff at grand river I'm pretty sure was caused due to the diabetic coffee situation. My manager may remember an irate woman complaining about how the coffee I served putting someone into diabetic shock.
I still sort of remember there being a dr. reikman involved - as well as a number of other staff. Although it doesn't make much sense why they would all be on the scene unless they were driving somewhere together. These were some of the same people who later were involved in attacking me at grand river. While I can't say there was a conspiracy formed ahead of time, it could have been once I was there.. and the irate person was the head of psychiatric at the hospital Dr. Marlina Power, that they may have taken advantage of the situation to "get even" with me. I can't say there was a preformed conspiracy, but I think there was an almost certainty that they abused their position for personal reasons. |
|
|
| Theresa |
| quote: | Originally posted by RandomGirl
Please verify that this was in Forwells on Lancaster, as in light of new information, I am beginning to think you are giving false information, or we have a bizarre coincidence. |
|
|
|
| Spam |
| quote: | | Originally posted by ******** I wasn't a minor your situation is not the same. |
Thereīs no way she could have known beyond reasonable doubt that you werenīt a minor, as you didnīt have ID. Therefore, the situation is exactly the same. You didnīt have ID, and as such, you couldnīt prove your age. Therefore, the possibility exists that you MIGHT HAVE BEEN a minor, and thus, she could have faced penalties for selling you a pack of cigarettes, despite her belief that you were 23.
Based on the possibility that you could be a minor, despite her belief otherwise, she MUST ask for, and recieve, ID before making the sale. |
|
|
| w_ashley |
| quote: | Originally posted by Spam
Thereīs no way she could have known beyond reasonable doubt that you werenīt a minor, as you didnīt have ID. Therefore, the situation is exactly the same. You didnīt have ID, and as such, you couldnīt prove your age. Therefore, the possibility exists that you MIGHT HAVE BEEN a minor, and thus, she could have faced penalties for selling you a pack of cigarettes, despite her belief that you were 23. |
Read the law. Until you provide the law you are talking BS.
The whole reasonable doubt here is irrelevant. It wasn't proof that I was, it was belief that I wasn't of age. That is how the situation worked. She had to believe me to not be of legal age for purchase - that being 19. There was no situation which prohibited sale on any other grounds. Except beleif of breach of some other laws like resale to minors.
| quote: |
Based on the possibility that you could be a minor, despite her belief otherwise, she MUST ask for, and recieve, ID before making the sale. |
ID can be fake, fact is she didn't think I was a minor. I did not look like I was underage, anyone would have been hard pressed to think I looked under 19. They would have been certifiable if they thought that. You are trying to say, you need ID to buy. At the time this wasn't the case. The fact I went to a store just after I was let out and bought a pack of cigarettes without ID only demonstrates this fact. |
|
|
| Theresa |
| quote: | Originally posted by RandomGirl
Please verify that this was in Forwells on Lancaster, as in light of new information, I am beginning to think you are giving false information, or we have a bizarre coincidence.
|
|
|
|
| Capitalizt |
| quote: | Originally posted by ********
I was honestly more involved with the clerk at the time and didn't really acknowledged the cops presence.
In retrospect he likely did say a couple things:
But I at first didn't know who was speaking
I was communicating with the clerk, not with the officer. |
The officer was probably giving you clear instructions to step away from the clerk and come talk to him. The fact that your mind is hazy and you can't remember anything he was saying seems to indicate you were in a state of mental psychosis. The officer didn't know you were crazy and assumed you were a perfectly sane person who was ignoring him..so he rightly interpreted that behavior as a sign of resistance and called for backup. |
|
|
| igottaknow |
| This thread reminds me of a bad car accident. I can't help sneaking a peek to see the carnage. |
|
|
|
|
