Police enforce make-believe security fence law

I think another very misunderstood element of the law is that *nowhere* does it mandate that someone produce identification. Rather, it requires that persons provide their name and address, which, obviously can be done without producing identification.

I would hope that Blog TO doesn't promote this dude as being a standup kinda guy. He is an asshole and ONE DAY when he is a grown-up, he will have children and loved ones that are important to him and he will be happy to have these procedures in place to keep people safe in a public space. He was clearly planning on getting into illegal activity - most people wandering through Queens Park don't need goggles. Just like you let your bags be searched when coming out of a store, it may not be in the statutes, but good citizens agree to that sort of stuff. Stay out of TO idiot, and don't come back. Does he think that cops like this sort of stuff? It's their job to keep the majority safe against the minority. After you have been assaulted by some evil doer, people are screaming for the cops. You can't have it both ways. Thank you Ontario and RCMP and Toronto Police for making my time here safe.

He is right - as obnoxious as you find it. They didn't have an answer because there was no answer. He does have a right to enter a public space - there is no law that dictates their action.

Police enforce law. That is what makes our streets safe. Not police. Law.

Police are just people, you're right. And because of that, we need law to dictate there actions. They were breaking the law. To promote that type of action out of 'fear' is corrosive.

Goggles aren't a weapon. I leave the house with them four days a week to go swimming. I agree this citizen wasn't going swimming, but goggles can also be used to protect your eyes from pepper spray, which can be and was used on peaceful protestors this weekend by the police.

And you seem to be missing the issue here. We have a Charter right to peacefully assemble. That is what the guy in this video was attempting to do. The police were obstructing his right to do so and were not adequately able to explain upon what authority they could do that. Now we know that's because they had none.

Kudos to this guy for having the courage to stand up for his, and all of our, Charter rights and freedoms!

That's quite alright Mr. Blair, your resignation will be acceptable.

Who ARE these people who are OK with the police having sweeping powers to lie to us, search us, and detain us without cause? What planet are they living on? If you want to live in a police state please move to one and don't further ruin this country by subjecting the rest of us to your crazy, insecure ideas that could only possibly be motivated by fear!

Harris, "what they felt was needed ... this past weekend" WAS ILLEGAL, a violation of our charter rights and freedoms. Maybe you feel that it was an acceptable compromise, but certainly there is some action the police could take that you too feel would be over the line. And although we can all have differing opinions about where that line lies, the legal line is drawn by the Constitution and our Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Those are the rules the police are expected to play by. They cheated, and we all lose because of that.

This happened all over the city: Yonge/Dundas, Bloor/Spadina, etc. So let's cut with the "they all knew it would happen" BS.

Apart from anything else, if he did make this up and had the officers under his command enforce it he's left them open to individual prosecution. That's enough of a firing offence right there. If you care about Toronto cops, you should demand his resignation.

I'd like to know if the guy in this video is a lawyer or if not, what makes qualifies him as an expert in the Charter. There is a right to freedom of peaceful assembly, but that right can be subject to reasonable limits. Entering a park that is the congregating place for large demonstration during a time of heightened security is not the same as entering a park on a normal day. Perhaps he is naive, perhaps just being a jerk.

I think most protesters have a very idealized view of their rights, and don't fully understand the balancing act that is a key component of Charter rights.

So, police stop you, and ask you to politely see some ID and check your bag quickly.
They don't care what you have in there as long is it's not unsafe/illegal. Ie: batons, gun, some form of item to be used for violence in a peaceful protest zone, etc....

You co-operate for 1-2 min, and you're on your way.
Due to the date, event, location of what is going on, where you've ended up, don't you think this is quite reasonable for YOUR and other peoples safety??? This way, it weeds out the losers trying to create a violent protest. If you really are innocent, and there to be peaceful, if you co-operated with their simple requests, then you'd be on your way. If you didnt, mouthed off, and obstructed them in their simple request, you got detained to minimize any chances of trouble, considering what was going on.
So, this is BAD???
No one was killed. People were injured for being stupid. Sounds like all in all, not too bad a weekend.

Complacency of the protestors....last time i checked they were not being paid over a million dollars to keep the city safe,they didnt have guns,or armour,yet theyre supposed to take down the "clack bloc" when all the cops in the city of toronto and surrounding areas could not??? over 1 billion dollars was spent on beefing up security and they let the city burn,while they stood around,or caught soccer games on big screens...where were the firemen,why did no one have a fire extinguisher...i mean the whole reason it supposedly cost so much was so that they were prepared for anything...couldnt they have used their new little toy the water cannon to hose it down? no cuz they needed the media to sensationalize it...they needed the public to be afraid of the new terrorists, and weapons of mass distruction: Peaceful Protestors!!! so now its ok for people to have their faces smashed in,children snatched off the street,broken arms,stiched up faces...but its ok cuz all protestors are the same right?? they hurt the city by asking for equality for all,they hurt the city for asking that poverty be abolished, that no one starve while the billion dollar industries sytematically kill off non renuable resources in the name of the dollar...this harmed your city??? how selfish can you be,how absolutely twisted can you be to wish and encourage violence on another human being all because some morons smashed up windows???...windows are worth more than human life now??? re-evaluate your priorities people thats truely sickening...the cheif of police lied to you all,and you still think what happened is justified? SHAME!!!

All those who were arrested, or stopped by police and told to show their ID and searched by Police in Toronto it was done illegally. The Metro Police Services has lost the respect and trust of the people of Toronto. All I see now are a bunch of criminals with badges I will never trust a Police officer again if I'm ever approached by a Cop I will always assume they are going to violate me in some way. And the the 3 biggest criminals in Toronto are Mayor Miller, The Chief of Police and the Premier.

So did anyone notice that the Globe changed its headline from "Police Admit Deliberately Misleading Public on Expanded Security Fence Law" to "Police admit no five-metre rule existed on security fence law". Significant difference there - the first says that the police were saying the law was one thing when it was really another; the second says that the media and others were saying the law was one thing when it was really another (and the police never said otherwise). Seems like most people never bothered to actually read the regulation in question.

Where`s the outrage at the Globe and virtually every other media outlet who seemingly couldn`t be bothered to read roughly one page of text?

Exactly! It's just outrageous to me that despite all the media coverage of this event and the lead-up no one really bothered to figure out what exactly the laws were.

It's a sad state of affairs when the police are enforcing non-existent laws but isn't that why we have a free press? To keep authorities in check?

Kind of pathetic.

The better question would be, why didn't the cop stop the violence, thats why they were there right? I mean they have the gear, they're the ones getting paid large sums of money?

to the person who stated

"You know what I do when I don't feel like getting searched? I stay away from zones with obviously and necessarily heightened security. Rocket science it ain't"

Seriously?"Well guess what, tomorrow, it could be your area, without you even being aware of it

And to..

"if the police want to look into a bag of someone that is walking into a public place then so be it. Let them look, it's for their own safety and the public's safety"

If that is to become our new norm, then let it be only by the fact that the Charter has been revised to allow it...until that day, presenting ID simply to comply and make things 'easier' on you isn't called "keeping you safe", it's proper name is "illegal"...

Everyone seems to be missing the point, this isn't about common sense, or people 'getting what they deserve', it's about the law, and the fact that we are all entitled to the right to be presumed innocent....

Random searches and ID checks are paving the way to assume that everyone is guilty, until proven innocent...

To be honest. I believe that our charter of rights is outdated and needs to be re-evaluated. For years now, I think that far too many people have been abusing it.

The thing is, this search is completely lawful under the regulations of the Public Works Protection Act. The cop initially tries to explain that when he mumbles something about "government building", but I don't think any of these cops were told what powers they had, just told to search everybody. In the PWPA section 4, it's up to a peace officer to decide where the boundary of a public works building ends. Mind you, they have to do so under oath, but cops lie all the time. I think maybe one of the reasons they didn't cite this is that had he refused and was arrested, and the case was brought to trial, the entire act would be deemed unconstitutional, which it is.

I also think an investigative detention for this situation would've been tricky, since he could've sued them for violating his charter rights, since their probable cause would have been shaky at best.

These cops are dumbasses. If you're going to be a cop, you should be able to answer simple questions like "why are you searching me without detaining me" or "on whose authority are you allowed to do this". If they don't have answers, like these folks didn't, then they should be asking up the chain what the reason for their order is.

Dickwadd or not, he deserves to have the question of "why am I being searched without being detained" answered. The rule of law is important, and it needs to be followed on both sides. Remember, this occurred at Allan Gardens on Thursday, before the violence. At that point, there really wasn't probable cause to suspect he was going to break the law. And Canadian citizens have the charter right to be protected against unreasonable search and seizure, as well as the right to freedom of assembly.

Wouldn't you agree?

Those people who were killed on 9/11--they should have known that America was a target for terrorists. They just shouldn't have been there!

Also, we should do whatever the police and government tell us to--they would never force us to submit to arbitrary measures!

Finally. we should have our bags searched as soon as we leave our house, in case we are terrorists. That would be a big job--so maybe our neighbours can help out and spy on us for the government!

After all, it our security that's at stake!

you guys are a bunch of hypocrates.

you complain about these laws and searches but if one thing actually happened you would all be crying for better security.

think before you start crying about losing your freedoms.

stop whining on the internet and do something about it. false imprisonment is a crime and a tort. take this man's house! Any officer that arrested under the law has no excuse. ignorance of the law is not an excuse remember?

"Make-believe security fence"? Were they trying to keep out mimes? And why bother - they have nothing to say. Next they'll claim that mimes'white face and clothes is disguise for a new anarchist group called the White Bloc.

If only the make-believe fence had come out during the protest. A troop of mimes could have been organized to make like they'd walked in to a wall SIX metres from the real one.
But the cops would probably have arrested them on criminal intent.

And after the arrest: "It's no use interrogating him any further - he won't talk!"

Dawn - "I'd like to know if the guy in this video is a lawyer or if not, what makes qualifies him as an expert in the Charter. There is a right to freedom of peaceful assembly, but that right can be subject to reasonable limits."

A few things to consider:

1) You don't need to be a lawyer to understand and interpret the law. Frankly, anyone who can pass the LSAT near the top percentile is quite capable of understanding and interpreting the law, and analyzing cases.

2) Laws are meant to be understood by the common populace, and it is the rule of law that they must be promulgated, that is, communicated to the public. This was in fact an illegal search and the guy in the video had every right to question why he was being searched.

3) Being a lawyer does not mean you understand the law better than a non-lawyer, it only means you have a license to "practice law", that is, take cases and represent clients. Additionally, there are paralegals who can represent clients on civil cases. In fact, you can represent yourself in some (if not most) civil cases. For example, you can hire a paralegal for a divorce case or represent yourself if you are confident in your knowledge of the law. Law clerks also know the law just as well as some lawyers.

4) I don't see that the guy in the video claimed to be an "expert". Like I said, you don't need to be a lawyer to understand the law. Everyone should know the law, in fact, so long as they are properly promulgated. I grew up knowing my rights here. What did they teach you in school? Something for you to think about.

5) The Charter of Rights and Freedoms, section 1 says that our rights and freedoms are "subject only to such reasonable limits prescribed by law as can be demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society." Emphasis on "reasonable limits prescribed by law" and "demonstrably justified". The police in this video did not make it clear what law provided them with the authority to make reasonable limits to our rights and freedoms. Also, the limits they wanted to place aren't "demonstrably justified". Did they give a reason why they wanted to search the man's bag? No, they didn't. Did the guy pose a threat? No, he didn't. Did he even resist arrest? Threaten the police officers? No, he didn't. He simply wanted to enter a public park. This person like many others had his rights and freedoms violated that weekend.

6) If you don't like the rights and freedoms we have that is a great legacy to Canada, you can always go live somewhere like China or Burma, then come back and tell us how great it is.

Citizens ignore make-believe taxes.

I agree that our rights have to be respected and upheld. The problem however, especially when it involved the G20 summit, is the Trespass to Property Act. The Trespass to Property Act empowers people in lawful possession or who is acting on behalf of the person in lawful possession of that property to enforce policies and procedures in regards to that property. In this case the property in question is a Public Park, which rather we like to admit to it or not is owned either by the Provincial government or the City of Toronto. The police were acting on behalf of the government enforcing the policies put in place regarding that public property. In this case it was simple, let the police search your bag before entrance into the park, or simply just not go into the park. We do have a right to peaceful assembly, therefore he could have just protested on the street instead of joining them in the park. A great example of this would be Canada's Wonderland. You must have your bag searched before going into the amusement park. You have the right to say no to the search, but Canada's Wonderland has the right to refuse you from entering the park. Therefore you can let them search your bag so you can enter the park, or you can not let them and be refused entrance into the park. The choice for this gentleman was to either have his bag searched to enter the park, which is not a violation of rights under the Trespass to Property Act, or simply carry on his day not in the park. Simple...