Cops`s `Cultural Insensitivity` Results in Two Drunk Charges Being Tossed

Posted on by
Cops`s `Cultural Insensitivity` Results in Two Drunk Charges Being Tossed

Canada`s minority-favouring Courts are out of control They are drunk on multiculturalism and bereft of common sense. The absolute folly of admitting as immigrants people with weird customs who just don`t fit in or people who, even after being here for years, cannot function in our language was demonstrated in two recent cases in Peel County. Two drunk driving cases against Sikhs — doesn`t their faith forbid them to drink? — were tossed because cops weren`t quite solicitous enough of Sikh peculiarities.

The Mississauga News (July 1, 2016) reported: `A Mississauga man has been found not guilty of driving with excess blood alcohol because a judge found police violated his rights by withholding his turban for more than three hours after his arrest. Not only did the officers involved not comply with Peel Regional Police’s own policy on individuals wearing turbans in custody, but one officer wasn’t even aware of it, wrote Ontario Court Justice Jill Copeland in a decision released this week Sardul Singh, an observant Sikh, was arrested following a RIDE spot check in December 2014. As he was being placed in the back of a police cruiser, his turban accidentally fell off. But it was not returned to him for several hours, including while he was giving breath samples at the Brampton police division, leaving him feeling vulnerable, the judge wrote. Copeland threw out the breath samples and dismissed the case, finding Singh’s right to freedom of religion had been infringed.`What Sardul Singh`s turban had to do with `feeling vulnerable`is hard to understand. Would a European Canadian been allowed to keep his baseball cap on in custody? We wonder.

Frederick Fromm's photo.

Many readers were rightly furious. Apparently, some of their comments were politically incorrect. So, in typical pinch-faced Miss Priss Puritan-style, the Mississauga News cut off online reader comments the very next day: ‘Commenting has been suspended on this story as of 2 p.m. on July 2. We regret that we have been forced to take this action because some readers have violated our commenting guidelines. Rude remarks and comments that are off topic are unacceptable. Foul language is forbidden.Would it be too ‘rude’ or ‘foul’ to call Madam Justice Jill Copeland a blithering idiot and a fanatic?

And another likely impaired driver goes free in Peel. The Toronto Star (July 26, 2016) tells the sorry story:  ‘A Brampton judge has dismissed an impaired driving charge against a man who was not given access to a Punjabi interpreter when he spoke with a lawyer following his arrest, which violated his right to counsel. While police did initially try to accommodate the man’s language needs, their conduct ‘fell below the standard of care reasonably expected of them in the circumstances,’ Ontario Court Justice Paul Monahan wrote in a decision released last week. Bikkar Khandal was arrested in October 2015 at a RIDE spot-check in Mississauga. Once Khandal had been brought to the police division, the arresting officer called duty counsel — who provide free legal advice over the phone to individuals under arrest — and also requested a Punjabi interpreter, according to Monahan’s ruling.

But the lawyer on the phone said something along the lines of ‘I speak English, he speaks English, we will do this in English,’ and did not arrange for an interpreter, Monahan wrote. The judge found that the lawyer’s conduct was ‘inappropriate and wrong.’ He also noted that after speaking with duty counsel, Khandal told the officers ‘but he’s in English, right? I’m not much English.’ Monahan said that should have caused the police to call back duty counsel, and again request an interpreter. The judge said this was necessary as he considered Khandal’s ability to speak English to be limited.

It is also my view that both Constable (Michael) Lupson and Constable (Eric) Passmore ought to have known early on during the breath room attendance, when Mr. Khandal expressed concerns about the fact that duty counsel spoke English and he (Mr. Khandal) spoke little English, that Mr. Khandal could not have had a proper consultation with counsel,” Monahan wrote. ‘They should have arranged a further consultation with duty counsel and a Punjabi language interpreter at that time.’”

The cost of providing interpreters to drunks and others is seldom mentioned as a burden to the taxpayer in all the gushing pro-immigration propaganda emanating from, our press and political class.

Peel police