Wednesday, September 2, 2015

Justice for Hudson Brooks

Finally the Hudson Brooks story is making it's way into the main stream media. Front page of today's Vancouver Province. The headline reads: "Devastated mom demands justice in police shooting death of 20-year-old Hudson Brooks in South Surrey. Jennifer Brooks vehemently disputes the claim that her son was suicidal, calling it completely untrue and a false accusation.” In fact a witness confirms it.

The Vancouver Province explains: "According to the police, a call for service was received shortly before 2:30 a.m. regarding a man who was suicidal, screaming and in significant distress in the 1800-block 152nd Street. Officers who were in the detachment responded, located Hudson Brooks, a struggle ensued and shots were fired. Hudson was shot multiple times and did not survive. An officer sustained a non-life-threatening gunshot wound and was treated and released from hospital the same day. The only physical evidence recovered from the scene was police-issued equipment."

Imagine that. A police officer was shot, the suspect was shot dead and the only guns they found were issued by the police. Do the math. As I explained previously, this case was a tragic accident that has been completely covered up. More power to his mother to find answers on the record. That's not going to happen because of the legal liability that would incur. Perhaps the only way the truth will come out is in a wrongful death suit. The mother at least needs to file a Freedom of Information Act request for documents in the police report.

Hudson was a skateboarder leaving Bakerview park at 2:00 AM. The same park that was a known hang out for youth where Dario Bartoli was assaulted and murdered last December. A witness woke up to sounds of Hudson screaming hysterically "Help me they're trying to kill me" as he was running away from the park towards the cop shop. The witness saw him running and was going to get dressed to see if he needed help. Then heard six or seven gunshots and went back inside.

It is clear that this was not a suicidal youth trying to commit suicide by attacking a cop. This was a young kid hysterically running to the police for help because someone was chasing him. He wanted to live. Another sourced claims a rookie cop pulled out their firearm when the terrified youth failed to obey their direct commands and shot themself by accident while pulling out their gun. This shows the inherit problem of Depot. Brainwashing new recruits into believing that civilians have to obey their direct command at the snap of a finger or else. That has to stop. The police are supposed to serve and protect civilians not control and oppress them.

The public has a right to know who shot the police officer because it was not Hudson.


  1. I had my rib busted by a Translink cop in January. Phat piggy jumped on me while I was face down on the concrete with my hands behind my back.

    The matter is going to BCSC and our oinker has very openly lied multiple times whilst his partner has also openly lied about what he saw/heard.

    Main theme (from both) was that I was suicidal and was screaming that they should shoot me in the head. Didn't happen of course but this allows scum such as these to claim a "mental health issue" and that's where your so called "rights" go right out the fukkin window instantly.

    Punchline? Phat Translink piggy that messed me up SEVERELY beat a handicapped man a few years ago for, wait for it ... having an expired handicap pass that was still "good".

    We can't know what happened precisely in this case. We should know trusting every word that come out of cop's mouths is for pure, pure idiots.

    1. I'm really sorry to hear that. That is really messed up.

  2. The best thing that could happen is to take the guns away from all the police in Canada in urban settings - just like in England. They have support nearby (hey, just like the average person they love to tell is completely safe and does not need a firearm!) and would then rely on their interpersonal skills and deescalate situations.

    Being a constable is a very stressful occupation. Period. When this stress exists, it manifests itself in various ways. Like anyone else who has a job (or student at school) most of their waking day (and the most functional hours of said day) are spent in that occupation (yes, being a student is an occupation).

    For police, that manifestation can be critical to not just their personal relations at work, but also deadly - and not just to coworkers but to society as a whole.

    A working environment that requires constables to slow down and talk to people in a more relaxed manner would naturally lower their stress levels, build lines of communication with the public and ultimately lower anxiety of BOTH police and non-police (most people are very anxious around police - for good reason).

    Lowered stress would build better family structures of and for constables as well as allow police to benefit from the better communications with the public.

    It would be a win-win situation.

    I am very surprised this concept is not talked about more in Canada.

  3. This is what happens when you hire "fear biters" who are not really confident of their abilities, or bullies who are just looking to get their rocks off exerting authority over others. "Take that button off or you can't get on the train". Seriously? More "we're the police, we can do whatever we want". This is obviously "sport" to these guys. Unbelievable, but then again, you get the police you are willing to accept.

    Obviously people in the lower mainland (and Canadians in general) are too apathetic to demand an acceptable level of conduct from their police officers. The compliant judges who find officers not guilty of offenses they obviously committed are part of the problem as well.

    When your ideal police recruit is a recent college grad with a background in team sports, you are not getting people who've ever lived in the real world or have any real depth of experience. Put them through the police academy with an emphasis on "whatever it takes to go home safe" (translation: be risk adverse when it comes to dealing with the public you supposedly protect and serve, "when in doubt, knock them out") tell them how special they are over and over as part of the indoctrination process and you have an officer who will do whatever they are told to at roll call. No wonder they want "book smart, street stupid".

    The reason you should be looking at veterans for police duties is that all of them have been exposed to the concept of an unlawful order and lack of duty to obey such. It's also why police departments don't really want them. Vets tend to think for themselves believe it or not. I have to think that such people will be more inclined to obey themselves the same laws they are empowered to enforce rather than developing the idea that pervades Canadian policing, namely that they are special and that the laws don't apply to them.

    Someday these clown shoes cowards will pick the wrong person (or someone the wrong person cares about more than they care about the lives of a few thugs who happen to wear badges) and the debt will be called in, payable in full. That's why governments and their enforcers like their subjects powerless and unequipped to effectively express themselves. It's safer for them to do what they do. It's not like it's hard to target a police officer, in fact it's pretty easy. They are usually easily identifiable, and they'll even come to a specific location at a time and circumstance of others choosing. In the military we call that an ambush....police officers have a very bad track record of surviving such.

    Think of this as a word to the wise and remember why you have the very well paid positions that you do. "Protect and serve". "Servum us" sounds like something different. You may not be doing wrong yourself, but if you accept that others who wear your uniform do, you are just as guilty as them and just as liable to suffer the penalty along with them. You have a responsibility to police yourselves, and you not only don't do that, you protect people who should be encouraged to find another profession because they disgrace the rest of you. You are not an occupying army, and even if you were there are many more of "them" than there are of you. In the words of Sir Robert Peel, the founder of modern policing, "you only police with the consent of the police'd". As well, there is a sector of the population that you, with your training/equipment/all your friends you can call for help, are woefully unequipped to deal with if they should ever take sufficient umbrage at your misbehavior.

  4. It's been one year today since we lost Hudson. Vigil was held at his memorial tonight. Still no answers

    1. I'm very sorry for your loss. This was a complete tragedy. I think we know what happened. It's just that they'll never admit it publically for fear of being sued.


Comments are moderated so there will be a delay before they appear on the blog.