The Canadian Press is reporting that "Charges of aggravated assault and assault with a weapon have been laid against an RCMP officer after the fatal shooting in 2015 of a young man in Surrey, B.C. Const. Elizabeth Cucheran is scheduled to make her first appearance in provincial court on Jan. 9, British Columbia's Prosecution Service said Tuesday."
We broke this tragic story when it happened. Hudson was running from a mob of kids late at night at the same park Dario Bartoli was murdered in. He ran straight to the police station screaming they're trying to kill me. A female officer orders him to stop. He is too frantic to obey her comand so she pulls out her gun and accidentally shoots herself. She radios for help saying she has been shot later admitting that she shot herself. More cops arrive on the scene and shoot Hudson dead. It was a mistake. They thought he shot a police officer. He did not. He was unarmed running to the police for help and they shot him dead. Now the female officer who accidentally shot herself is being charged while the alpha dogs that killed Hudson aren't. How is that justice?
what else did you expect? this is the organization which had to settle all those sexual harassment and assault charges. 1100 women filed claims. Of course the low person on the organizational chart set up by the boys is going to take the fall. Sort of reminds you of the H.A. A probbie takes the fall, its not different here. Don't know why she is charged if she didn't do the shooting..except, it gets the boys off.
ReplyDeleteShe got charged for shooting herself..it would almost be funny, if not for poor Hudson.
DeleteIndeed. However she was charged with assault with a weapon. Technically a swing and a miss is assault. A swing and a hit is assault and battery. Since she drew her gun on him and missed technically that is assault. However, it is my understanding that the other police officers that came to her aid shot Hudson dead without giving him a command to stop or drop the weapon he did not have. They are the ones that killed him not the one they have charged.
DeleteYes, that's how I understand it, she shot herself and radio'd that she had been shot, failing to add that she shot her own dumb ass. Of course the other officers ran out assuming Hudson had shot her, and then shot him..which seems like a straight up murder since obviously Hudson had no weapon pointed at them.
DeleteI hope there is some justice but you are right..it's bull that the other responding officers get a pass.
Exactly. However, if you listen to the radio recording a male officer said we need help officer down. Then at 1:44 the female officer is heard to say I think I shot myself.
Deletehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cR9qo6X78Ac
The first report from a civilian was that Hudson was yelling kill me kill me. That's all they heard from a distance. In reality he was saying they are trying to kill me referring to a mob from the park chasing him.
Ahh, I will give it a listen.
DeleteI am sure the prosecutor's office realized the constables who showed up later responding to her call thinking he shot her would have been cleared so they have not bothered to pursue that.
ReplyDeleteOne would think they would charge her with Obstruction of Justice and various other like charges if they were pinning it on her.
Since they are not, perhaps they are leaving that "door" open so they can charge the others who actually shot this person in the future. It did take them this long to press charges against her.
Perhaps that was their rationalization but sadly it fails. When you are arresting Clifford Olsen you say you are under arrest. You do not execute him because he is accused of murder. Likewise with Hudson. He was unarmed. They had no right to shoot him. They committed murder and need to be charged with murder. This is the airport taser fiasco times a thousand.
DeleteExactly. It's a clear cut case of a bad shoot, and this poor kid's family needs someone to file a wrongful death suit on their behalf if that has not already happened.
ReplyDeleteShooting an unarmed suspect is as egregious as it gets. Even the training provided to the RCMP recruits at depot, problematic as it has proven in developing "the right stuff" in trainee's, cannot possibly be such that it allows the shooting of unarmed suspects. A decent lawyer will have no problem demonstrating to a jury that the shooter(s) departed completely from their training in this regard and are therefor negligent, and the chick who lied about getting shot set the stage for that kid to be executed.
The level of misconduct, thuggery, and violence against citizens they are sworn to protect on the part of the RCMP and other "police service" (LOL) agencies is off the hook, and yet they rarely suffer for it.
"We're the police, we can do whatever we want".
I'm waiting for the day they pull this shit with the wrong person. Guess who I'd be cheering for. Hopefully if it ever goes down like that the "respondent" ;-) will be disciplined enough to target the officers specifically responsible rather than anyone in the same uniform, but on the other hand, when you're part of a group, you bear a degree of responsibility for the conduct of others within that group, and you either exercise it (and are seen to exercise it) or you can justifiably be lumped in with the problem children. In other words, if you aren't part of the solution, you're part of the problem.