Maintiens le droit ...

It appears that we've written quite a lot about the RCMP, at DJ!

And most of it covers the police violence within and outside its ranks - not the regrettable armed display of force required to fulfill its mandate of law enforcement - but a corrupt and despicable exploitation of its resources and its mandate that has repeatedly, unjustly harmed, damaged and killed people.

There's no end in sight, as it emerges that the Mounties do a truly negligent, incompetent job of keeping records with regard to officers that have been brought up on cases of professional misconduct, and possibly, of criminal activity.

[...]no one within the RCMP had a comprehensive list of Mounties who’d been disciplined, became obvious after CBC News asked for basic data between 2005 and 2008 that included offences and findings by internal adjudications boards.

CBC News submitted the request in November 2008. It was delivered four years later in November 2012. An officer who handled the file offered an embarrassed apology, and explained the delay was due to the list having to be created from scratch.

[...]Many of the allegations are also criminal offences, including two cases of possession of child pornography. The CBC asked for details on which cases went on to criminal prosecution, but the RCMP did not make that information available.

And while about 50 of the cases were withdrawn, in some cases due to the expiry of the statutory time limit for a hearing, more than a third were deemed so egregious the officers involved either quit, were forced to resign or had to forfeit 10 days pay — the harshest punishment under the RCMP Act short of dismissal.

Meanwhile, the RCMP old boys' club is calling the shots on the manner in which it will defend the institution from several sexual abuse and harassment lawsuits against the force and specific officers.

Moving from outright denial to counter attack, it appears that the legal strategy rests upon a campaign of discrediting the claims that have been brought forward by female officers.




A vulnerable female complainant has been singled out, likely to demonstrate to the others what awaits them - to intimidate them and ultimately, to silence them.

The RCMP’s statement of defence, filed earlier this week, details the results of the police investigation and the review board’s findings, and says whatever happened between Gastaldo and Pearson occurred outside of their work and has nothing to do with the force.

“If any of the Crown defendant’s employees, servants or agents engaged in the conduct alleged ... then all such conduct was outside the course and scope of the employee, servant or agent’s duties,” says the statement of defence, filed in B.C. Supreme Court.

Even if Gastaldo was harmed in any way by Pearson, the statement of defence says, it wouldn’t be the force’s fault.

“Any of the damage allegedly suffered by the plaintiff was caused solely by the unauthorized conduct of Pearson, and the Crown defendants are not responsible for that conduct,” the statement says.

Gastaldo’s lawsuit was among the first of several involving female RCMP officers who have claimed they were assaulted, harassed and abused on the job.

[...]The statements of claim and defence contain allegations that have not yet been tested in court.

The RCMP has so far issued denials in several sexual abuse and harassment lawsuits against the force and its officers.

The highest-profile case involves Cpl. Catherine Galliford, a former spokeswoman for the Air India and Robert Pickton cases. She filed a lawsuit last year alleging years of abuse by numerous officers.

Const. Karen Katz has a lawsuit alleging a colleague harassed and sexually assaulted her, as well as a second lawsuit that alleges more widespread abuse spanning her entire career.

And Janet Merlo, a 19-year veteran of the force, filed a class-action lawsuit in March alleging sexist comments, sexual pranks and derogatory remarks while on the job. Her lawyer has suggested dozens of other officers are prepared to join the case.

Aggressive "defense" tactics deployed by the RCMP display many of the elements that characterize systemic rape culture, as well as a toxic work environment.  The failure of the police force to treat its officers and other employees - male and female - with the respect they deserve as human beings, is typical of military-type organizations based on the very worst misogynist practices "tolerated" if not encouraged by the leadership.

The photo above is from here.

And those who defend pedophilia crawl out ...

from the underside of a big rock that was lifted to shed some light upon the sexual exploitation of children (emphasis ours).

oldowleyes wrote: "Wow, if your male your not even allowed to pay cash or ask for a quiet private room w/o out being suspected of being a pedophile. What a bunch of clowns Canadian governments are turning out to be, go back into your holes of institutional discrimination. While your at it, I suggest you get those illegal Family Relation Laws* off your books, or someday soon your going to be on the hook for billions in a class action law suit."

boardhead wrote: "Great. Now any 35 year old man with a young looking 20 year old girl will get a label. I'm all for the initiative as well, but most 18 yr. old girls these days are promiscuous with older men, and some look younger than 18, which will cause problems for some guys who are doing nothing wrong."

Most of the commenters who responded favourably to this campaign appeared to be women. The purpose of this initiative from the government of Alberta, Child and Youth Services division is to target adults who sexually exploit vulnerable girls and boys in rooms rented from commercial lodging establishments such as resorts, hotels and motels.

I have traveled with my daughter and her girlfriend, when they were teenagers. If I had seen hotel staff chat informally with them to ensure that neither had been kidnapped or were being coerced to participate in child prostitution, as part of precautionary measures that screened all guests, I would not have reacted in anger or fear. But perhaps men like Dickie Evans who engage in duplicitous sexual behaviour know that they have something to hide.

* This appears to be the legislation that oldowleyes finds objectionable.

More about religious fundamentalist bullying

There are moments when the most eloquent blogpost possible, on a particular issue, is to simply provide a link to someone else’s piece.

Last month, Birth Pangs wrote, in Moving the goal-posts on contraception and The Haters’ Agenda Part II, about the Bush administration’s meddling in the parameters of federally-funded health programs.

Read Proposed HHS Regulation Pits “Workers’ Religious Freedom vs. Patients’ Rights”.

… if … it’s Workers’ Religious Freedom vs. Patients’ Rights, the patient wins. For those who feel they can’t morally treat everyone, go into another line of work. Whether you are a stem cell advocate, or in favor of reproductive rights, back door regulations are no way to set health policy that will affect millions of Americans in ways they are not expecting, including the superseding
of state laws designed to protect reproductive rights.

Political religious fundamentalist bullies never sleep, it seems.

First posted at Birth Pangs.

The Haters’ Agenda, Part II

Last year, Birth Pangs drew up what we thought was an amusing little poke at right-wing religious fundamentalist fanatics, The Haters’ Agenda. As it turns out, our spoof gets closer to reality every day Bush continues to rule in the US.

At Bring It On, Daniel DiRito writes about the new Bush government’s initiative to impose religious fundamentalist ideology upon those organizations that are funded by the US Department of Health and Human Services.

As if it isn’t bad enough that we’ve had to endure nearly eight years of George W. Bush, he has chosen his final months to enact one of his most intrusive policy initiatives. It seems that the president has decided to redefine abortion to include contraception.

The plan would be enacted by the Department of Health and Human Services and cloaked as an attempt to prevent discrimination in government funded endeavors. The explanation being offered by the president’s operatives suggests that the goal is to insure that those individuals who have religious objections to abortion or the distribution of contraceptive products cannot be terminated from employment.

Nor can the organizations refuse to hire individuals because they hold those beliefs.

This is the same administration that has long argued that hate crimes legislation, intended to specifically deter violence against the LGBT community, is unnecessary. So when it comes to measures to bolster the safety of gays, existing laws are sufficient because they already provide penalties and punishment for these crimes. However, when a handful of Christians want to refuse to provide contraception to a rape victim, the Bush administration thinks special rules are warranted.

So, the Bush administration refuses to pass anti-hate laws to protect those who are the target of the haters, but … lookee here, a law to protect the haters’ rights to be fully employed in areas where they can do harm to those they hate.

The Haters’ Agenda: one more task, soon to be accomplished.

First posted at Birth Pangs.

Moving the goal posts on contraception

Yet more evidence the US federal government policy is being shaped by officials sympathetic with religious fundamentalist beliefs, appointed by Republicans.

The Bush administration wants to require all recipients of aid under federal health programs to certify that they will not refuse to hire nurses and other providers who object to abortion and even certain types of birth control. Under the draft of a proposed rule, hospitals, clinics, researchers and medical schools would have to sign “written certifications” as a prerequisite to getting money under any program run by the Department of Health and Human Services. …

The proposal defines abortion as follows: “any of the various procedures — including the prescription, dispensing and administration of any drug or the performance of any procedure or any other action — that results in the termination of the life of a human being in utero between conception and natural birth, whether before or after implantation.”

From the NYTimes.

Remember “The Pill Kills” campaign? It would seem that there are policy makers working within the US Department of Health and Human Services who support the unscientific basis of that premise and they are attempting to coerce physicians, hospital administrators and other health care professionals to enforce it.

Many US-based organizations have responded to the USDHHS proposal; Reproductive Health Reality Check, Planned Parenthood, and more from the Reuters Health and Science reporter. And of course Dr Prole in her rant ON mode regarding this news item, here.

First posted at Birth Pangs.