ME THINKS … by Rattan – A regular commentary on what’s going on (Week of Saturday, May 16)

WEDNESDAY, MAY 20

 

LOGO GREEDJUST HOW GREEDY CAN BIG BANKS GET!?: There seems to be NO LIMIT to the greed of big banks around the world – and they are always finding ways to increase their revenues by ripping off their clients with small increases in this or that service that in the end works out to billions of dollars in profits for them and millions of dollars in bonuses for their executives. They have NO RESPECT for their poor clients.

But that is not all – they are WORSE than TERRORISTS – and even bank robbers!

Just read this press release that this newspaper received from the FBI:

“Five major banks—Citicorp, JPMorgan Chase & Co., Barclays PLC, The Royal Bank of Scotland plc and UBS AG—have agreed to plead guilty to felony charges. Citicorp, JPMorgan Chase & Co., Barclays PLC, and The Royal Bank of Scotland plc have agreed to plead guilty to conspiring to manipulate the price of U.S. dollars and euros exchanged in the foreign currency exchange (FX) spot market and the banks have agreed to pay criminal fines totaling more than $2.5 billion. A fifth bank, UBS AG, has agreed to plead guilty to manipulating the London Interbank Offered Rate (LIBOR) and other benchmark interest rates and pay a $203 million criminal penalty, after breaching its December 2012 non-prosecution agreement resolving the LIBOR investigation.”

You can read all the details on our website.

Attorney General Loretta E. Lynch bluntly stated: “Today’s historic resolutions are the latest in our ongoing efforts to investigate and prosecute financial crimes, and they serve as a stark reminder that this Department of Justice intends to vigorously prosecute all those who tilt the economic system in their favor; who subvert our marketplaces; and who enrich themselves at the expense of American consumers.”

How shameful!

What kind of role models are these guys for students and others.

Indeed, terrorists and other criminals who launder money can have a hearty laugh at such HYPOCRISY of these so-called business leaders of the Western world!

Thank God for the vigilant FBI – great work by these guys. 

 

 

 

TUESDAY, MAY 19

 

(Updated)

THE REALITY OF 100 RCMP OFFICERS FOR SURREY: So we had this announcement with much fanfare about 100 more cops for Surrey that is reeling from (petty) gang violence today and we were supposed to say “Wow, awesome! Look how the “Harper Government” is tough on crime! We must vote for him in the coming election!”

Really?

After first allowing the situation to get out of hand, you now want to come as the Messiah and deliver us from evil, Prime Minister Stephen Harper?

And when exactly will ALL these cops arrive in Surrey? One year? Two years? Three years?

As I pointed out in my column Rattan’s Rumble in April (“Don’t fool yourselves, NOTHING is going to change in the crime scene – and here is why …”):

“As The VOICE has reported in the past the much touted increase in RCMP officers that we have been promised is NOT going to have any real impact for the obvious reason that they have no experience.

“[SFU criminologist Dr. Robert] Gordon bluntly noted yet again: “It wouldn’t make a blind bit of difference. The problem with the incoming police officers is that they are all fresh out of the Academy. They will not have the street smarts.”

“He added that there was no pool of police officers experienced in dealing with gangs who can be moved into Surrey from elsewhere.”

So where does that leave Surrey-ites?

Adding to all the confusion was the fact that while National Revenue Minister Kerry-Lynne Findlay told the media that she didn’t know when all the new officers will be in place, Surrey Mayor Linda Hepner told the Vancouver Sun that Surrey “will get those officers through either promotion, transfers or new recruits” and that “under the new contract signed last year, there is a clause that they must commit to the filing of the request within 12 months.”

So what exactly are we supposed to believe? Does Hepner really believe in magic?

Anyway, at least the opportunistic politicians have moved their big butts on this issue. So I guess we should be grateful for small mercies, eh!

Meanwhile, Surrey’s NDP MPs Jinny Sims and Jasbir Sandhu on Wednesday claimed that the announcement was because of the pressure they had put on the government in the House of Commons recently.

Really?

So they also admit that it also took them SO LONG to wake up to the crime situation in Surrey!

Everyone is playing politics now because of the coming federal election.

Expect things to get more intense on this issue.

 

MONDAY, MAY 18 :

 

Luka Gordic
Luka Gordic

 

(Updated Wednesday, May 20)

HOW TO DEAL WITH ROWDIES WHO KILL: Three 17-year-olds and 18-year-old Arvin Val Golic of North Vancouver have been charged with manslaughter in the stabbing death of 19-year-old Luka Gordic on May 17 (Sunday) in Whistler. The Integrated Homicide Investigation Team said that they believe “this was a situation where a group of young people who knew each other had a dispute which turned deadly.”
(Earlier there had been unconfirmed reports in the media that Gordic was ambushed by a group of men who reportedly had knives as he walked back to his hotel from a nightclub.)

Well, I am imagining a scenario where the youths may not admit who stabbed the victim and hope to get away on the premise that they are all innocent as nobody can be identified as the killer or killers beyond a reasonable doubt.

Do they REALLY think they can get away with that?

NO!

Because both the B.C. Supreme Court and the B.C. Court of Appeal have sent out a loud and clear message to hoodlums: You have to take collective responsibility for your actions.

As I wrote last August: “I think it’s a brilliant stand because it will discourage hoodlums from participating in group attacks as cowards who think they will get away with it because it is hard, if not impossible, to prove who stabbed the victim or pulled the trigger or delivered a kick or punch. If you were involved in any assault as a group, well then face the music collectively.”

Three men were convicted of manslaughter in a 2009 fatal attack on Tyson Edwards outside a downtown nightclub. A fourth man was acquitted because the Crown failed to prove he participated in the attack.

Three or four men punched Edwards in the head and upper body and then kicked him in the head and body as he lay on the sidewalk. One of the attackers tried to bang his head against the curb. Someone stabbed the victim in the chest with a knife and two of the wounds proved to be fatal.

B.C. Supreme Court Justice Victor Curtis said he didn’t know who used the knife but the attackers acted together as joint perpetrators.

The three men’s principal argument was that they could not be convicted of manslaughter because there was no evidence as to who stabbed Edwards and no evidence they knew, or could have foreseen, that a knife would be used during the attack on him.

But the B.C. Court of Appeal dismissed the appeals of the three men.

Justice David Frankel noted: “The appellants advance their appeals on the following factual basis: * They participated in a group-attack (i.e., assault) on Mr. Edwards knowing he would likely suffer some non-trivial harm as a result; * The attack lasted approximately one minute; * An unknown member of the group stabbed Mr. Edwards resulting in his death; * They neither knew that one of the group had a knife, nor did they foresee a knife would be used during the attack on Mr. Edwards.”

He added: “In my view, those facts satisfy all the elements of manslaughter, which is a crime of consequences.  When the appellants participated in the attack, they engaged in an unlawful act where non-trivial / non-transitory harm to Mr. Edward was objectively foreseeable.  As a result, they bear legal responsibility for Mr. Edward’s death at the hands of one of the other attackers, even though they did not intend for Mr. Edward to die or foresee that one of the attackers would use a knife.”

Indeed, this ruling should serve as a strong warning to those who think they can get away with manslaughter or murder or any other crime if they are in a group.

 

 

 

SATURDAY, MAY 16

 

BAD NEWS FOR LIBERALS: Poor Justin Trudeau! Just when it appeared that he and his Liberal Party could possibly form the next government (barring some major blunder on his part – he’s terribly inexperienced after all), it appears Tom Mulcair’s NDP has shattered that dream – at least for now.

Two polls have confirmed that the NDP, which had been in a rut with around 20 per cent support for a long time, is now neck and neck with Stephen Harper’s Conservatives and the Liberals. An Ekos poll conducted May 6-12 shows that only three points separate the Conservatives, the NDP, and the Liberals. And a Forum Research Poll, conducted May 12-13, has confirmed that situation.

The Forum says that those results would translate into 131 seats for the Conservatives in a 338-seat House of Commons – a minority government, with the NDP bagging 111 seats and remaining the official opposition, while the Liberals will keep their third place with 95 seats.

In B.C., many Liberal supporters are mighty pissed off at the way some former World Sikh Organization (WSO) guys tried to be king makers. Remember how former MP Sukh Dhaliwal humiliated these guys by thrashing the living daylights out of their upstart candidate in Surrey-Newton in the nomination and how they sabotaged businessman Barj Dhahan in Vancouver South? I knew that with friends like these Trudeau would start losing support in B.C.

 

LOGO JAILGET READY TO STAY IN JAIL!  A report in the Globe and Mail said that a Supreme Court of Canada ruling now makes it easier for judges to deny bail to accused people. The court has set guidelines for judges noting that they need not wait for exceptional or rare cases to deny bail when it comes to protecting public confidence.

The newspaper pointed out that bail can be denied to an accused person to protect public safety; ensure the individual shows up for trial; and maintain public confidence.

The court now says that bail can be denied for any crime and judges should consider whether it was a crime against a vulnerable person, or committed by someone who belongs to a criminal organization.

In general, the ruling says that the law requires judges to consider the strength of the prosecution’s case and the seriousness and circumstances of the crime, including whether a firearm was involved, reported the Globe and Mail.

Indeed, I think whenever a firearm is involved, the accused MUST remain in jail. Judges should know that allowing such guys out undermines confidence in the justice system – ESPECIALLY for those from countries such as India and China.

Comments are closed.