Doug Ford will provide enhanced funding for TAVIS

Ontario Progressive Conservative Leader Doug Ford's speech on policing: if he becomes Premier of Ontario in June 2018 he will pump more money into The Toronto Anti-Violence Intervention Strategy (TAVIS). Tavis was a unit that collected personal information on mostly Black and Brown males. It was feared and hated for criminalizing a community based on racial stereotypes.

Cross-examination of Seelall Persaud, the Commissioner of the Guyana Police Force, on note-taking

By Selwyn A. Pieters, B.A., LL.B., L.E.C.

Lawyer & Notary Public (Ontario, Canada)

Attorney-at-Law (Republic of Guyana, Island of Trinidad)

Pieters Law Office

Created August 3, 2017

The Commission of Inquiry comprising Mr. Paul Slowe, DSM was issued on the 11th day of July, 2017, to-
1. inquire into the persons, places, time, circumstances and events by and through which allegations and reports came to be made of an intention or a plan to assassinate the President of the Co-operative Republic of Guyana;
2. investigate and review the full range of the Guyana Police Force’s actions and responses to the reports and the extent to which such actions were conducted or executed with due diligence;
3. determine whether any person and, in particular, officers of the Guyana Police Force had information before and after reports were made of the plan to assassinate the President and whether any such officers communicated that information to a superior authority;
4. record and report on what official action was taken on the basis of the information received and whether there was due diligence by the officers of the Guyana Police Force in the investigation of the plan to assassinate the President;
5. review all actions taken by the Guyana Police Force and examine whether there was evidence failure, neglect or omission to thoroughly and properly investigate the intention or plan to assassinate the President and determine whether such failure or omission was intentional;
6. determine the blameworthiness for failure or neglect of officers or persons involved in the investigation and recommend action to be taken against persons found to be blameworthy;
7. recommend steps that can be taken in order to prevent the recurrence of such incident and can be deemed appropriate by the Commissioner; and 
8. identify systemic issues, if any, in the Guyana Police Force’s competence to investigate matters of this nature.

This is part of my Cross-examination of Seelall Persaud, the Commissioner of the Guyana Police Force, on note-taking and record keeping. Read and form your own opinion:

Mr. Pieters: I am Selwyn Pieters I represent the interest of a young reporter Mr. Travis Chase who is also in the Courtroom and I have some questions for you.
Mr. Persaud: Sure.
Mr. Pieters: Now Mr. Commissioner I understand that you were, sworn in as a Police Officer on October 15 1984.
Mr. Persaud: That is correct.
Mr. Pieters: And you are an internationally trained officer as well in terms of experience and education?
Mr. Persaud: That is correct.
Mr. Pieters: And that you went to Harvard University?
Mr. Persaud: That is correct.
Mr. Pieters: What did you do at Harvard University?
Mr. Persaud: A course executive education in National and International Security.
Mr. Pieters: And have you had training as well in other police organisations?
Mr. Persaud:Yes,  I did the FBI National Academy  at the FBI Academy in Virginia USA, and I did Senior Investigating in Officers Course by the Scottish Police I did several drug investigation course by many conducted by many countries around the world
.......
Mr. Pieters: When did you become aware that Mr. Chase recorded an interview with Mr. Gillard?
Mr. Persaud: I heard about an interview being aired sometime maybe shortly after he
…
Mr. Pieters: When was that?
Mr. Persaud: I can't recall.
Mr. Pieters: Who advised you?
Mr. Persaud: I can't recall either.
....
Mr. Pieters: Yes, I appreciate that, but let me ask you this Mr. Commissioner do you have a pocket book?
Mr. Persaud: No.
Mr. Pieters: How do you record entries of issues that are brought to your attention by Officers?
Mr. Persaud: Its filtered if there is a need to record I do record.
....
Mr. Pieters: Right, well who records, if you don't take a contemporaneous recording which is what your job is as a policeman, you are a policeman regardless if you are a Commissioner or Constable, right?
Mr. Persaud: Yes.
Mr. Pieters: And you are supposed to take contemporaneous notes, aren't you?
Mr. Persaud: On matters that are investigating on matters of interest, yes.
Mr. Pieters: And matters that are brought to your attention in your office as a police officer isn't that the case?
Mr. Persaud: No it's not the case.
.....
Mr. Pieters: Did you take any notes in respect to these matters touching in the assassination plot against the President of the Cooperative Republic of Guyana?
Mr. Persaud: No I didn't.
Mr. Pieters: Why didn't you take notes?
Mr. Persaud: It was not necessary.
Mr. Pieters: I am going to suggest to you that it was.
Mr. Persaud: I am going to continue to say that it was not.
Mr. Pieters: I am going to suggest to you that it was neglect of duty for you not to take notes of an important issues such as this.
Mr. Persaud: I will totally deny that.
Mr. Pieters: Would you said that you know the date when you were advised that Mr. Chase did an interview with Gillard?
Mr. Persaud: No, it was of no interest to me.
Mr. Pieters: It was of no interest to you and we gone get to that.
Mr. Persaud: Yes
...
Mr. Pieters: Let me finish my question, that‟s the problem as a professional
policeman, you testified to the panel that you have no way of making contemporaneous
notes…
Mr. Persaud: That is true unless I find it necessary.
Mr. Pieters: Well let us deal with that.
Mr. Persaud: Yes.
Mr. Pieters: Contemporaneous notes is an aide-memoire... taking notes is an aide-memoire, it aids your memory, and it helps you…
Mr. Persaud:...I don't disagree with you…
....
Mr. Pieters: It is called an aide memoir, but it also assists you when you testify in
court.
Mr. Persaud: But I didn‟t know that it would have been called to testify on this, had I known that then from day one I would have probably made notes.
Mr. Pieters:(inaudible)
Mr. Persaud: No, I make notes when it's necessary, I didn't find it necessary.
Mr. Pieters: But where is your is your memo book?
Mr. Persaud: I have a personal diary.
Mr. Pieters: Where is your personal diary?
Mr. Persaud: It‟s in the office.
Mr. Pieters: You came to court today, you don‟t think you should have brought it?
Mr. Persaud: No.
Mr. Pieters: If that is what you use to recollect your memory.
Mr. Persaud: I am saying that I didn't write anything in relation to this matter in the diary.
Mr. Pieters: You didn't write anything on this matter, so I will suggest this to you didn't write anything on this matter Mr. Persaud because you thought that all the officers would have covered up for you and exclude you from the whole sequence, that I why you didn't make notes.
Mr. Persaud: I totally deny that I don't know of any commissioner of Police that went to any court and gives evidence of any investigation that the police force conducted during his tenure as commissioner.
Mr. Pieters: That is what I suggest to you, and I will make some suggestions to you…
Mr. Pieters: And you ordered that Gillard be sent on bail as well.
Mr. Persaud: I never knew Gillard was arrested.
Mr. Pieters: You did know…
Mr. Persaud: Until this inquiry.
Mr. Pieters: Well that shows how in tune you are with the police force that you
manage.
....
Mr. Pieters: And when would you have briefed Mr. Ramnarine prior to your leave
in…I think it was the end of February you went on leave.
Mr. Persaud: It is normally done in the week before I proceeded.
Mr. Pieters: Would you have memoed him?
Mr. Persaud: Well no, there were oral briefs.
Mr. Pieters: They were oral briefs, there was no note taker taking notes?
Mr. Persaud: No.
Mr. Pieters: And were you taking notes during the meeting with what you said to
Ramnarine?
Mr. Persaud: No.
Mr. Pieters: And is Ramnarine taking notes of what you are saying to him?
Mr. Persaud: I don‟t know.
Mr. Pieters: Well you were at the meeting tell the panel.
Mr. Persaud: I did see him writing I don‟t know if he was taking notes or writing
something else, I never review.
Mr. Pieters: So the change over of command is quite an ad-hoc matter…

80,000.00 damages plus $20,000.00 costs against Toronto Police for Racial Profiling

By Selwyn A. Pieters, B.A., LL.B., L.E.C.
Lawyer & Notary Public (Ontario, Canada)
Attorney-at-Law (Republic of Guyana, Island of Trinidad)
Pieters Law Office
Created April 06, 2017

In Elmardy v Toronto Police Services Board, 2017 ONSC 2074 (CanLII), <http://canlii.ca/t/h314g>, a Divisional Court panel awarded $50,000.00 Charter damages and $25, 000.0 punitive damages award plus $20,000 costs against Toronto Police Services Board and Police Constable Pak.

This was a typical carding case: [11] The police gave the Appellant no reason for his detention and he was not advised of his right to counsel. During the incident, the police filled out a card, known as a 208 card or field information report, for the Appellant. Part of the information to be included on the card was the Appellant’s skin colour, which was filled in as “black,” and his birth place, which was filled in as “Sudan.” The police did not explain to the Appellant that he was being “carded.”


The analysis in this case showed the Divisional Court was alive and in tuned to the dynamics of racial profiling:

[19]           The only reasonable inference to be drawn from the fact that both officers, without any reasonable basis, suspected the Appellant of criminal behaviour, is that their views of the Appellant were coloured by the fact that he was black and by their unconscious or conscious beliefs that black men have a propensity for criminal behaviour. This is the essence of racial profiling.
[20]           In this case, the officers’ unreasonable beliefs about the Appellant caused them to assault the Appellant, unreasonably search him and forcibly restrain him. In other words, instead of presuming his innocence, they assumed and acted as if he were guilty and dangerous. He must be violating his bail and he must be carrying a gun. These assumptions, for which there is no explanation other than the colour of the Appellant’s skin, caused them to blatantly and aggressively violate the Appellant’s constitutional rights.
[21]           The trial judge found that the officers’ real motivation for stopping the Appellant was so that they could “card” him by filling in information on a 208 card. This begs the question of why the officers would single the Appellant out for “carding.”
[22]           However, the trial judge also found that the officers lied about why they stopped the Appellant and “backfilled” a purpose after the fact. Lying about the real reason for a stop is another basis for drawing the inference that what motivated the stop was the Appellant’s race and colour. As noted in Brown, at para. 45, the inference that a police officer is lying about why she or he singled out an individual for attention is a circumstance that is “capable of supporting a finding that the stop was based on racial profiling.” Such a finding becomes even more compelling when, as here, the “lies” that the police chose to tell about why they stopped the individual are based on racial stereotypes, such as the belief that black men are more likely to be on bail and more likely to be carrying weapons.
[23]           Contrary to the finding of the trial judge that there is no evidence from which one can draw the inference that the conduct of the police officers was racially motivated, there is no other reasonable inference that is available from all of the evidence. The explanation the officers gave for their behaviour was both rejected by the trial judge and infected with racial stereotypes. Given this, there can be no issue that the Appellant’s right to equal protection and equal benefit of the law without discrimination based on race under s. 15 of the Charter was also violated.

"The Appellant was an innocent man who had fled his country looking for a society in which his rights would be respected. Instead of finding the respect to which he is entitled, he was subjected to humiliating, violent and oppressive behaviour from one of this city’s police officers, all because of the colour of his skin. Further, when questioned about their behaviour the police officers were found to have lied to the Court, conduct that can seriously undermine the administration of justice."

Hopefully the Human Rights Tribunal would take note of this decision and start to up its awards in these cases.

Selwyn A. Pieters Subject Matter Expertise: Racial profiling, race & ethnicity, anti-black racism (law enforcement, security, education, law, criminal justice system)

Selwyn A. Pieters

Subject MatterExpertise: Racial profiling, race & ethnicity, anti-black racism (law enforcement, security, education, law, criminal justice system), racial bullying, African-Canadian urban culture and race relations, social  inequality, law enforcement, policing culture in Ontario, Canada; Guyana and Trinidad

Selwyn A. Pieters, B.A. (Toronto), LL.B. (Osgoode), L.E.C. (U.W.I). Lawyer & Notary Public (Ontario). Attorney-at-Law (Republic of Guyana and Republic of Trinidad and Tobago).

Litigation

Selwyn has appeared at all levels of courts, including the Supreme Court of Canada in Fraser v. Ontario, 2011 SCC 20 and the racial profiling case of Quebec (Commission des droits de la personne et des droits de la jeunesse) v. Bombardier Inc. (Bombardier Aerospace Training Center), 2015 SCC 39, [2015] S.C.J. No. 39.

Selwyn has also appeared in the Ontario Court of Appeal in Freeman-Maloy v. Marsden 267 D.L.R. (4th) 37  (C.A.); Bangoura v. Washington Post (2005) 202 O.A.C. 76 (C.A.) and most recently R. v. Steele 2015 CarswellOnt 3334, 2015 ONCA 169, [2015] O.J. No. 1253 (Ont. C.A.). Leave to the Supreme Court of Canada denied:  R. v. Steele, 2015 CanLII 43092 (SCC) where an allegation of racial profiling was made against a Hamilton Police Officer.

Selwyn argued numerous case of racial profiling in Criminal Courts including: R. v. Agil, Chambers, Fullerton, Jimale and Brown 2011 CarswellOnt 18099 (Ont. CJ. July 14, 2011, Khawley J.) [Carding led to a big gun, drugs and gang case that I successfully litigated in Toronto... Project Threadbare the Judge called it because of the lack of evidence]; R. v. Steele, 2010 ONSC 233 (ON S.C.) and R. v. Egonu, 2007 CanLII 30475 (ON SC) - Driving while black and R. v. Bramwell-Cole [2010] O.J. No. 5838 (ON S.C.) - walking while black. Charges of cause disturbance and assault police can be pretextual racial profiling charges: R. v. Roach, 2005 O.J. No. 5278 (Ont. C.J.) (Criminal Law - Causing a Disturbance); R. v. Ramsaroop, 2009 CarswellOnt 5281, 2009 ONCJ 406 (Ont. CJ.); R. v. Taylor, 2010 CarswellOnt 6584, 2010 ONCJ 396, [2010] O.J. No. 3794 (Ont. CJ.).

Selwyn has litigated numerous human rights, constitutional and administrative law cases before the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario, Canadian Human Rights Tribunal, Superior Court of Justice and Federal Court of Canada, the most recent being Roberts v. Toronto Police Services Board, 2016 HRTO 1464 (HRTO). He has appeared in Divisional Court on Judicial Review applications.

M. (R.) was a case involving a youth 14 years old who was arrested four time by Toronto Police all based on racial profiling and improperly targeted him for arrest and detention based on Code-related grounds. He has no convictions yet was targetted, carded, arrested, detained, on several occassions. His case was fiercely litigated by Toronto Police and the reported decisions stand as a monument to the challenges litigants face in litigating racial profiling:

M. (R.) v. Toronto Police Services Board, 2013 CarswellOnt 12134, 2013 HRTO 1472

M. (R.) v. Toronto Police Services Board, 2013 CarswellOnt 11941

M. (R.) v. Toronto Police Services Board, 2013 HRTO 1102

M. (R.) v. Toronto Police Services Board, 2013 HRTO 73

M. (R.) v. Toronto Police Services Board, 2012 CarswellOnt 11158

M. (R.) v. Toronto Police Services Board, [2011] O.H.R.T.D. No. 618, 2011 HRTO 410

M. (R.) v. Toronto Police Services Board, 2011 ONCJ 143, 2011 CarswellOnt 1980, 2011 ONCJ 143, 274 C.C.C. (3d) 272 (Ont. CJ.)

M. (R.) v. Toronto Police Services Board, 2010 CarswellOnt 9121, 2010 HRTO 2349

M. (R.) v. Toronto Police Services Board was settled to the satisfaction of all parties and the terms of settlement reached remain confidential.

Selwyn represented then Toronto Police Inspector David McLeod in a racial profiling case commonly known as the “Gas pump incident” in 2005 – 2006: Toronto Police Association v. Ontario (Civilian Commission on Police Services), 2010 ONSC 246 and most recently Constable Dameian Muirhead of York Regional Police Service who alleged that he was subjected to racism, discrimination, malice, and bias in his own police service.

Selwyn was the successful litigant in the racial profiling/carding case of Peel Law Association v. Pieters 2013 CarswellOnt 7881, 2013 ONCA 396, 228 A.C.W.S. (3d) 204, 116 O.R. (3d) 81, 306 O.A.C. 314, 9 C.C.E.L. (4th) 233, [2013] O.J. No. 2695(Ont. C.A.)

Lectures, Papers, Symposiums

Pieters, Selwyn and Frank, Rick, Police Bias in a Criminal Investigation – Constitutional and Civil Consequences for Criminal Defense Lawyers and Defendants, at Legal Aid Ontario (LAO) and Innocence Canada symposium entitled “Unravelling the truth: Investigations, Interviews and Confessions” November 30, 2016

Presented a paper at the Ontario Bar Association: Selwyn A. Pieters, "Using Public Interest Remedies to Impact Cultural Change" Online: <http://www.selwynpieters.com/documents/HumaRights_Ontario_PublicInterestRemedies_PietersPaper.pdf> November 02, 2016

Pieters, Selwyn and Frank, Rick, Police Interrogations and The Psychology of False Confessions, at Innocence McGill's 10th Anniversary Conference: online <http://www.selwynpieters.com/documents/Police_Interrogations_and_The_Psychology_of_False_Confessions.pdf>

February 22, 2016

OBA Constitutional, Civil Liberties and Human Rights (CCLHR) program entitled “Hot Headlines in Human Rights - Racial Discrimination and the Legal Profession” September 10, 2013

Street Law Smarts Training Day, Justice for Children and Youth and the Law, November 8^th, 2012

"Data Collection, Race, and Criminal Justice in Canada: Building a Firm Foundation for Progress" By Selwyn A. Pieters, B.A., LL.B., L.E.C. and Adrian Roomes, J.D., Critical Race Symposium Osgoode Hall Law School at York University, November 2, 2012

“What role does data collection play in ensuring that police agencies are fulfilling their human rights obligations?” Accessing Justice and Accountability in Policing, Law Enforcement Accountability Project (LEAP), University of Windsor

Presented at the Black Law Students Association of Canada, 19th Annual Conference

Theme: "Partnering for progress and unprecedented possibilities" February 24, 2010 and a CRARR event on racial profiling.

March 19, 2008: University of Windsor Faculty of Law RACIAL PROFILING AND THE LAW - Guest Speakers (Selwyn Pieters and Raj Dhir)

March 15, 2008: SPINLAW 2008 “Solidarity: Law at the Grassroots.” The Jane/Finch CommunityThe Jane-Finch community has long been painted by the media as a centre of violence, gangs, drug busts and other criminal activity, largely committed by racial minorities. This panel hopes to engender discussion on issues affecting the community, and to dispel some of the myths and problematic stereotypes associated with the Jane-Finch neighbourhood. Panelists: Selwyn Pieters, criminal lawyer; Tonika Morgan, community organizer; Dauda Massaquoi, community legal worker at Jane Finch Community Legal Services.

March 04, 2006: The High School Drop Out Rate and the Safe Schools Act: A Panel Discussion with Liz Sandals, MPP Guelph-Wellington, Parliamentary Assistant responsible for the Safe Schools Act Review and Selwyn Pieters, lawyer and activist involved in human and civil rights, working with the community concerning safe schools and racial profiling

February 23 - 26, 2006, Black Law Students' Association of Canada Conference, The Ripple Effect of One Voice; Seminar "Critical Race Practice: Setting Up an Equality Practice" with Donald McLeod, Barrister & Solicitor; Plenary "Black and Aboriginal Racism in the Legal Profession" with Professor Michelle Williams, Dalhousie Law School

January 28, 2006, "Knowing Your Rights" BLING SUMMIT, Bring Love In Not Guns, Black Youth Coalition Against Violence, University of Toronto.

December 09, 2005, Human Rights and Justice Series, Presentation to youths in Malvern, Hoodlinc.

November 29, 2005, Safe Schools Act Review at Holiday Inn

November 23, 2005, presentation to detained youths at the York Detention Centre.

October 11, 2005, CACO meeting with the Mayor David Miller

October 04, 2005, CACO meeting with the Premier of Ontario, Dalton McGinty, Minister of Education, Gerrard Kennedy and the GTA Caucus, to discuss the Safe Schools Act and increasing violence in the Community

September 17, 2005, Better Policing for Toronto, "Controlling and Preventing Racial Profiling", Innis Town Hall, Unversity of Toronto

August 19, 2005, "What Are Your Civic Responsibilities", 33rd Annual National Education & Training Conference, National Black Police Association, with Theodore M. Shaw is Director-Counsel and President of the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, Inc. (LDF); Anthony R. Rodgers, Edwards Waters University and Hazel A. Wallis, NBPA USA Consultant

August 08, 2005, Career Choices, Tropicana and Malvern Youth Club, with Angela James, Regional Manager, Children and Youth Services and Basil Jardine, Soul Images.

June 04, 2005, "Dealing with Authority/Knowing Your Rights", Malvern in Motion Conference, with Kike Roach - civil lawyer, Roach Schwartz & Associates

April 07, 2005, Deputations, Toronto Police Services Board , "Hate Crimes" and "Race Relations"

March 05, 2005, "Fighting Racial Profiling: Legal strategies and tactics", Law Union of Ontario Annual Conference 2005, with Kike Roach - civil lawyer, Roach Schwartz & Associates and Hadayt Nazami - immigration lawyer, Jackman & Associates

March 05, 2005, "Barriers to Equal Opportunities in Education", Fifth Annual Spinlaw Conference, Bridges and Barricades -- The Roadmap to Domestic Human Rights , with Marie Chen, African Canadian Legal Clinic and Maxwell Nelson, Berkshire Group of Companies

February 03, 2005, oral and submissions to the Standing Committee on Government Operations and Estimates, House of Commons, on Bill C-11 Public Servants Disclosure Protection Act

November 02, 2004, written submissions to Justice Lesage Chair of the Review of the System for Complaints by the Public Regarding the Police was established by the Government of Ontario .

March 20, 2004, Are courts appropriate forums for litigating racial harassment claims? A look at the elusive quest for harassment free and respectful workplaces" (paper and oral presentation), Ryerson University Equity Conference 2004 .

May 30, 2003, Presentation to Ontario Human Rights Commission Racial Profiling Inquiry "Racial Profiling at Canada Customs: Personal and Society's Implications and Measures to Combat this Unlawful Treatment of Canada's Black Population" (paper and oral presentation)

March 08, 2003, The Third Annual SPINLAW Conference, Expanding the Boundaries of Human Rights Litigation - Post 9/11, Racial-Profiling and the impact of the Pieters Settlement (submitted paper)

April 2002, Racial Profiling, Association of Black Law Enforcers (hand-outs)

February 22, 2002, "How to become an legal activist" - Panelists included, Julian Falconer, Barrister and Solicitor; and Pat Case, Equity Advisor, University of Guelph. Moderator: Louise James, Law Student, University of Toronto Law School

January 18, 2001, Trials on Poverty, with Elan Ohayon, Peter Rosenthal & Vilko Zbogar, University of Toronto

March 29, 2000, Affirmative Action & Employment Equity: Case Studies in the Struggle for Racial Justice in Ontario and Michigan with Dr. Chandrakant Shah, Dr. Kin-Yip Chun, Karen Thom, ASSU, University of Toronto.

Media

Print, broadcast, television and social media nationally and internationally.

Selwyn A. Pieters, B.A., LL.B., L.E.C.

Lawyer & Notary Public (Ontario)

Attorney at Law (Guyana and Trinidad)

Correspondence to:

P.O. Box 518, 31 Adelaide St. E., Toronto, Ont. M5C 2J6

Phone (24 hours): 416-787-5928 Fax: 416-787-6145

Internet : http://www.selwynpieters.com