Mass Shooting in Nova Scotia April 18/19, 2020: misogyny and gun violence

123 posts / 0 new
Last post
Aristotleded24

kropotkin1951 wrote:
The depth of the misogyny and racism in our justice system is unfathomable if one has not seen some aspect of it personally.

Does that also explain why, when black people are shot in the US the police "thought" that person had a gun and yet there are several YouTube videos of white guys walking around with guns and the cops being okay with it?

kropotkin1951

The RCMP is a para-military organization that is contracted to do community policing in some parts of the country. They are very bad at the job. They are incapable of taking a domestic abuse complaint as an imminent threat and the abusers face few consequences when evidence is presented. They also seem incapable of dealing with armed suspects with intent to kill police officers. They are only good at enforcing court injunctions against peaceful protestors on behalf of corporations. For instance they were extremely capable of mounting a coordinated military assault against peaceful demonstrators outside of Rexton.

The RCMP is going to export its policing model to the Ukraine. I'll bet it will be about how to carry out para-military operations like we saw recently in Northern BC and how to do crowd control like they did for the Vancouver Olympics or the G8 summits. Canada enabling fascism world wide. 

https://www.rcmp-grc.gc.ca/en/gazette/Ukrainian-police-talk-training-rcmp

Aristotleded24

kropotkin1951 wrote:
The RCMP is a para-military organization that is contracted to do community policing in some parts of the country. They are very bad at the job. They are incapable of taking a domestic abuse complaint as an imminent threat and the abusers face few consequences when evidence is presented. They also seem incapable of dealing with armed suspects with intent to kill police officers.

One of the problems I have with the framing of people who shoot and kill RCMP officers as crazy people is that it takes the focus off any mis-steps the RCMP bureaucracy made that costs officers their lives. Take the shooting in Mayerthorpe, for instance. How was it decided to send 4 rookie officers after a known cop hater who was prone to voilence?

Of course the politicians and RCMP bureaucracy will call these officers heros. Calling them heros does not bring them back.

Paladin1

MegB wrote:

My ex was physically, verbally and emotionally abusive and police refused to offer protection or even a deterrant (this was many years ago). He came to where I was staying with our infant daughter and backhanded me in the face with an ashtray as I was trying to feed her. I called the police. They said they could charge him with property damage (he put a fist through a window after I locked him out) but apparently assaulting a woman holding a newborn got a free pass - they refused to lay assault charges. Law enforcement and the legal system are both systemically misogynistic and so long as they remain so women will continue to be at the mercy of violent partners. It deeply saddens me that more than three decades after my experience nothing has changed.

I've witnessed the other side of things. I've seen women assault men and then the men call the police the man ultimately gets arrested and charged for assault. Because "he's bigger" or used physical force to defend themselves like pushing back. I've seen a man call the police on his girlfriend and then get kicked out of his own house (along with his young younger) while the girlfriend was allowed to stay in the home.

I'm not "but what about men-ing?". Just there's some really weird inturputations of the law. It boggles my mind why your ex wasn't charged and arrested in your situation Meg. It's like our police don't use common sense. Do you remember if the attending officers were young or older?

Misfit Misfit's picture

Paladin, your post is a false equavelent on both the number of cases and on the severity of the violence. They are not the same. You also imply that it is men who should be entitled to stay in the home when violence erupts and that it is the women who should leave. You imply that it is the man's home when it is her home as well. You imply that women should lose their right to stay in their home when they do fight back. 
 

Elizabeth Sheehy elaborates that "Women fighting back"  plays into a host of stereotypes that women somehow are not really abused or battered when they do fight back. It somehow negates the deeper and more serious patterns of male abuse that many of these women have suffered by treating two as exactly the same.

This is also a negative slur against large women. Even when women do fight back who are taller than their men they are not physically and biologically the same as men. Their violence is not the same. It feeds into misogynistic men's stereotypes  of women as being delicate and dainty and that it is not ladylike to fight back. It implies that women who are fat or tall are somehow less domestically assaulted and that the physical and psychological damage that they suffered is less due to their size. 

Sheehy mentions how black women and First Nations Women are more inclined to fight back.  It boils down to a long standing and deeply rooted mistrust of the police. She also notes that many First Nations women who live in remote areas do not have ready access to shelters so they are forced to fend for themselves. 

Edit to add...

Here is a Rsbble podcast of Meghan Murphy interviewing Elizabeth Sheehy on aboriginal women and on women who fight back.

Interview.

Paladin1

Misfit I reread my post with the intention of maybe editing it if it wasn't saying what I wanted to after reading your response. Without getting too far off track I didn't explain the example very well sorry. The man owned the house and had shared custody of his child. His girlfriend of a couple months(not the mom) was staying over, she had a home of her own. In this case the man didn't assault the woman and wasn't arrested for assault, there was an argument and he called the police. The police made him leave anyways. He was back in in 2 or 3 weeks but a really weird situation.

The context I brought it up was that police make some strange decisions, just like with Megs case of how someone who clearly assaulted her wasn't charged with assault. I'd like to see a lot of those cases reinvestigated. The military is going back 20 years and reinvestigating sexual assault and harassment complaints and sometimes they're charging people 20 years later, why can't the police do that for citizens?

You mention deeper and more serious patterns of male abuse towards women (and fighting back). Do you know if that is a factor the courts take into consideration when women are charged with assault against men? Does it get considered as self-defense or something like that in Canada or do we treat it black and white and say assault is assault? To me it would make sense that a history of abuse would justify someone reaching a breaking point and lashing out or assaulting their abuser, where they turn around and play the victim. But I'm not a law expert.

I'm going to watch that interview after breakfast thanks for digging that up.

Aristotleded24

Paladin1 wrote:
You mention deeper and more serious patterns of male abuse towards women (and fighting back). Do you know if that is a factor the courts take into consideration when women are charged with assault against men? Does it get considered as self-defense or something like that in Canada or do we treat it black and white and say assault is assault? To me it would make sense that a history of abuse would justify someone reaching a breaking point and lashing out or assaulting their abuser, where they turn around and play the victim. But I'm not a law expert.

Manitoba introduced zero tolerance laws for domectic abuse. What often ended up happening was that the abused partner would hit back, and both partners would be charged. This was known as "double charging," and these cases were often thrown out.

Something I've been thinking about with domestic abuse is the image of a big powerful man who beats up on a woman who doesn't physically fight back. That must have been the motivation behind zero tolerance legislation. Could it be that this image plays into gender-based stereotypes that don't take into account the complexities of what happens in individual siutations? Let's say a man is viciously beating a woman and she kicks him once in the groin to get the abuse to stop. Under zero tolerance, both are charged. Using common sense, it's obvious that the man should be charged in this case.

Misfit Misfit's picture

Aristotleded24 wrote:

Paladin1 wrote:
You mention deeper and more serious patterns of male abuse towards women (and fighting back). Do you know if that is a factor the courts take into consideration when women are charged with assault against men? Does it get considered as self-defense or something like that in Canada or do we treat it black and white and say assault is assault? To me it would make sense that a history of abuse would justify someone reaching a breaking point and lashing out or assaulting their abuser, where they turn around and play the victim. But I'm not a law expert.

Manitoba introduced zero tolerance laws for domectic abuse. What often ended up happening was that the abused partner would hit back, and both partners would be charged. This was known as "double charging," and these cases were often thrown out.

Something I've been thinking about with domestic abuse is the image of a big powerful man who beats up on a woman who doesn't physically fight back. That must have been the motivation behind zero tolerance legislation. Could it be that this image plays into gender-based stereotypes that don't take into account the complexities of what happens in individual siutations? Let's say a man is viciously beating a woman and she kicks him once in the groin to get the abuse to stop. Under zero tolerance, both are charged. Using common sense, it's obvious that the man should be charged in this case.

 

The interview explains how these prior assault charges have been bad for these women

jerrym

When I was 17 in the mid-1960s, I joined the army cadets in a rifle regiment for one summer. When many cadets contined to call their rifles 'guns' repeatedly, the commanding officer  ordered one cadet to climb a 25 foot scaffold in the armory and shout out:

This is my rifle

This is my gun (pointing at his penis)

This is for shooting

This is for fun.

All the cadets were embarassed and avoided using the word 'gun' afterward. However, this shows the ingrained attitude towards women present in the miltary and the linking of weapons and violence. The officer was actually a relatively mild-mannered guy, showing how deeply ingrained such attitudes can be.

Misfit Misfit's picture

Nova Scotia mass shooter may have been a police informant.

https://www.macleans.ca/news/canada/the-nova-scotia-shooter-case-has-hallmarks-of-an-undercover-operation/?fbclid=IwAR1v5zeYOZMNVpFye_D4PSsnVq0ogRuq0zIidBMIs9S3SeNMiH-ig331rGE

"If Wortman was an RCMP informant or agent, it could explain why the force appeared not to take action on complaints about his illegal guns and his assault on his common-law wife."

 

eastnoireast

“A feminist lens will be critical to the inquiry’s success. Transition House Association of Nova Scotia, Women’s Shelters Canada, Feminists Fighting Femicide and the Canadian Women’s Foundation point out that chronic spousal abuse and misogyny are often linked to larger violent acts in our society,” the letter says.

the gender-based violence aspect of the situation seems to be generally accepted now, including among politicians and other official types.

the ns premier, mcneil, who is a bully and generally a piece of work, is of course totally dragging his feet regarding an inquiry.  he comes from a sheriff-cop family.  ns justice minister furey is also ex-cop, excusing off duty police bullshit when he was new glasgow's police chief with "we work hard and we party hard".

interestingly, one of the 11 questions is "the role, if any, of the COVID-19 pandemic in the incident." 

i also find it interesting, or telling, that it is now accepted behavior for the media to say "22 people died", or "22 nova scotians died", ie not counting the gunman.  i am all for not elevating the killer; i am also for accurate reporting.  he was human, he was of us, whether we like it or not.

 

https://www.thechronicleherald.ca/news/local/nova-scotia-senators-have-q...

"Three of Nova Scotia’s newest senators are calling on the federal and provincial governments to immediately launch a joint inquiry into the mass shooting of 22 people in April.

Senators Mary Coyle, Colin Deacon and Stan Kutcher, all members of the Independent Senators Group, issued a letter to both federal Public Safety Minister Bill Blair and Nova Scotia Justice Minister Mark Furey outlining the importance of a joint review.

“As independent Nova Scotia senators, we understand the need to tackle all issues surrounding this tragedy in an objective, unbiased and nonpartisan manner,” the letter states. “A joint inquiry would help everyone better understand what transpired and to learn from this tragedy. If properly conducted, the joint inquiry could lead to changes to policies, practices and procedures and hopefully give us the tools to prevent future tragedies of this nature.”

The senators go on to list 11 questions they would like to see addressed by such an inquiry."

jerrym

Both the Liberal federal and Liberal Nova Scotia provincial governments are facing a backlash and accusations of a coverup over their failure to have public inquiry into the worst mass shooting in Canadian history, opting instead for a three person panel review.

The federal and provincial governments’ decision not to hold a public inquiry into the worst mass killing in Canadian history is fuelling a growing backlash in Nova Scotia and accusations of a cover-up.

Nova Scotians have been calling for an inquiry for months to examine the RCMP’s response to a 13-hour rampage that left 22 people dead in five rural communities before the shooter was killed by police in April. Instead, the federal and provincial governments announced on Thursday a three-person panel review that many say falls short of their expectations for transparency.

“It’s just inflamed their pain even further,” said Mary Coyle, who is among a group of more than 30 Canadian senators calling for a full, public inquiry into the massacre. ...

“We don’t need any more secrets around this, there’s already been enough erosion of public trust. ... This is not the best we can do. It’s pretty clear the voices of the families of those victims have not been respected.”

Some families of the victims say they reject the governments’ argument that a review – which would produce a report by the end of August, 2021, but doesn’t require public hearings – would be a faster way to get answers and spare them from the “trauma” of revisiting the massacre through an inquiry.

They believe a full, open inquiry is needed to examine why the RCMP didn’t charge the gunman in the years leading up to the shootings, despite multiple weapons and assault complaints, and to probe mistakes made in the police response to his rampage.

That includes the decision not to use the province’s emergency alert system, keeping other municipal forces in the dark after allowing the gunman to slip through a police perimeter, keeping secret for nearly 12 hours the fact the gunman was on the loose in a look-alike RCMP cruiser, a delay in calling for an aircraft in the search, and for a manhunt that only caught the killer by accident – when he stopped for gas and an officer who was also filling up recognized him.

“They won’t give us a full public inquiry, why? Because they are covering up facts that happened that night and day,” said Amelia McLeod, whose father Sean McLeod and stepmother Alanna Jenkins were killed by the gunman. “We deserve a full public inquiry. My parents deserve the truth.”

The husband of one of the victims is calling for the resignation of the province’s Attorney-General and Justice Minister, Mark Furey, who along with Bill Blair, the federal Minister of Public Safety, laid out why their governments rejected a public inquiry.

A protest is planned for Monday outside the constituency office of Mr. Furey, who is a former member of the RCMP. Some families of the victims allege he is putting the interests of the national police force over the public. ...

Opposition parties at both the federal and provincial levels also criticized the review. Nova Scotia’s NDP and Progressive Conservative parties demanded Premier Stephen McNeil call an emergency sitting of the legislature to push through a bill forcing a public inquiry.

“April 18 and 19, 2020 are among the darkest days that have been visited on our country. I am asking you to recognize and respect this fact with the commensurate response and allow for the initiation of a full-fledged, public inquiry,” reads a statement from NDP Leader Gary Burrill to the Premier. ...

Premier McNeil defended the review process and the qualifications of the panel chosen to lead it – former chief justice of Nova Scotia Michael MacDonald; former federal attorney-general Anne McLellan; and Leanne Fitch, the former chief of the Fredericton Police Force. He acknowledged that many people in his province weren’t happy, but said the review should be able to provide the answers they’re looking for.

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/canada/article-governments-face-backlash...

jerrym

Women's Rights activists are calling for a 22 miute General Strike on Monday July 27th at noon local time across Canada over the Nova Scotia mass shooting of 22 people and the failure of the Nova Scotia Liberal and Trudeau governments over their failure to launch a public inquiry into the mass shooting and misogyny related to it. 

Women’s rights advocates in Atlantic Canada are calling on people across the country to join a brief general strike on Monday to demand a public inquiry into the deadly mass shootings that took place in Nova Scotia last April. The federal and provincial governments announced this week that an expert panel, led by former Nova Scotia chief justice Michael MacDonald, would review the massacre that left 22 people dead.

But Martha Paynter, founder of Women’s Wellness Within, a Halifax-based group that advocates for women’s reproductive justice, said that falls short of the transparent public inquiry that many people, including the victims’ families, are demanding. “We need systemic and structural change to come from this, and a little review is just not going to cut it,” Paynter, one of the strike organizers, said in an interview.

The strike — which will last 22 minutes in honour of the 22 victims killed on April 18 and 19 — will begin at noon local time on Monday. Supporters of the public inquiry will be gathering at the city’s Victoria Park and people can also watch the event live on Facebook.

The victims’ families, as well as women’s rights advocates, lawyers and federal senators from across Canada, have for months urged Halifax and Ottawa to launch a public probe into what happened during the shootings and why. Many have criticized the review panel — made up of MacDonald, the former chief justice; former federal Liberal cabinet minister Anne McLellan, and Leanne Fitch, the former chief of police in Fredericton — because they say it does not have enough power and lacks transparency.

An online petition demanding a public inquiry had garnered over 10,000 signatures as of Saturday afternoon, while a Facebook group for Nova Scotians in favour of a public probe had over 9,000 members. ...

 Jenny Wright, another co-organizer of Monday’s strike, said a public inquiry is the best way to get to the bottom of what happened — and prevent future massacres. “We must have an inquest that looks at the specific links between misogyny and violence against women and mass killings that we are seeing here at home and across Canada that we are not acknowledging,” Wright, a feminist activist who lives in both Halifax and St. John’s said in an interview. ,,,

She said the gunman in Nova Scotia had a history of violence against women, which can be a predictor of mass killings. She pointed to the Toronto van attack in April 2018 and to the 14 female engineering students who were killed at Montreal’s Ecole Polytechnique in 1989 as other examples of massacres in which misogyny played a role.

“We need to have an inquiry so that people … can be compelled to speak the truth about that night so that we’re finally able to unpack what happened (and) have transparency and accountability,” said Wright. “In the end, we are hopeful that if our voices are strong enough then the governments will overturn their decision.”

https://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2020/07/26/activists-to-strike-as-ca...

jerrym

The strike will be in Halifax's Victoria Park and can be watched on Facebook.

JFJ50773550.jpg

Family and friends of victims attend a march demanding an inquiry into the April mass shooting in Nova Scotia that killed 22 people, in Bible Hill, N.S. on Wednesday, July 22, 2020. Women's rights advocates in Atlantic Canada are calling on people across the country to join a brief general strike on Monday to demand a public inquiry into the deadly mass shootings that took place in Nova Scotia last April. THE CANADIAN PRESS/Andrew Vaughan

The federal and provincial governments announced this week that an expert panel, led by former Nova Scotia chief justice Michael MacDonald, would review the massacre that left 22 people dead.

But Martha Paynter, founder of Women's Wellness Within, a Halifax-based group that advocates for women's reproductive justice, said that falls short of the transparent public inquiry that many people, including the victims' families, are demanding.

"We need systemic and structural change to come from this, and a little review is just not going to cut it," Paynter, one of the strike organizers, said in an interview.

The strike — which will last 22 minutes in honour of the 22 victims killed on April 18 and 19 — will begin at noon local time on Monday. Supporters of the public inquiry will be gathering at the city's Victoria Park and people can also watch the event live on Facebook.

"This was a horror, an enormous trauma for the entire country, and we all should be truly enraged by the inadequate government response," Paynter said.

https://www.kamloopsthisweek.com/activists-will-strike-as-calls-continue...

jerrym

Below is an update of on the 22 minute general strike in Halifax over the mass shooting of 22 people.

Hundreds of people gathered at a Halifax park and in the riding of Nova Scotia's justice minister today to demand a public inquiry into the April mass shooting that killed 22 people in the province.

The protests followed last week's announcement by the provincial and federal governments of an independent review, which has been criticized by victims' family members as lacking transparency and legal heft.

Feminist community activists and advocates spoke to more than 100 people at Victoria Park in Halifax at noon, saying the panel created by the federal and provincial justice ministers is destined to work behind closed doors.

Emily Stewart, executive director of Third Place Transition House, which serves several counties where killings occurred on April 18 and 19, said only a public inquiry could effectively expose the role that domestic violence played in the mass shooting.

Meanwhile, in Bridgewater, N.S., organizer Desiree Gordon estimated about 100 people marched to the riding office of Justice Minister Mark Furey, joined by the provincial Progressive Conservative and NDP leaders.

Activists, lawyers, Nova Scotia opposition parties and senators from across Canada have joined the call for an inquiry in recent months, expressing disappointment in the governments' chosen format.

The federal and Nova Scotia governments said last week that a three-person panel would be established to review the killings and the police response.

That review body will be led by Michael MacDonald, a former chief justice of Nova Scotia, and includes former federal Liberal cabinet minister Anne McLellan, and Leanne Fitch, the former chief of police in Fredericton.

https://atlantic.ctvnews.ca/protests-in-two-nova-scotia-locations-over-m...

 

jerrym

After a massive backlash by the Nova Scotia public, including the 22 minute general strike described in the previous post led "on Tuesday, Nova Scotia Justice Minister Mark Furey said he would support a public inquiry into the April mass shooting if the federal government agreed." The Trudeau government then caved and announced a public inquiry. The families whose relatives have been murdered and their supporters, who had planned a march for Wednesday, say they will still be marching. Good on them for forcing a public inquiry into the many questions the murders have raised. 

However, the same people who were going to carry out the review of the shootings will be carrying out the public inquiry, which could potentially raise more questions, especially with Anne McLellan being a former Liberal deputy Prime Minister.

After days of criticism about the decision to launch a review panel into the Nova Scotia mass shooting, the federal government has announced that the tragedy will instead be the subject of a public inquiry.  ...

A public inquiry will allow the power to summon witnesses and require them to:

  • Give evidence, orally or in writing, and on oath or, if they are persons entitled to affirm in civil matters, on solemn affirmation.
  • Produce such documents and things as the commissioners deem requisite to the full investigation of the matters into which they are appointed to examine.

The same people who had been involved with the highly criticized review panel will take part in the public inquiry, Blair said. 

J. Michael MacDonald, Anne McLellan and Leanne Fitch agreed to assist in the public inquiry and will serve as commissioners. ...

In an interview with CBC Nova Scotia News at Six on Tuesday, Premier Stephen McNeil apologized to the families of victims. He said his intent was not to cause families additional harm, but to get them answers with the panel review. ...

Robert Pineo, the lawyer representing 21 of the 22 families in a class-action lawsuit against the killer's estate, and whose firm is handling the class-action suit against the province and the RCMP, said he's glad the two levels of government had a change of heart. "It is unfortunate the families had to go through the turmoil of the last three days worrying about this, but at the end of the day, the government did the right thing," Pineo said. ...

Families had organized a march for Wednesday and Pineo said they still plan to do that.

"The family member that I spoke with said he would like to see the march go on as ... a show of support to the families and to the processes coming," Pineo said. "The families are going to be there tomorrow and so will some of their supporters."  

Earlier on Tuesday, Nova Scotia Justice Minister Mark Furey said he would support a public inquiry into the April mass shooting if the federal government agreed.

His comments came following days of criticism about the decision to instead appoint a review panel.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-scotia/liberal-mps-support-inquiry-l...

 

laine lowe laine lowe's picture

Good to hear this reversal of decision.

Hurtin Albertan

The spin and ass covering will be huge as the RCMP try and explain away their many fuckups.  But like High River, no one will be held accountable.

lagatta4

I still don't understand how anyone, even a white guy with a succesful business, could get away with a fake law enforcement uniform and fake law enforcement livery on his motor vehicle. Something is very, very wrong.

Hugs to all the people who lost loved ones and neighbours in this outrage.

Hurtin Albertan

You don't even need fake uniforms or a fake cop car, as Portland has shown us all it takes are a few friends with a lot of multicam gear and a white rental SUV.  "Police!  You're under arrest!  Get in the car!"

jerrym

lagatta4 wrote:

I still don't understand how anyone, even a white guy with a succesful business, could get away with a fake law enforcement uniform and fake law enforcement livery on his motor vehicle. Something is very, very wrong.

 

There are lots of rumours about Wortman, including that he was an police informer, which would help explain why he got away with so much and why the Nova Scotia and Trudeau governments were reluctant to release much info about him. 

Crown blocks access to case documents amid report Nova Scotia mass shooter was RCMP informant

Speculation abounds and a legal can of worms has been opened after a report published in Maclean’s claiming gunman Gabriel Wortman had criminal connections and may have been in the employ of the RCMP

Was Nova Scotia mass shooter Gabriel Wortman a police informant? Was he a member of a drug cartel? Why did he withdraw $475,000 from a Brink’s office weeks before he carried out the deadliest mass shooting in Canadian history? Were there co-conspirators who helped Wortman, or is the RCMP attempting to deflect attention from its own failings in its handling of the case? And what’s the U.S. connection in the illegal guns obtained by Wortman and used in the attack? Were they part of a gun-smuggling ring?

More than two months after the former Nova Scotia denturist’s rampage that left 22 people dead and three people injured, the search for answers continues.

The scope of the investigation has been massive. Some 200 officers from six different law enforcement agencies have been assigned to the case. ...

So far, documents related to seven search warrants have been released by the courts, with some of them redacted. But an application brought by a number of media outlets led by the CBC for the complete unsealing of the remaining documents, without redactions, has opened a legal can of worms.

The federal Crown is arguing that the “premature” release of the documents could compromise the RCMP’s investigation. ...

According to the Crown, the sealed materials “contain intimate details of traumatic experiences, lives and deaths of victims and their families.” And that “no legitimate interest is served by exposing their trauma to the world.”

The Crown argues that “Public access will undermine the administration of justice and serve only to re-victimize an already vulnerable community,” and that, “preserving the integrity of the ongoing investigation outweighs the importance of public access to this information at this stage.”

https://nowtoronto.com/news/nova-scotia-mass-shooting-rcmp-gabriel-wortman

laine lowe laine lowe's picture

I thought the informant angle was dismissed? I'm not sure what evidence came up to result in dismissal of that theory but I guess if it was just a statement from the RCMP, then it certainly merits re-examination.

Pages