What ever happened to Sgt. Dennis Mahoney-Bruer? | Page 20 | GTAMotorcycle.com

What ever happened to Sgt. Dennis Mahoney-Bruer?

This thread started in 2011 ! and people think I have a long memory , wow !
 
That's just fantastic.
 
nfq said:
That's just fantastic.
Click to expand...

cops are protected in layers; everyone does there little bit to help... invisibly

Im certain the cops investigating the cop didn't do their best work to insure a conviction
the crown works with cops - they won't do their do their best work to get a conviction
judge had the opportunity to give the officer the benefit of doubt, even though he pretty much said he knew the cop was guilty

all of these people knew what the outcome would be
 
Last edited:
boyoboy said:
cops are protected in layers; everyone does there little bit to help... invisibly

Im certain the cops investigating the cop didn't do their best work to insure a conviction
the crown works with cops - they won't do their do their best work to get a conviction
judge had the opportunity to give the officer the benefit of doubt, even though he pretty much said he knew the cop was guilty

all of these people knew what the outcome would be
Click to expand...

Based on what has been released about the actual investigation they went to pretty hefty lengths to gather evidence. I think, worst case, someone might have given him a heads-up regarding how he was going to be investigated. I think it more likely, however, that he just managed to come up with a story that raised reasonable doubt, using a possibility that the investigators had not foreseen, forcing the judge to rule accordingly.
 
Rob MacLennan said:
Based on what has been released about the actual investigation they went to pretty hefty lengths to gather evidence. I think, worst case, someone might have given him a heads-up regarding how he was going to be investigated. I think it more likely, however, that he just managed to come up with a story that raised reasonable doubt, using a possibility that the investigators had not foreseen, forcing the judge to rule accordingly.
Click to expand...

Didn't the judge basically tell him to his face that they knew he was guilty but couldn't convict him due to lack of credible evidence?
 
caboose56 said:
Didn't the judge basically tell him to his face that they knew he was guilty but couldn't convict him due to lack of credible evidence?
Click to expand...

To paraphrase the judge essentially said I know what you did and you know what you did, but reasonable doubt won't let me convict you.
 
Rob MacLennan said:
To paraphrase the judge essentially said I know what you did and you know what you did, but reasonable doubt won't let me convict you.
Click to expand...

exactly my point, "KNOW" what you did...

I've had a judge say;
"this is a weak case at best" and then convict me. invisible layers...lol
 
Last edited:
boyoboy said:
exactly my point, " KNOW what you did...
Click to expand...

The following statement applies to everyone, not just police officers. If you want to be judged solely on the merits of law, you want a trial by judge. If you want to tug at the heart strings, you want a trial by jury.
 
Rob MacLennan said:
The following statement applies to everyone, not just police officers. If you want to be judged solely on the merits of law, you want a trial by judge. If you want to tug at the heart strings, you want a trial by jury.
Click to expand...

ahem, benefit of doubt is an arbitrary decision made by the judge....and is not based solely on law. its an arbitrary decision lmao good try.
 
boyoboy said:
ahem, benefit of doubt is an arbitrary decision made by the judge....and is not based solely on law. its an arbitrary decision lmao good try.
Click to expand...

"Benefit of the doubt" is not a legal term, with a legal definition. "Reasonable doubt" is.

"Good try."
 
boyoboy said:
ahem, benefit of doubt is an arbitrary decision made by the judge....and is not based solely on law. its an arbitrary decision lmao good try.
Click to expand...
You talking about actual judges or JP?
 
From the article:

"The OPP declined to provide a list of its suspended officers and said a Freedom of Information request would be necessary to release the names."

Nice.
 
Neil_V said:
Not a bad gig, getting paid 100k a year by the good peeps of Ontario whist being able to spend your time, and that sweet sweet tax $$$, getting your business venture off the ground.
Click to expand...
It's like an incentive to get charges filed against them. Smack people around behind the cameras until one of them goes to get their lawyer, bingo! Instant paid vacation.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom