Woman alleges police beat her in custody

Susan Nabors turns to courts after disappointment with complaint process

A Calgary woman is suing the Calgary Police Service for damages related to alleged police brutality. Susan Nabors filed the lawsuit on November 26, 2012, naming the CPS, police Chief Rick Hanson and constables Amy Klassen, Craig Steele, Malinda Massicotte and Mark Atkin as liable for events that took place on December 5, 2010.

Nabors says when police came to her home at 2 a.m. in response to a noise complaint made by her neighbours, they came into her bedroom without permission and ultimately arrested her for assaulting an officer. What happened over the next 20 hours has been the subject of a complaint investigation for the last year and a half. Frustration with the lack of progress in that investigation led Nabors to file the lawsuit, which claims $50,000 in general damages.

Contrary to police allegations that Nabors assaulted police, the lawsuit claims that the constables repeatedly assaulted the 54-year-old, five-foot-two woman, leaving her with cuts and bruises on her face and head, a concussion, a lip laceration requiring surgical repair, a chipped tooth, chronic facial pain, headaches and post-traumatic stress.

The suit names Chief Hanson on the grounds that he is responsible for conduct in the CPS. By law, he is also responsible for overseeing public complaints.

There are similarities and differences between Nabors’ and her husband’s stories and those of the police.

“I was yelling out in the front yard,” admits Nabors. “We had been at a party, I was drinking…. I finally came inside. It was a cold winter night. We were just getting ready for bed, everything’s all peaceful and quiet, when the police came.” Nabors says she was getting undressed and had bent down to plug in her electric blanket when a woman entered her room.

“She starts barking orders at me, telling me to sit down and give her identification. And I said, ‘I’d like you to leave, I don’t want you here. I want you to leave.’ And then she’s like, ‘Give me some ID.’ She’s in my house. I’m the registered owner of the house and she’s asking me for ID.

“I said, ‘I’m not going to give you identification, I’d like you to leave.’ She was being quite aggressive… and she bangs me into the door jam. I thought, ‘This chick’s crazy.’ So I go into the bathroom to create physical distance between me and her…. I don’t want her touching me. And all of a sudden the door’s flung open by her partner. He grabs me and throws me down the hall.

“So I’m standing in the kitchen, just standing there, and I’m holding on to the drawer just because I’m just in shock now. What is going on here? Then they grab me and throw me onto the ground and handcuff me and drag me out to their car. They said, ‘We’re taking her downtown.’”

Her husband Charles Nabors concurs.

“Outside the house my wife was making a bit of commotion, loud voice, as she was upset about something. Some neighbours apparently called the police…. Anyways we came in the house and she was getting ready for bed, in her bedroom, when the police arrived,” he says. “They went into her bedroom, a woman police officer, and was quite aggressive…. Susan did not assault any of the police officers. She used her voice to express her unhappiness as to what was occurring, but she did not use any physical assault.”

At the police station, Susan Nabors says she was seated on a bench with the four arresting officers standing around her.

“They didn’t like what I was saying. I’m kind of mouthy. [One of the officers] throws me down on the ground. They go and get a spit mask and they say that I had spit on them. Well I don’t spit…. They start to process me physically, which is to remove my jewelry. So there was an officer kind of behind me in between my legs — my legs spread and you see his legs. And then the officer, the one from my bedroom, she’s trying to get my ring off. My hands are so swollen from the handcuffs, they’re pretty wrecked. And she’s trying to get my ring off and she’s pulling and pulling and pulling. I thought she was going to break my finger off.”

Susan says when she bent her finger to stop the officer from pulling, the officer began hitting Susan’s face against a window.

“I’m trying to flail around, I need to break free…. She’s smashing my head and her other person on the other side of me was kicking, grabs my head and just throws it onto the ground and blood just squishes everywhere. But I’ve got the mask on and so all the blood is just filling up inside the mask and I can’t breathe…. Then they pulled the mask off and blood just gushed everywhere, massive, probably a couple pints of blood. And they took me into the medic room. And I’m just like, why are you doing this?”

Nabors was held in an isolation cell from 4 a.m. until 4 p.m. She was finally released at 11:30 p.m. When she came home, her teenaged daughter immediately took her to the Rockyview Hospital.

The officers’ notes from that evening, obtained by Susan Nabors through a freedom of information request, tell a slightly different story.

Const. Klassen writes: “My partner remained in the living room. I walked down a short hallway and observed a heavy-set female lying on the bedroom floor just inside the doorway. She got on her hands and knees, turned over. I identified myself to her; used her name, ‘Susan.’ I helped her to her feet. Susan was extremely intoxicated, unsteady on feet, glazed eyes, slurred speech, odour of alcohol emanating from her breath.

“I told her we were there because she had been yelling in the street. Susan immediately yelling, cursing, ‘Are you fucking kidding me?’

“I asked her to sit on her bed. She began to push, hit, try to slam my arm in bathroom door. I pulled her out. Had asked for my partner Cst Steele to assist me. I continued to tell her to calm down, we were there to make sure everyone was safe. Susan continued to be assaultive... Susan pushed past to the kitchen... Cst Steele began pulling Susan away from opening drawers, Susan began screaming, hitting and kicking. Cst Steele and myself took Susan to the ground. Advised [she was] under arrest [for] assault[ing a] police officer. Handcuffed. Locked to not tighten... While sitting on bench [at the station], screaming, spit at Cst Massicotte. Cst Massicotte took her to the ground. I put a spit mask on. During search continued to struggle. Held against window to keep her standing. Kicked Massicotte... took Susan to ground... Susan’s nose started to bleed. EMS checked. Susan began to calm down, apologize... No intention of hurting nose. Could not support her on way to ground when she kicked and continued to struggle.”

The medic’s report says Nabors had a self-inflicted nosebleed and was in no pain. Despite a property record confirming she had a jacket, mitts, boots and a toque, Nabors says she wore only a thin black dress and stockings until her release the next night. She says she asked repeatedly for a blanket, food, water and toilet paper, but was not given any. She also says she was never allowed a phone call though she asked to make one. Her arrest records say she was “too drunk” to make a call.

Nabors was accused of assaulting three officers, but the charges were stayed in June 2011. Her background check shows her only contact with police prior to that night was in 2006 when neighbours complained she and her husband, then separated, were fighting outside their home.

No longer facing charges, Nabors believed a complaint investigation would find she was telling the truth. However, after 18 months she says nothing has been done.

She says that after several months her police liaison told her the CPS found no wrongdoing and was ready to close the investigation.

“I said, ‘Are you kidding me?’ I said, ‘He [the complaint supervisor] hasn’t even talked to me; he hasn’t even talked to me. Did you show him the [police] video?’ And he goes, ‘No, he’s not allowed to see the video.’”

Nabors’ lawyer Susan Cameron has seen the video recorded at the station on December 5, 2010 and of Susan in the isolation cell. She says she found the footage shocking.

“It puts the Calgary police department in a very embarrassing situation…. It’s way more than just her giving her side of the story when you have a video. And I think also the injuries and the damages that have been caused to her — it’s more the post-traumatic stress disorder,” says Cameron, who is making the video available to Fast Forward Weekly on December 6.

“For three days after her release I was emotionally numb, as her severe facial bruises and broken tooth had a big effect on me,” says Charles Nabors. “Then I became depressed for a period of time, which later turned to anger.”

Susan Nabors says she brought this story to the media because she feels the larger issue of police brutality and the public complaint process needs to be examined.

“I’ve been an activist, I’m a feminist and I march and I’m a union person, I’ve been on school councils for my daughters and I just feel as a citizen I can’t just sit there,” she says. “I’m scared all the time and I never was scared before. I lock my doors so that police can’t get in.”

The Calgary Police Service would not comment on this matter because it’s before the courts.

 


Comments: 35

noodleboy wrote:

Where can I find the video?

on Dec 6th, 2012 at 12:38pm Report Abuse

Drew Anderson wrote:

Suzy Thompson is meeting with the lawyer as we speak (okay, write) and we will hopefully have a copy up on the site later today.

on Dec 6th, 2012 at 1:15pm Report Abuse

Suzy Thompson wrote:

I've seen the video. It happened exactly as Susan says it did. As soon as the principle lawyer gives the go ahead we'll have it up.

on Dec 6th, 2012 at 2:10pm Report Abuse

Wisefull01 wrote:

Obviously CPS are not very well trained to deal with intoxicated humans as individuals. And you should all remember " who police the police?"...nobody and everybody, and neither are any more responsible, then the other. They do what they feel is right in their eyes...right or wrong! And they are always, always RIGHT. And very seldom to never, will they ever admit they were wrong in any situation. They all want to be heroes. And they all CYPA(cover your partners ass) too many attitudes/pre-madonas/ want to be heroes just like their boss!
Something I soon realized is when you call emergency services to your aid, you don't have a choice who comes. If there is an ambulance attendant that is abusive or really hard to deal with...too bad! Or an officer whom you might of had a history with, too bad! you have little choice.

on Dec 6th, 2012 at 9:29pm Report Abuse

Bellablue wrote:

I am a 53 years old female, and I also have a very similar story of a brutal assault on myself, and my 20 year old daughter, on AISH disability, by the CPP.
Don't ever call the police to your house, not even accidentally. They will enter your home, and do whatever they like. Then after they beat you up, they lye and say that your beating was justified because you resisted arrest and assaulted ever cop that was there. Oh and you may just get tazered. That is what they did to my daughter. Then they beat me up while I was in handcuffs. We were both charged with resisting arrest and two counts of assaulting police officers. What was so shocking was the amount of lying that went on among all the cops, even the medics at the jail lied about what was said in favor of the cops. I have never been in on ounce of trouble in my life, or my daughter. When the district attorney got the medical file on my daughter, they dropped all charges, then throughout my case and used the words "excessive force". I didn't even have to step foot inside the court room. I also in the process of making a complaint, and it has taken months to get anything done. The police officer I was assigned to was transferred out of that department, and my case was not given to anyone to follow through with. If I had not called to inquirer why they had not called back, nothing would have been done. Please file a complaint when you have been unjustly treated by the police. Things will only get worse if we do not standup for the rights of the people.

on Dec 6th, 2012 at 10:57pm Report Abuse

Drew Anderson wrote:

If anyone would like to share their story with us, please contact either Suzy Thompson at sthompson@ffwd.greatwest.ca or Drew Anderson at danderson@ffwd.greatwest.ca

on Dec 7th, 2012 at 12:01am Report Abuse

Patrick2892 wrote:

Susan Nabors maybe should check into rehab and quit blaming others for your poor decisions and behaviour!

on Dec 8th, 2012 at 2:17pm Report Abuse

Suzy Thompson wrote:

Do you mean one is justified in hitting a person who's been drinking?

on Dec 8th, 2012 at 3:39pm Report Abuse

Ron wrote:

My suspicion was correct. I was sure that, sooner or later, some posterior aperture would read of Mrs. Nabor's claim and enter the standard "blame the victim" tripe. Of COURSE it's all her fault! That makes it easy to turn the page and pretend the world is all sunshine and roses.
Remember the 2007 brutal murder of Robert Dziekanski - a visitor to our country - by mendacious R.C.M.P. thugs. That honourable organisation tried to suppress the video of that crime. Said video only became available after the man who recorded it obtained a court order to demand its release. It has since been viewed world-wide by hundreds of millions of people.
In their self-serving testimony, the involved honourable officers quite clearly perjured themselves numerous times. But they are honourable protectors of the peace. So are they all. All honourable!
The incident has caused the world to cast its prior high opinion of our nation into the lowest level of the out-house. Anyone who has visited Europe in the years before and since that event can attest that the disgust for and contempt of Canada held by many people there remains high.
But what has been done about it? After FIVE YEARS, sweet F--- all. The degree of shabby efforts to deny the obvious, blame the victim, and sweep all under the carpet in that affair was and continues to be sickening. And if it isn't on video, they try to pretend it never happened.
Anyone who can claim that they have NEVER seen police - who are supposed to be the agents of our government who protect our constitutionally-entrenched and judicially enforceable rights and freedoms - commit grievous abuses of same is either legally or wilfully blind.
It happens, Patrick2892, virtually daily right here in Calgary. You are free to be a fool as you wish - and you certainly seem to be one - but do NOT try to pretend to be omniscient, and do NOT try to sweep away what may well prove to be yet another utterly intolerable denial of human rights and fundamental freedoms with your pompous, condescending drivel.

on Dec 8th, 2012 at 3:48pm Report Abuse

awatd wrote:

A few years ago my friend was lightly beaten and arrested for trying to push past a cop in a crowded bar. He claimed that he didn't notice it was a cop, that he didn't resist arrest just tried to reason with him and that he was hit and put in arm bars. I didn't really believe him and thought he must have been belligerent. Then we were out on Canada day and as the party spilled out in to the street a girl in her early 20's opened her off sales and didn't hear the cop yelling at her to come over to the street where he was parked. He ran through the crowd, tackled her so hard she came out of her shoes and hit the pavement in a belly flop. She was then put in an arm bar and carried to the street, slammed on to the hood of the car so hard her bra inserts flew over the car. All this time the cop was yelling 'Quit resisting!' She wasn't resisting but her joints didn't bend the way he was pulling them. Ticketable offence? Maybe if you were on a power trip (I would have thought a reasonable officer would give a warning and dump the open cooler) But the abuse she received in front of a crowd of people yelling at him for using excessive force while other officers stood there and did nothing is a sign of a sick training program that encourages jarhead mentality and escalating situations rather than deescalating.

@Patrick#? People jumping to blame the victim is why these abuses are able to persist.

on Dec 8th, 2012 at 6:39pm Report Abuse

Bellablue wrote:

Hey Susan, doesn't that sound like something a cop would say...(Patrick) Just a though.
Keep your chin up, Keep fighting the good fight. Thank you for doing this. More of us should have the BALLS to do what you are doing. You can ask any attorney how many phone calls they get every day, from victims wanting to file complains about police brutality. So why are we not hearing about them? Is it because people don't want to be bothered, or are they too afraid? Susan Nabors is very afraid, and yet she is doing this because it is the right thing to do. For GODS sake, people like Patrick, think about it. Do you not realize how you have just victimized this poor woman all over again. Your comments cut through to my bones. I don't want to think about what you have done to her with your insane comments. I pray she can find it in her heart to forgive
ONE LOVE
One Love

on Dec 8th, 2012 at 8:31pm Report Abuse

Agent666 wrote:

Allowing the police to unionize was a really dumb idea. Police unions provide another layer of protection for a group that already wields considerable power in society. And we need to seriously look at an all-civilian, elected Police Commission that has the power to go over the Chief's head and fire police officers.

There are too many police, and the hiring standards are too lax. Reducing the numbers of officers, increasing pay scales, and toughening the selection process would raise standards. You get what you pay for, and we've been buying economy. Here's one example: I know a fellow (acquaintance since my teenage years) who is now a Sergeant with the CPS who has both EPILEPSY and a volcanic anger problem. Yet this guy gas a forty calibre pistol and arrest powers. Affirmative action hiring has also watered down hiring standards--women and minorities are allowed to score lower on the PARE (physical aptitude) test than white males, in both the RCMP and most city police (CPS, etc.) hiring processes. None of this helps attract quality personnel.

And if you think the cops have problems, have a look at correctional officers:

http://www.orwelltoday.com/policebrutes.shtml

The Kyle James Young case was a staggering example of extreme abuse by law enforcement personnel. The Solicitor General and Crown Prosecutor's offices were too scared of AUPE to thoroughly investigate what appears to have been the homicide of a youth in custody. And, under pressure from the union, the NDP and other Provincial opposition parties didn't touch the case with a ten foot-pole, either.

To all of you blaming this woman for somehow bringing this upon herself, remember this: YOU COULD BE IN THIS POSITION! As a perfectly law-abiding civilian, I recall being detained--at gun point--by CPS officers, because I resembled a person who was wanted for a series of muggings (the actual perp was caught about a month later). I was polite and deferential to the four nice men with Glocks and batons, but I dread to think what could have happened if I lost my cool and the cops were having a lousy day. And, with Redfraud's Charter-violating legislative spree, we can expect BC-style policing to come to Alberta:

http://www.vancouversun.com/entertainment/Sober+senior+fined+failing+blow+breathalyzer/5976530/story.html

on Dec 9th, 2012 at 8:07pm Report Abuse

Drew Anderson wrote:

Sorry folks, still trying to get the video, the lead lawyer is saying no, but we're working on it.

on Dec 10th, 2012 at 11:23am Report Abuse

standuporbeputdown wrote:

The entire police culture is corrupted by routine Charter violations and a pervasive “us vs. them” mentality. When and why did the police start viewing citizens as enemies and potential threats instead of fellow citizens? Police are neither military officers nor do their powers extend to judge, jury and punisher of all crimes-the primary job of police officers is to maintain the peace. Our judicial system deals with breaches of the peace, a system that the police often hold in contempt as we see the ever-increasing encroachment by police on public life with justice as they see fit, never mind the law.

Any organization is defined by its leadership and Chief Hanson is responsible for the behaviour of his officers and for the culture within the force; unless he steps up and cleans up the corruption within the force, blatant disregard for our rights and our laws will continue.

The dearth of leadership within the Calgary Police Service is serious. Read “The Wolf and the Sheepdog,” published in 2008 by a Calgary cop using the pseudonym “John Smith” and reviewed here in the “And Justice For All” blog

http://andjusticeforall-calgary.blogspot.ca/

How many people fail to complain or plead guilty to “assaulting a police” officer or “resisting arrest” when their personal security and finances are put at risk by overzealous officers? How many officers suffer from a poisonous work environment? The police should be held to a higher, not a lower standard for criminality and by overlooking offenses by officers, the Chief is condoning criminal behaviour, undermining morale within the force and increasing distrust from citizens. Calgarians deserve better.

on Dec 10th, 2012 at 12:53pm Report Abuse

buddy wrote:

Sorry to all you cops out there but you have completely lost all creditablity with the public. I would just take this woman at her word. That's what happens when you constantly lie and been shown repeatedly to be lying in videos and then telling us we can't beloved our own eyes! We do need a new police chief one who understands the police are here to serve and protect us not violent police officers.

on Dec 10th, 2012 at 5:12pm Report Abuse

buddy wrote:

*belive own eyes*

on Dec 10th, 2012 at 5:19pm Report Abuse

officematt2002 wrote:

I am not surprised at all by this. Something is definitely wrong with the police services throughout this country and what we as the public allow them to get away with. Funny how in Europe they do not get much respect and people will go out of their way to argue and harangue them...likely all due to the way the police were in fact government-sponsored murderers in Himmler's payroll. The tables have changed, and need to change here. Take back the streets people.

on Dec 10th, 2012 at 9:17pm Report Abuse

Ron wrote:

Police everywhere have ALWAYS served as the willing goon squad for the power elite of the place and time. They have always unquestioningly done whatever "massa" asks, often to a more intense degree than was requested. There is a good reason they get called "pigs" - they earned the title.
The primary error was in arming them. Now look: They grow ever-fatter off of propaganda and the politics of fear. C.P.S. has its own "Luftwaffe" with helicopters newer than many in the Canadian Forces - but they want still better. Some police even have their own armoured fighting machines ("Panzers").
It is a fact that the police of any of Canada's 10 largest cities could out-gun a regiment of the WWI Canadian Expeditionary force. Some could out-gun a WWII or Korean War infantry regiment. And for what?
To keep the citizens beaten down, that's what. S. 91 of the 1867 Constitution Act seeks "peace, order and good government." If we achieve a dim representation of the first two through police thuggery, are they worth the cost? And have we ever truly had the third?
If you allow the existence of an organisation wherein the members are armed like, dress like, look like (tattoo-covered), and talk like Himmler's Allegemeine Schutz Staffel, you should not be surprised to find some of those members decide to also act like the S.S. did. After all, they've got nothing to lose.
I have no sympathy for police who whine about how hard their jobs allegedly are. They are extremely well compensated, and NONE of them were conscripted or does the job under duress. They could just quit and get a real job somewhere else.
Suggested reading: Philip Zimbardo: "The Lucifer Effect". Hannah Arendt: "Eichmann in Jerusalem: A Report on the Banality of Evil."

on Dec 10th, 2012 at 11:30pm Report Abuse

AP wrote:

There are good cops and there are bad cops, much like there are good people and there are bad people. They come from the same society that we belong to.

And after dealing with the dredge of society every day, unfortunately, most of them start seeing every one as being dredge and a potential threat.

However, when there are barbarians at the gates, all of us - each and every one - wants them to man the walls.

on Dec 11th, 2012 at 9:22am Report Abuse

Christie Braun wrote:

At any rate, I believe Susan 100%. I hope she wins your case!

on Dec 11th, 2012 at 11:31am Report Abuse

Ron wrote:

For AP. We don't need explanations for the incidence of police misbehaviour. We need its existence honestly acknowledged and honesty dealt with - not covered up with blame the victim tactics and sob stories about poor, poor, pitiful Officer ----.
If they can't stand the heat, get the hell out of the kitchen. Their effectiveness(assuming they ever had any) is gone, and they do not serve a constructive purpose. As I said above: no one forced them into the job.
As for this "barbarians at the gates" nonsense, what hallucinogen are you using? That has happened in our society exactly - let's see now, I'm counting, ahhh - NEVER. YOU may want a psychologically disturbed strutting martinet to "man" your "walls" (where do you conjure up this tripe from?), but that is precisely the sort of person I DO NOT want looking after my safety. I can do that very well by myself. Rather, that is the sort of person I DO NOT want having access to lethal weapons. There are psychiatric interventions or, if necessary, prisons for that sort of gangster.

on Dec 11th, 2012 at 6:05pm Report Abuse

AP wrote:

Ron - If you want to find out about barbarians at the gates, take a gander through the streets of Mogadishu or Kabul on your own one day. Or even make it closer to home... Conspicuously display a wad load of cash and take the c-train at night...

on Dec 11th, 2012 at 8:56pm Report Abuse

Ron wrote:

For AP: Hmm. A look at the map shows that Mogadishu and Kabul are NOT in Canada. Therefore, they are of absolutely ZERO relevance to this issue, to me or to anyone else save those in the midst of a delusion.
As for me and wads of cash: I have walked many of the darkest streets of Detroit, places that make the worst of Calgary seem like Shangri-La in comparison, with absolutely no problem whatsoever. And in Calgary MANY times. In my life, many fools have tried to show me how tough they are. They very quickly realised the vast magnitude of their error. As I said above: I don't need anyone else to take care of my safety.
And do you mean to suggest that C.P.S. could/would ever do anything mid-night muggings? Fat chance - unless it occurred in a Tim Hortons parking lot.

on Dec 12th, 2012 at 2:12pm Report Abuse

officematt2002 wrote:

AP, the word is "dregs". You dredge a harbour or navigable waterway.

Stop apologizing for the police. They would be the first ones to save themselves in a time of dire need, not the ones to depend on.

on Dec 12th, 2012 at 10:51pm Report Abuse

chachiherbert wrote:

FFWD community you can forget about seeing the video. The lawyer will never show it. All that is on the video is police procedure for handling a perpetrator who was resisting arrest with every muscle of her inebriated body.

I would watch the video if it included all actions from the start.

I read this article and it was like watching an episode of CAMPUS PD on Much Music. 20 year old girls crying because they don't feel like they should be arrested for lying to the police.

Do the followers of this paper really think we can afford a police service that just stands aside until the perpetrator decides they are guilty, and wants to be taken to jail?
Should the police just let perpetrators go because they are making the arrest difficult?

I don't know why the FFWD would take the role as the troll for Susan Nabors? If your wanting to create hype about police brutality, shouldn't you start with a known innocent victim? Now lets wait to see which story has more facts that can be documented true. What the FFWD threw up? Or what I made up?

P.S. I don't know the Calgary Police rules of arresting somebody. I'm just like Susan Nabors, coppers will never catch me, they only catch stupid criminals.

on Dec 13th, 2012 at 3:58pm Report Abuse

Drew Anderson wrote:

I removed certain portions of the above comment, due to concerns over libel, including a fairly in-depth breakdown of what allegedly transpired that night and some personal comments about Nabors.

chachiherbert: We're not against having open discussions on this site, but you have to be careful what you write about people.

How do you supposedly have such detailed information in regards to what happened prior to the arrest, inside the house and at the police station? That's not an accusation, I'm simply curious.

Our staff writer, Suzy Thompson, the author of this article, has seen the video and it doesn't correspond to what you described.

on Dec 13th, 2012 at 4:47pm Report Abuse

chachiherbert wrote:

I understand what you had to do Drew. I know police officers from several places, and was generalizing.
I will just point out and use what has been written and admitted in the article.
- History of creating disturbance (2006 fighting outside house)
- Party drinking "been at a party, I was drinking"
- Creates disturbance “Outside the house my wife was making a bit of commotion, loud voice, as she was upset about something."
- Refuses to ID herself to responding officer "I’m not going to give you identification"
- Tried bossing officer around "I don’t want you here. I want you to leave"
- Tried to hide from investigating officer "I go into the bathroom to create physical distance"
- Slamming bathroom door on investigating officer "I don’t want her touching me"
- It required two arresting officers to move her into the kitchen, because she was screaming, kicking, and pulling at drawers. "I’m holding on to the drawer"
-At the police station she continues verbally abusing the officers of the law “They didn’t like what I was saying."
-Officers required a spit hood for protection from her "I’m kind of mouthy."
-Had to be processed physically because of her resisting "she bent her finger to stop the officer from pulling"
-The officers tried to pin her against the wall, for a submission, but she was kicking the officer that was supporting, so they had to pin her to the floor “I’m trying to flail around, I need to break free"

This is what is given to us in the article, retold by Susan Nabors, and quoted by Suzy Thompson.
I would like to know as a guilty perpetrator, why it's okay to be defiant and ignorant to the law and it's officers, and refuse detention?
Just show the part in the video where she was obedient to the law, politely answered the questions and was behaving in a civil manner that is acceptable to society standards while in custody. Compliant and peaceful while being processed, but the cops needed to pin her head to the floor anyway.
I read this article and thought this woman needed a doctor and not waste her money on a lawyer.
Being confronted by somebody of authority should not make you exhibit psychotic behaviour.
The patrick2892, got blasted in the comments for leaving a responsible comment. Go to rehab and learn acceptance for your actions and behaviour.
Ignorance of the law is no excuse. It's not excessive force because you weren't let off with a warning.

on Dec 14th, 2012 at 5:44am Report Abuse

Ron wrote:

This report has a vital unexplained aspect: How did police get into Mrs. Nabor's house - especially in the middle of the night? It can onlly come about legally through the invitation of a resident. And of course, we note the above comment by Bellablue. Be assured that anyone who crosses my threshold without my consent - irrespective of the time of day - will suffer the consequences. It is irrelevant who they claim to be or how they are dressed. Centuries of law in every country that bases its law on English Common Law support allow this response.
Absent information to adequately explain this point, it is difficult to conclude on the issue. However, at the end of his above pontification, chachiherbert repeats the trite saw "ignorance of the law is no excuse." But that plays BOTH ways. It IS excessive force if any force beyond the minimum necessary is applied. That is a question for the Court to decide upon hearing all of the evidence.
In all this talk of "ignorance" by Mrs. Nabors, chachiherbert - and the other 2 police apologists who have been a part of this forum - seem ignorant of Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. As it has existed for more than 30 years, this seems inexcusable. It is easy to envision this lot in 1933: They would be standing in a Berlin street, screaming "We want the Enabling Act" (let Hitler suspend Germany's constitution and rule of law and rule by decree).
Mrs. Nabors should swear an Information before a Justice of the Provincial Court to seek criminal charges against any whom she believes have violated the Criminal Code and her CHARTER rights and should not allow the Crown Prosecutors office to try to sweep the issue under the table - because it will certainly try to.

on Dec 14th, 2012 at 5:51pm Report Abuse

chachiherbert wrote:

Vampires, your thinking of vampires. You have to invite a Vampire into your house before they can cross the threshold.
Nice of you Ron to help keep spreading ignorance and hate with the FFWD.
How can you believe that you can commit a crime and then go home and close the door so you can't be arrested. Apparently delusional people can.

Being Part I of the Constitution Act, 1982
Whereas Canada is founded upon principles that recognize the supremacy of God and the rule of law:
RIGHTS AND FREEDOMS IN CANADA.
1. The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms guarantees the rights and freedoms set out in it subject only to such reasonable limits prescribed by law as can be demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society.
FUNDAMENTAL FREEDOMS.
2. Everyone has the following fundamental freedoms:
(a) freedom of conscience and religion;
(b) freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication;
(c) freedom of peaceful assembly; and
(d) freedom of association.
(e) freedom to do as Ron says, because he knows.

on Dec 15th, 2012 at 8:38am Report Abuse

Ron wrote:

Unfortunately, attempt at rational debate in this forum too often ends up to having to waste endless time explaining the most basic principles to one who is uninformed, be it due to ignorance, sheer foolishness, of wilful intent to try to pound through their skewed perception of reality despite the facts. That was why I just gave up on the forum about a year ago, and why I will again when this issue is fully debated. But right now, I must do it again.
Long-time tripe purveyor chachiherbert is at it again. He copies a fragment of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Isn't that just special? Oh, look, he even adds his own silly-assed "s. 2(e)" as a puerile attempt to seem clever. What a clown! Ha ha. But to actually understand what he copied must wait for another time.
It is vital to note that nowhere in the originating article did anyone allege that Mrs. Nabors or any other party at her house had committed any crime. C.P.S. reponded to some unknown party's report of noise late at night. There is no Criminal Code violation of "Disturbing the peace." That is a Calgary Municipal By-law.
That means there is NO authority to arrest one who is being charged with that offense. There is also this other part of the Charter - way down there, beyond the ken of the lazy, the attention-deficit disordered and the superciliously self-righteous (can you hear me chach?). It's all about "presumption of innocence."
Given that:
a. No crime was originally alleged.

b. There was no power to arrest in the event of a finding of the given probable offense being committed,

c. That police have NO authority to enter any person's home without a warrant at any time unless in "hot pursuit" of a party who, on reasonable and probable grounds, the pursuing police believe to be the perpetrator -

the question remains: How did police get into Mrs. Nabors' home? Contrary to what chachiherbert seems to believe, actual life in Canada does not evolve like a scene from some trashy "action" film or U.S. television series. We do not let armed goons in uniforms simply crash down one's door, stomp in and start tossing people about. That would earn them Criminal Code charges under s. 348 (Breaking and Entering With Intent ... etc.) or s. 349 (Being Unlawfully in a Dwelling-house).
A further question the Crown will have to explain at trial is "How can a person be "assaulting a peace officer" (s. 270) when the person was simply resisting an undeclared, hence unlawful assault on her person?
This infringes or denies Mrs. Nabors' Charter S. 7 right.
I realise this is another one of those annoying parts far beyond chachiherbert's attention span, so I copy it herein: "Everyone has the right to life, liberty and the security of the person and the right not to be deprived thereof except in accordance with the principles of fundamental justice".
- Does chachiherbert presume that any uniformed goon can just do whatever the Hell they feel like doing? (Remember: Hell's Angel's consider their "colours" a uniform.) That we live by some Divine Right passed down by God Above to Officer Kropke - or whomever the name of the moment is? Thankfully, we do not.
And - a pre-emptive strike here: No, it was NOT soldiers or police who obtained the rights and freedoms we have. It was ordinary citizens who struggled and endured centuries of oppression, including such charms as being burned at the stake - committed by soldiers and police acting in the name of the megalomanic tyrant or oligarchy of the moment - who won those rights and freedoms with their agony and their lives. So I will never let anyone try to limit or deny them to me. Anyone who does is a World-Class Fool.

on Dec 15th, 2012 at 10:55am Report Abuse

TC wrote:

On a plain definition of the offense of “disturbing the peace”, even with the information given by the police, there was no reason to arrest Susan Nabors. The Criminal Code of Canada defines “disturbing the peace” as a petty crime which can only be committed when“not… in a dwelling house”! So how could they think it necessary to enter her house when the call was about disturbing the peace?

“175. (1) Every one who
(a) not being in a dwelling-house, causes a disturbance in or near a public place,
(i) by fighting, screaming, shouting, swearing, singing or using insulting or obscene language, …
is guilty of an offence punishable on summary conviction.”
(Criminal Code of Canada, http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/C-46)

I guess this explains why the only thing they arrested her for was asaulting officers, which they later dropped.

By definition, when the police arrived and saw that the person(s) making noise outside had gone inside, there was nothing more they needed to do. Their actions of not only entering Susan Nabors’ home but also holding her in custody over night and apparently beating her, were completely inappropriate.

Also, it looks like we’ve got a troll trying to attack both Susan Nabors and others who have been hurt by police, and control the conversation. I suggest that this forum doesn’t give them that power by ignoring their unproductive comments.

I am very glad that this case is going to be heard in court.

on Dec 16th, 2012 at 1:38pm Report Abuse

MiLK wrote:

More important than the unanswered questioned about how the officers got into the house is the fact that Chachi has not adequately answered the questions as to how he happens to know what he does (if he really does) about what happened that night. He professes to know exactly what is on the video and then in the next sentence says he has not seen it. Is he psychic? He's able to present aspects of the Constitution that suit him - and even make up some of his own. Is he in government? He also seems to know about the causes of psychotic behavior - which apparently do not stem from confrontations with authority. It's not too difficult to figure out how Chachi knows what he says he knows if indeed he really does - and we can only take his word for it. Any one of several plausible answers only serves to support Susan's side of the debate. Think about it ... There are only a few different kinds of people who get some kind of twisted satisfaction out of blaming the victim.

If he cares to come clean with a real answer - I'd also like to know how getting drunk at a party (only one drinking event mentioned here), and getting loud later, translates into a need for rehab. Unless, of course, again, Chachi and Patrick are privy to information about Ms Nabors that the rest of us are not.

This forum is most informative. I just found out what a troll is - thanks to Chachi's misuse of the term - and read that it is useless to try to reason with one. Best left under the bridge. So, Ron, I've appreciated reading your rational, intelligent attempts and I completely understand why you'll be leaving (once again). P.S. - I didn't realize that you're actually mentioned in the Constitution - good for you!

Meanwhile, I've heard enough, here and elsewhere, to be more wary next time I answer the knock at my door. Good luck Ms Nabors with your court case - I suspect the CPS would do best to not let it go that far - press is bad for business - and city coffers overflow. And on that note ... exactly how much is all of this nonsense costing individual taxpayers?

on Dec 17th, 2012 at 2:48pm Report Abuse

Ron wrote:

Thank you for your comments MILK. As my absolutely parting shot, a quote attributed to many:

NEVER TRY TO ARGUE WITH AN IDIOT. HE'LL
JUST DRAG YOU DOWN TO HIS LEVEL, THEN
DEFEAT YOU WITH EXPERIENCE.

So, kids: It's been more than a slice! It's been a whole loaf. Such a drag that it's gone stale. Au Revoir, Auf Wiedersehen, Do Svidanye, Adios, etc. etc.

on Dec 18th, 2012 at 12:40pm Report Abuse

chachiherbert wrote:

Milk, you are very close to why articles like this, with no proven victim, shouldn't be given a stage for revenge. Did you really think that ambulance chaser was taking down the CPS with a $50000 damages case? They never wanted to air the details of that night, trial is the farthest thing from victory for them.
I don't even call it news, that the FFWD led with, it should be called a full page add.
Feel free to storm your gates, selectively believing what the media hypes that week, because you don't want to hear anything contrary to your beliefs.

on Dec 21st, 2012 at 8:53am Report Abuse

standuporbeputdown wrote:

Fast Forward is a community paper-it keeps us abreast of all sorts of happenings in our city. A lawsuit was filed, which is a matter of public record, and the reporter did what any journalist would do-investigate and present information - the story from the victim, the police notes and the video evidence. At this point, there is only an allegation of brutality before us; however, charges against Ms. Nabors were dropped.

It is always sad when citizens must turn to the court for remedies-it is often indicative of a failure on some level. In this case the process that provides for resolving complaints of police misconduct clearly failed and this alone should be something that concerns us all. We need to know that the avenues we take to voice our concerns flow to meaningful resolution and that allegations of police brutality are taken seriously. Police brutality is a very real problem and it appears as though investigations not only take excessive time, but do not honestly address these issues that are corrosive for a civil society. When a crime is committed by an officer, he or she must face prosecution just like any other accused criminal who has the presumption of innocence until found guilty. The separate judiciary for the police as administered by the Police Commission must be overhauled. Citizens ought not to have to sue to have their concerns heard.

This forum is addressing known incidents of brutality where there were no serious attempts to resolve the cases with officers obstructing investigations and giving false evidence. If we want to honour our officers they must act with integrity, something that is disappearing at an alarming rate in law enforcement. In a democracy, we don’t all get what we want, but we must all abide by the same laws, whether we agree or not. This applies to police officers, too. If laws need to be changed, there are processes for that but no one, not individual officers nor the Chief have the authority to arbitrarily decide what laws they will acknowledge. Whether a crime is committed within the force or in the greater community, it is essential that perpetrators face justice.

Take a look at the aforementioned book The Wolf and the Sheepdog written by Constable Brix-Maffei (writing under the pseudonym John Smith) who currently serves in the Calgary Police Service. He reveals his thirst for violence and his distain for citizens and the law informed by his own self-righteousness. You may point to Constabe Brix-Maffei and say he’s the exception in the CPS, most cops are good; however, the behaviour so vividly described in his book, if not addressed as the serious issue it is, but instead being condoned and encouraged will only get worse and we will continue to see more harm done by police and mistrust between the citizens of Calgary and the CPS. It would be interesting if Fast Forward investigates the case of Constable Brix-Maffei. Has he been prosecuted for his well-documented crimes or are his crimes being swept into the “blue wall of silence”? We all need to decide: when is enough enough? What kind of community do we want? Is it acceptable for police to break the law while carrying out their duties? What standards shall our civil servants adhere to? Do we want a police state and to live in fear or can we once again have a police force that we trust, that behaves with integrity and that adds to the quality of life in our city?

We deserve to have sincere, respectful discourse on this matter. Our officers are well-equipped and most always have a partner and other resources to do their job. They are well-compensated. They need to work without causing harm or engaging in criminal activity and must be accountable for their actions. It’s time the Chief takes responsibility for the force and insist that officers serve with integrity in upholding and abiding by the laws they are sworn to protect. When there is evidence of a breach in the law, officers must face prosecution and let the judicial system decide. Thanks to Fast Forward for shining light on this very important issue.

on Dec 21st, 2012 at 7:52pm Report Abuse


Post comment: (Login or Register)


Content © Fast Forward Weekly | Great West Newspapers LP | Glacier Community Media

About Us Contact Us Careers Privacy Policy Terms of Use