On November 5th, the London Anonymous group held a rally, entitled the Million Mask March, to protest government corruption, unjust laws, and police surveillance, among other things. Over the next few days, the police decided to conduct an investigation, in which they figured it was ok, to constantly harass non violent activist’s for their footage, going so far as to threaten to break down doors and threatening to confiscate computers, cameras, and harddrives. Nothing ever came of these threats, and indeed, most of the footage the cops were asking for was already online. In fact, the police released a press statement, thanking those members of the public who posted their video’s online, which included those being threatened. So, on one hand, you have the cops harassing people for footage, and on the other, you have those same cops, thanking those who were harassed.
On December 4th, Mike Roy, and Bailey Lamon, of The Indignants, witness 2 local thugs violently arrest a man downtown London. They start filming and taking pictures with their cellphones. After said arrest, they walk home. A couple of days later, the 2 said thugs visit Mike and Bailey. “We’ll toss your place upside down“ they said. “We’re gonna come back with a warrant” they said. However, when confronted about what he said, pottruff immediately backtracks and responds 3 times with “search your place”. And they never bothered coming with a warrant. In fact, they never bothered to come again for this. Seems to me, that if you stand your ground against these thugs, when they are threatening to violate your rights, as they violate your rights by harassing you, they back down. For a little bit. Which is kind of sad when you think about it. They keep trying the same thing, with the same results. You’d think they’d try something different.
Kevin Jones seems to have born the brunt of the harassment from London Police Services as of late. He has been constantly called and harassed over footage, and most recently over a facebook post he made.
I have been informed from people that work in the field, that it is difficult to get the police to do welfare checks on people, when social workers and others ask them to, as required by law. WHAT THE FUCK are they doing pretending to do a welfare check on a peaceful non violent activist, when they can’t even be bothered to do welfare checks on those who actually may need a welfare check.(and lets not get into the whole idea of cops doing “welfare checks” to begin with)
Kevin recieved several more calls after this from unknown numbers, which, if you’ve ever experienced this type of harassment, you’d know that the police never call you from a number in which you can call them direct.(even though they have cellphones) They always block their number. I wonder why they don’t have any transparency there. Seems to me, that public servants should be more than willing to give out their phone numbers to those who ask. Especially considering that pottruff is always looking for new avenues of communication. I’ve asked him several times in the past for his phone number, but he keeps on giving me the stations number. Apparently, it’s ok for him and his friends to call and harass non violent activists, but not ok for the rest of the world. Cops are obviously above the law, when it comes to harassment and intimidation.
From the Canadian Criminal Code;
- 264. (1) No person shall, without lawful authority and knowing that another person is harassed or recklessly as to whether the other person is harassed, engage in conduct referred to in subsection (2) that causes that other person reasonably, in all the circumstances, to fear for their safety or the safety of anyone known to them.
Marginal note:Prohibited conduct
(2) The conduct mentioned in subsection (1) consists of
- (a) repeatedly following from place to place the other person or anyone known to them;
- (b) repeatedly communicating with, either directly or indirectly, the other person or anyone known to them;
- (c) besetting or watching the dwelling-house, or place where the other person, or anyone known to them, resides, works, carries on business or happens to be; or
- (d) engaging in threatening conduct directed at the other person or any member of their family.
(3) Every person who contravenes this section is guilty of
- (a) an indictable offence and is liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding ten years; or
- (b) an offence punishable on summary conviction.
There is a hell of a lot more to this story. Watch here for more stories, and check out our previous articles.