#Archie Thomson | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

if-you-fan-a-fire · 1 year

Text

"Commissioner Reports on Dorland Case," Toronto Globe. August 3, 1933. Page 1, 3 & 8. ---- Suggestion that serious consideration should be given as to the advisability of proceedings being instituted against four Detective-Sergeants who fired shots while arresting Albert Dorland and Williams Toohey on April 7, 1900. contained in the Royal Commission report on the Dorland case, released yesyesterday. In upper row, left to right Chief Constable D. C Draper, who is cleared of complicity in Inducing Dorland to commit the crime; Judge Emerson Coatsworth who tried Dorland; Justice A. Courtney Kingstone, the Commissioner, and former Inspector of Detectives Alex. J. Murray, also cleared of complicity in inducing the hold-up, but whose conduct of the case is criticized. In lower row, left to right are the four detectives who made the arrests: James Thomson, Patrick Hogan, Archie McCathie and George Taft.

///

"Sole Aim Was to Stop Hold-Up But Deferred Arrest Scored In Dorland Case Findings," Toronto Globe. August 3, 1933. Page 1. ---- Commissioner Kingstone Suggests Government Consider Advisability of Proceeding Against Detectives Who Made Arrest, Because of Shooting - Retaining of Dorland at Headquarters for Eight Hours Condemned - Suggestion Made to Bar Magistrates From Police Boards ---- GOVERNMENT GIVES CONSIDERATION TO RECOMMENDATIONS IN REPORT ---- Condemning what the Commissioner defines as an attempt "either to kill both the occupants of the car or wound them grievously," Mr. Justice Kingstone, in his report to the Attorney-General of Ontario on the "Dorland case," recommends to the Government that "serious consideration should be given as to the advisability of proceedings being instituted against the four officers concerned, viz., Detective-Sergeants Thomson, Tuft, Hogan and McCathie, under Subsection C, Section 264, or Section 273, of the Criminal Code of Canada."

Not only were Chief Draper and former Inspector of Detectives Murray cleared of complicity inducing any hold-up but their the sole aim and object was to prevent a crime and capture the participants.

Code Requirements. The sections of the Code under which his Lordship suggests that the four detective officers might be charged as a result of the shooting on Wellesley Street the day Dorland and Toohey were taken in their automobile, are: Section 264 (c) liability to life mprisonment for one who with intent to commit murder shoots at any person; and Section 273, liability to life imprisonmenet for any one who shoots with intent to maim, disfigure, or disable any person.

Another recommendation of the report declares that: "In order to put our courts in a position where no such allegation (that the trial of Dorland was not fair and impartial) could be suggested or urged it might be well to consider the advisability of prohibiting Police Magistrates from sitting on Boards of Police Commissioners."

Acting Attorney-General Charles McCrea, prior to his departure from Toronto yesterday, stated the recommendations of the report would be taken under consideration by the Government. He had no comments to make. The report verbiage spoke for itself. The recommendation in respect to Police Magistrates being prohibited from sitting as Commissioners, it is believed, would require Legislative action by the Ontario Legislature.

The report unhesitatingly condemns the action of the police chiefs, Chief Draper and Inspector Murray, in keeping Dorland at police head-quarters from some time after the arrest, probably 3.30 in the afternoon, till nearly 1 In the morning.

Mr. Justice Kingstone finds that General Draper "did not make a good witness, and seemed uncertain and doubtful about what the exact occurrences were, and what was done and said at some of the conferences between himself and his chief inspectors, as well as the interview with Toohey. I am satisfied that this was due to the length of time that had elapsed since the events occurred."

Justice Kingstone, in his report, reviews the circumstances leading up to the incident which took place in April, 1930. In view of the time which had elapsed between then and the investigation, allowance had to be made for discrepancies in the evidence as some of the witnesses could not clearly recollect certain phases of the matter. But this did not account for "positive and emphatic statements sworn to and which cannot be accepted as true,' he held.

"In coming to the conclusion that I do on the matters before me, I am not unmindful of the splendid record of the Toronto police over many years. That the CIty of Toronto has been virtually free from the darking bank robberies that are not infrequent elsewhere is in no small measure dud to the splendid work of the Police Chiefs and the men on the force.

"In discussing the evidence reporting thereon it may be convenient to separate and divide the Inquiry under three heads, as follows:

"1. The preparations made by Dorland to rob the bank, and the police plans to frustrate it.

"2. The arrest of Dorland and Toohey.

"3. The conviction of Dorland and sentence imposed on him."

With respect to the preparations to rob the bank, his Lordship said that his Commission was restricted to the facts as they related to the administration of justice, and that this included the administration of law. It was for the Police Commission to decide about the methods used by the Toronto police force, he held. Nor had he the power to make any direct finding as to the propriety of the courses followed by Chief Draper or any of his assistants, as long as the plans made remained within the law, he said.

Events of Four Days. "The chief events with which this inquiry is concerned are really confined to four days: Saturday, Sunday, Monday and Tuesday, April 5, 6, 7, and 8, 1930. Dorland some time previously had been released from the Portsmouth Penitentlary, had been working at a filling station and garage in Toronto, where he met Toohey. He proposed to Toohey that he should join him in robbing a bank, and suggested that a third man, who turned out to be Bird of Hamilton, would join them in the enterprise. In the week before April 5, both Dorland and Toohey visited Bird at Hamilton, and discussed the proposed hold-up with him. Bird says, and I believe him, that Toohey took the most active party in endeavoring to persuade him to be a participant. Bird promised to see what he could about getting the guns which it proposed should be used in the hold-up, and pretended to both Dorland and Toohey that he would join them, and would take the Hamilton bus to Toronto to meet them on the night, April 6. I believe Bird he swears that this job was not in his line, and he never intended any part in it, and only told and Toohey what he did to get rid of them. I do think that both Dorland and Toohey were of the opinion that he (Bird) was to be one of the party.

"Toohey, who had informed the police of a projected bank in Hamilton a year previously, decided to play again the part spy and disclose the plot to the It is not clear whether at time Toohey knew Dorland's name. I am inclined to think that he did, though he swears he did not, and only knew him under the name Bert. Both these men had served terms at the Portsmouth Penitentiary, when working at the garage in Toronto became aware of the fact that they had been fellow-convicts."

'After recounting how Toohey was turned over to Chief Draper on April 5, because Toohey intimated he had some information and which ended Provincial Police connection with the case the Commissioner's report proceeds:

Reviews Facts.' "It will be proper now to state as briefly as possible the main facts as to what took place on Saturday, Sun- y and Monday, up to the arrest of Dorland and Toohey on Monday afternoon:

"Unfortunately General Draper's evidence is not very clear as to all that happened, and the instructions which he gave, or the information he received. He did not make a good witness, and seemed uncertain and doubtful about what the exact occurrences were, and what was done and said at some of the conferences be- tween himself and his chief inspectors, as well as the interview with Toohey. I am satisfied this was due to the length of time that had elapsed since these events occurred, and also because of the fact that he left the whole matter to a large extent in the hands of his Chief Inspector of Detectives, Murray, on whose experience and judgment in this matter he relied. The Chief Constable had only recently been appointed (in 1928), and had had apparently no previous police experience, and at this time had no reason to doubt the ability, capacity and competence of Inspector Murray to handle the job.

"An interview took place between Draper, Chisholm and Guthrie on Saturday morning in regard to what course should be taken, but after that fall subsequent plans, arrangements and preparations on the part of the police were made by Murray, with, of course, the knowledge and approval of Draper. Murray was in Guelph on Saturday morning, but on his return The was interviewed at the City Hall. There, the Chief, explained what he had heard from Toohey. An interview between Murray and Toohey took place at the former's home on Sunday afternoon, and on Sunday afternoon and evening the bank manager of the Royal Bank at the corner of Wellesley and Church Streets. and inis accountant were given guns to take to the bank, and the police plans were fully developed.

Police Information "I believe, and find, that the police by Sunday evening were in possession of certain information through contact with Toohey. Briefly summarized, the information was as follows:

"An attempt to rob the Royal Bank at the southwest corner of Wellesley and Church Streets was to be made about 10.30 on Monday morning by three persons whose names were Debar (who was Dorland), Barron and Bird. These men were armed with sawed-off shotguns, which had been purchased on York Street for fourteen dollars. One man was to come from Hamilton. The address of Debar was sufficiently indicated so that he could be located, and, of course, Toohey's address was known to the police. Toohey was to be one of th the party, but was now placing himself at the disposal of the police. Barron and Bird were to hold up the staff and Debar was to go into the vault. Debar's brother was to hire a car and drive it to the apartment, change the numbers, and, after the robbery return the car.

"Having this information, the steps taken by Murray and approved the Chief Constable were:

"1. To place and secrete five detectives, armed with revolvers, shot- guns and rifles, Inside the bank early on Monday, and concealed from any one coming into the bank.

"2. To locate and secrete another of squad of four armed detectives in a convenient spot in the immediate vicinity to prevent the escape of the bank robbers.

"3. Toohey was to keep in touch with Murray and give him such further information as possible.

"4. Toohey was to accompany the bandits to the bank door, and then leave them, and was not to be molested by the police, and a sufficient description of Toohey was in the hands of the men in these two 'squads to enable them to distinguish him from the robbers.

"5. The police squad in the bank were to 'get the two men that went into the bank.

"6. The instructions to these men were specific to get these men in the bank, and not outside. I believe that Draper did caution Toohey about committing any crime or taking any actual part in the robbery.

"7. Doherty, the bank manager, and his accountant were fully informed of what was being done.

No Check on Information. In reaching his conclusions with respect to the instructions given, his Lordship stated that he relied on the evidence of Detectives Thomson. Alexander, Skinner, Crowe, McAllister, and Dr. Miller, together with the notebooks. and testimony of Toohey.

"No steps were taken by Murray to check the information given him by Toohey, by shadowing him or watching the apartment, and these plans and preparations were proceeded with entirely on the word of Toohey, unverified and uncorroborated."

He then relates how five armed detectives under Detective Williams secreted themselves in the bank, while another squad under Detective Thomson were stationed at McKelvey's drug store.

"The action of Dorland and Toohey should now be traced. Toohey was paid by the Chief $3 on Saturday morning. After Toohey's interview with the Chief he and Dorland went to a second-hand store on York Street on Saturday morning, and with moneys contributed to by both purchased two shotguns in the name of Debar. On the same evening they purchased the necessary ammunition. and Dorland sawed the shotguns ready for use. This was done at an apartment house at Winchester and Sackville Streets, where he was then staying: and Toohey spent Sunday night with him at this apartment. Dorland's brother hired a car from the 'Hertz Drive Yourself' motor garage and on Monday morning Toohey took the car to No. 4 Police Station to meet Chisholm, whom he had made an appointment with at Murray's suggestion."

Told Time of Hold-up. Mr. Justice Kingstone relates how Dorland and Toohey had reconnoitered in the vicinity of the bank in the morning, and how Toohey had entered the bank and informed the manager that the hold-up would not take place until about 3 p.m. At this time, Detective Tuft, from the drug store window, had taken the number of the car. Later, Inspector Murray had met Toohey at St. Michael's Hospital.

"It is not clear what Murray actually knew of Toohey's plans to go to the bank in the afternoon with Dorland alone if Bird did not come. It is not perhaps fair to assume, as Murray did not give Toohey any instructions, that he expected Toohey to join Dorland and accompany him to the bank if Bird did not come."

Bird failed to put in an appearance, and Toohey and Dorland had ap- proached the bank together, both with sawed-off shotguns under their coats. Dorland thought some one was watching, and they got back into the car and drove away.

"At this point Toohey says, in accompanying Dorland to the door of the bank, when Dorland took fright he was constantly expecting they would be picked up by the police. He puts it: 'I expected we would be picked up at the apartment, in the car, or on the street by the police.'

"No Contact Maintained." "It is significant that on this occasion they were observed by Detective Tuft of the drug store squad, who wanted to make the arrest then, but was restrained by Detective Thomson, the Sergeant of Detectives in charge, as the men had not gone into the bank. It was then. after the usual closing hours of the bank, which had been kept open by the manager of the bank at the request of Detective Thomson for the express purpose of enabling the bandits to carry out their design of entering the trap which had been laid for them. It is worthy of comment that no contact seemed to have been maintained all the time from early in the morning, when the police detectives had taken up their respective positions in the bank and drug store, till after the bandits made their second visit to the bank vicinity, between these men stationed there and Inspector Murray, other than a telephone message by Murray at 10.30 a.m., inquiring if anything had happened.

"The squads did not communicate to Murray the arrival of Toohey and Dorland at the bank on either or both occasions, nor did Murray inform them of the interview he had held with Toohey and the failure of Bird to arrive. The hour at which the bank was to be robbed, viz., 10.30 a.m., had long since passed, but there was no checking up by Murray of what had gone wrong, except the 2 o'clock interview with Toohey, had at Toohey's request. It would have seemed reasonable and good police practice for Murray to have kept in constant telephone communication from time to time with both squads, and if this had been done it would appear as if an arrest could have been made of these two men in the morning, or again in the afternoon when they marched up to the bank, armed as described.

To Be Captured in Bank. "It would also appear that Dorland could have been arrested at the apartment when he failed to make the entry into the bank in the morning. But no instructions were given to watch the apartment, and Dorland was permitted to go and come as he saw fit. This makes it quite plain that the main idea possessed by Murray, and conveyed to the two watching squads, was that the bandits were to be captured inside the bank, and not on the street or at the apartment.

"The spectacular and theatrical arrest of the men in the bank as planned may have been justified, but only if earlier efforts to apprehend them had failed.

"What might well have happened had Dorland entered the bank premises as expected can be better imagined than described by what occurred at the subsequent shooting affray on Wellesley Street. The detection of the crime and the conviction of those concerned was assured by the presence of the sawed-off shotguns in the possession of Dorland at the apartment, corroborated by the testimony of the police informer and spy, Toohey. It is not part of my duty to ascertain the motives of Inspector Murray in refusing to make any effort to arrest these men unless they went into the bank building, but in this case it would seem to have been both safer and wiser to have 'picked them up' on the street or in the apartment.

Position of Chief and Murray. "I have been asked to consider whether the fact that Murray and the Chief Constable, in making the plans they did, and in employing Toohey to take an active part as police spy and informer, and pretending to participate in the crime of robbing a bank, were themselves guilty of the crime of conspiracy to rob the bank, under Section 69 of the Criminal Code.

"In considering the position of Chief Draper and Inspector Murray in this connection, it must be remembered that they were acting on the information and knowledge they then had, and not on the facts as we now know them to be after this exhaustive inquiry. I have stated above what information they had on the Sunday evening and the instructions they gave. It does not appear with any certainty that Murray, much less Draper, knew that Toohey and Dorland were going to the bank alone if Bird did not arrive, or that Dorland, with encouragement from Toohey, would have attempted himself. I do not think that Toohey ever intended to rob the bank after he had informed the police, and that he was still playing the part of police informer and spy when he and Dorland approached the bank premises on Monday afternoon. He was going to the bank, not with the intention of robbing it, nor with the intent of committing any crime, but solely for the purpose of instigating and encouraging Dorland to carry out his original intention.

Termed "Agent Provocateur." "The position of a man who instigates and encourages another commit a crime is a despicable one. It is unfortunate and deplorable, but I am afraid necessary, that men such as Toohey have at times to be employed by the police in their work. He was more than a mere common informer; he is what is known as an 'agent provocateur, one who instigates offenses no further than by pretending to concur with the perpetrators. He was not an accomplice of Dorland. In order to constitute one person an accomplice of another in the commission of a crime it must be shown that the former's participation in the crime was criminally corrupt. Is it has not been criminally corrupt he is not an accomplice. The detective or spy is in law wholly different from the accomplice.

"The use of informers, police spies and police traps is, of course, a much debated question. As a rule informers are employed for the purpose of detecting the crimes of habitual law-breakers, e.g., the illicit sale of drugs or liquor. When the police that some person or persons are the habit of breaking the law, and are unable to secure the evidence in any other way, they are obliged to resort to this means of securing know In a conviction, But when a serious crime is contemplated, and the police have knowledge of it through an informer, it becomes a more difficult problem. If the informer is to pretend to identify himself with the participants, to what extent and how far should he be allowed to assist and encourage the wrongdoers for the purpose of apprehending the criminal?

Only in Exceptional Cases. "One would think that only very exceptional cases should this be allowed, and with every proper safeguard taken to insure that the police spy does not induce another person to commit a crime which but for the encouragement and instigation of the spy might not be committed. If several persons are conspiring to commit a crime it would seem quite right and proper for the police to be kept Informed of all their actions and movements leading up to the crime. I would hesitate to think that it is in the interest of society or the administration of justice that one person, although without any intention of actually committing a crime, should be allowed to facilitate and assist another who has planned a crime, so that other could be convicted and punished.

"I cannot hold, therefore, that Murray, much less the Chief Constable. was guilty of any conspiracy or attempt to commit a crime, or that they assisted or countenanced the attempt that was proposed to be made. Their sole aim and object was to prevent a crime and capture the participants. There was no mens rea or guilty mind on their part, and, without that, and the law being as I have stated it, of what offense could they be accused, even if the police spy was an active participant? The ethics and advisability of employing informers and spies and setting of police traps is not, strictly speaking, a matter within the scope of my Commission, but is primarily a matter to be dealt with by the Police Commission, though a proper subject of comment under the circumstances in this case.

Crime When They Left Car. "The crime of attempted bank robbery itself was complete as soon as the men left their automobile and started for the bank.

"The simple fact appears to he that, in order to 'get' Dorland and Bird in- side the bank, instead of 'getting' them on the sidewalk or in the car as they approached the bank, the police were overlooking and tacitly consent- sing to the commission of two other crimes, namely, having possession of weapons for a purpose dangerous to the public peace, and attempted robbery.

"The reason suggested for taking this unusual course is that the police were anxious to apprehend all those participating in the crime of robbery, and that only in this way could it be accomplished.

"The answer is obvious. The police knew that the two men were coming in one car, and no real difficulty lay in the way of an early arrest. This course of conduct, though perhaps not fully appreciated at the time by Murray when he made his plans, would seem to be clearly indefensible.

"Dorland did not walk into the trap that was so carefully set, and under the circumstances here it may be, and probably was, fortunate, as a the lives of innocent persons in the bank might have well been sacrificed. It does, however, shock one's sense of what is right to believe that to permit or facilitate an attempted crime. merely to make sure of catching and punishing the criminal is the function of the police.

Unfair, But Not Illegal. "The primary duty of the police is to prevent and detect crime; and to decoy a criminal to the scene of the crime would seem to be unfair and contrary to the spirit of British justice, though not under the strict Interpretation of the law illegal, or an offense under the Code.

"In this respect it is only fair to the police to again emphasize that at the time they laid their plans and gave their instructions to Toohey they were not aware of the fact that Dorland would be the only participant. It is their subsequent treatment of both Dorland and Toohey, when they were aware of all the facts, that is open to serious criticism, I do think, however, that Toohey did assist and countenance the commission of a felony when Bird failed to arrive, and that subsequently, after Toohey's arrest, it was the clear duty of the police chiefs to have charged him, as Dorland was, with an offense under Section 115 of the Code. Walking in company with Dorland up to the door of the bank with a gun under his coat, and the encouragement he gave to Dorland, and assistance he rendered, was, as I believe it, outside and In excess of the instructions he received from either Murray or Draper.

"I may say here that I believe that neither Inspector Chisholm nor Inspector Guthrie had anything to do with, and even disapproved of, the Murray plan to trap Dorland.

ARREST OF DORLAND AND TOOHEY. "On Monday, some time after 3 o'clock, when the Royal Bank on Wellesley Street, and all other banks were closed, the detective squad stationed in the drug store, realizing that there would be no bank robbery. sent for the police car with the intention of returning to Police Head- quarters. McKelvey, the owner of the drug store, who was in the office of a Dr. Milar on Wellesley Street, telephoned to a member of the squad to say that the car in which the bandits had been seen in the morning was on Wellesley Street. The members of the drug store squad say that while they were waiting for the police car they decided thereupon to 'stop' these men.

"They had been instructed by their Chief 'to get' the men when they went into the bank, and, having failed, they then proceeded to get them on the street. In this connection it must be clearly stated that neither Chief Draper nor Inspector Murray was in any way responsible or to blame. Outside of the express instructions above set out, the Chief Constable and Murray expected the detectives to act on their own initiative as the occasion arose and the emergency demanded. Indeed, the Instructions seemed to be clear that the men were not to be arrested on the street as has already been pointed out.

Curiosity of Dorland. "On the arrival of the police car at the drug store, the four detectives climbed into the car and drove north on Church Street, crossing to Jarvis and proceeded west on Wellesley Strect, travelling on the north side of the street. The car which Dorland was driving was in a driveway on the south side of Wellesley Street, a short distance west of Jarvis Street. Dorland was at the wheel and Toohey sitting on his right, with the two sawed-off shotguns standing up in the car at Dorland's left side in a position unobservable to any one outside the car. The only apparent reason for these two men being there at this time was one of curiosity on the part of Dorland to satisfy himself by driving by the bank to see if it was being watched by the police, as he suspected earlier in the afternoon when he to hurried away before attempting enter.

"At the moment the police car drew up and stopped on the north side of the street Dorland had backed his car into the driveway with the Intention of turning his car to the right to return presumably to his apartment on Winchester Street.

"At the time the police car stopped It was almost immediately in front of Dr. Millar's surgery, which is situated on the north side of the street, and both Dr. Millar and McKelvey, the druggist, were watching the proceedings from the window of the doctor's surgery. There was the width of the street or possibly less than that at the time the police car came to n stop between the Dorland car and the police car as it (the Dorland car) was headed out of the driveway preparatory to turning to the right and in motion at the time, and directly facing to the north.

"I accept the evidence of both Dr. Miller and McKelvey as to what happened, corroborated in the main, as it is, by the stories told by the detectives themselves.

Shots and Cars Crash. "Immediately the car in which the police were came to a stop, the four detectives, or some of them, started to shoot at the Dorland car, and at the same time the bandit car rammed the police car, whether intentionally or otherwise; the impact of the two cars causing the Dorland car to re- bound some seven or eight feet. Delective-Sergeant Thomson, who was in charge of this squad, was in the act of getting out, and his leg was badly injured by the impact. Neither Dorland nor Toohey had at the moment a gun in his hands, both of these weapons still standing upright on Dorland's left; nor does there seem to have been any attempt on the part of either of these two men to use their guns, nor was any effort made by the them to escape. All they did, apparently, was to slide down to the bottom of the car to avoid the deadly fusillade of revolver shots that was directed at them.

"To this prompt action on their part they can attribute the fact that they came out of the encounter unscathed and alive. The car was out of control, and stopped at once. That the police fired in deadly earnest there can be no doubt. Several of the bullets penetrated the windshield where the two men were sitting, and the number of shots fired by the police would indicate quite clearly that they intended to either kill both the occupants of the car or wound them grievously. I am of the opinion, on all the evidence, that the police probably started shooting before their car was rammed, and that the two cars may well have come together by reason of Dorland slipping down from the wheel, and thereby losing control of the car, to avoid the murderous attack. The whole affair was most inexcusable and unjustifiable on the part of the police, and cannot be too strongly condemned.

Difficult to Understand "It is possible to understand that, smarting under the disappointment of their having failed to secure the bandits at the bank, and expecting when they finally confronted the looked-for robbers they would be heavily armed, they would not treat them gently; but when allowance is made on these grounds it is still difficult to understand how these four men, who after years of good service had risen in the force to the positions of responsibility they occupied, could so completely lose their heads and be guilty of what was nothing else than a gross misuse of their powers and duty as police officers.

"That this serious incident was not fully reported to the Police Commission and action taken by them if reported is also hard to understand. It is a fairly good illustration of the wisdom of police officers not carrying revolvers, as the temptation to use them without justification seems to be overwhelming.

"These two men at the time this took place, so far as the police knew, had made no attempt to rob a bank, and, while they were unlawfully in possession of firearms, were not making an effort to escape, and neither of them had made the slightest resistance, or had the time or opportunity to do so. The police did not wait to see whether they would surrender, but started firing on them immediately.

"Sections 41, 42 and 43 of the Criminal Code set out clearly what is the duty of a peace officer when making an arrest under these, or any circumstances.

"I regret to report that, in my opinion, even though there was no -loss of life, and no person was injured by the action of these police officers, serious consideration should be given as to the advisability proceedings being instituted against the four officers concerned, viz.. Thomson, Tuft, Hogan and McCathie, under Subsection (c), Section 264, or Section 273 of the Criminal Code of Canada.

"As has been stated by eminent authority, the special protection given by the law to police officers in the execution of their duties is lost if they misconduct themselves in the discharge of their duty."

Testimony Is Compared "After what has not Inaptly been described as the Battle of Wellesley Plains, the two men were handcuffed and taken to Police Headquarters at the City Hall," his Lordship states, and then deals with the questioning of Dorland in Inspector Murray's office, and later by Inspector Chisholm. With respect to this questioning he compares the testimony given by Inspector Chisholm and by Dorland himself.

Dorland had told the officers that Bird had had nothing to do with the affair, and that they ought to give him (Bird) a medal for keeping out of it. He had also asserted that Inspector Chisholm had given him many reasons for admitting that he intended robbing the bank, and that no caution had been given him that anything he might say could later be used against him court. Dorland had also stated that threats of personal violence had been made against him.

In the final interview, which took place after midnight, Dorland testifled that Inspector Chisholm had said: "Come on in; we have got a charge you can plead guilty to." Dorland's answer was, his Lordship states, according to Dorland's evidence. "This must be a bargain day." According to Dorland's story, he was then taken into a room with Chief Draper, Inspectors Murray and Guthrie.

Says He Agreed to Plead Guilty. "He swears that Draper got up and said: 'We have a charge here of carrying concealed weapons: the penalty is from one to five years. Now, Dorland, I don't want to be too hard on you. I could try you for conspiracy. Son, if you go to court in the morning and plead guilty to this charge, I will see that you get the minimum sentence.'

"Dorland then said: 'What will you do with Bird?' And Draper said: 'I will let Bird go. Toohey will be tried on a separate charge.' Dorland says he then agreed to plead guilty to carrying concealed weapons and get the minimum sentence of one year. After this had occurred, Dorland says, he was taken to the Court Street Station for the rest of the night."

Dorland had stated that he was detained in the Police Headquarters 5 at the City Hall from about 3.30 p.m. till 1 o'clock the following morning, his Lordship reports. The next morning he pleaded guilty to the charge of having in his possession an offensive weapon, relying, according to Dorland, on the promise which be claimed to have reeceived of getting only one year's imprisonment.

Quițe Different Story. This story was quite different from that told by Inspector Chisholm, Mr. Justice Kingstone points out. When Dorland had asked Chisholm what the charge would be, the latter had told him it would be that of carrying offensive weapons. "He asked me the penalty. I said: 'Five years.' He said: 'I will be tickled to death to do that. The sentence is longer than i that. I said: 'No, of course it is not. I will show you. I went and got the book (Criminal Code), and I took it down, opened it, and showed it to him, or read it to him." This was Inspector Chisholm's evidence.

"Dorland told his solicitor after the sentence of five years, the maximum sentence under Section 115, had been imposed, that he had been framed. He also repeated to Hal Gordon, the prosecuting Crown Attorney, the same complaint, but did e not specify to either of these gentlemen in what way he had been framed, or by whom, nor did he explain what he meant by saying he had been framed. He waived his right to appeal when at the Don Jail by signing a waiver, and when at Kingston Penitentiary made no direct protest to the Minister of Justice at Ottawa, or otherwise, for over two years, against a sentence of five years, when he had pleaded guilty, according to his own story, on an express promise that he would receive a sentence of one year. His explanation of this unusual and submissive conduct, following a great injustice, if his story is to be believed, was that there was no use in his doing so, as he would not be believed, and in any event, on Toohey's evidence if all the facts came of out, they could prove that he and Toohey had conspired to rob the bank, and his sentence would, therefore, not be lessened.

"Contradicts Himself." "Dorland's demeanor and manner in the witness box impressed me not unfavorably, though he contradicts himself in some important respects in what he had sworn to on former occasions.

"Chisholm's recollection of the alleged conversation about the reading of Section 115 from the Code, as he related it above, was not convincing. When examined by Mr. Regan he was unable, without great difficulty, to find the reference to the section in the index, and showed a lack of familiarity with the charge and the provision in the Code with reference to the offense, inconsistent with his account of how he was able at the Dorland interview to refer to it without any delay or hesitation.

"What actually happened at the several interviews that took place between the police inspectors, including Chief Draper and Doriand, I find it hard and difficult to say. I am afraid we have not got the whole truth from the evidence that has been given.

"I do most unhesitatingly condemn the action of the police chiefs, Chief Draper and Inspector Murray, in keeping Dorland at Police Headquarters from some time after the arrest, probably 3.30 in the afternoon, till nearly 1 in the early morning, only was he detained there, but was brought up from time to time for questioning about the part he had taken in the attempted hold-up by Draper, Murray and Chisholm. As a result of the questions put and the answers given by Dorland there is little doubt but that he made up his mind to plead guilty to some offense. whether or not he was promised leniency by the police.

"Objectionable and Unfair." "In this connection, it is to be borne in mind that he had just gone through a most grueling experience, and had miraculously escaped with his life. Nine hours of detention at Police Headquarters, subjected from time to time to questions on the part of the police, who were evidently concerned, as it subsequently appears, in getting an admission of guilt, and thereby saving the necessity of the whole story being told to the Magistrate next day, was, in my judgment, most objectionable and unfair to the accused. No matter how dangerous or criminal a man may be, he is entitled to fair and just treatment on his arrest, as well before as at his trial.

"It has been said by a well-known British Judge that it is the business of the police, when a man is in custody on a serious criminal charge, to keep their eyes open, their ears open, and their mouths shut, and not to ask him any questions. A prisoner may desire to make a voluntary statement, but should not be cross-examined, and no questions should be put to him about it except for the purpose of removing ambiguity.

"Here there was no written statement taken signed by Dorland after being duly cautioned and warned, but he was taken from one office to another, and examined by different officials on the subject of the charge for which he was in custody. Sees Indirect Threat. "The very fact that he was detained for hours at headquarters instead of being sent to a police station constitutes in itself, in my opinion, an indirect threat and improper pressure on the accused."

The argument of the police for thus detaining Dorland was that they wanted to get all the facts: that they had to send to Hamilton to get Bird, and that by reason of the questioning they were able to free Charles Dorland and Bird, his Lordship says.

"This is in a sense true, but does not justify, it would seem to me, the treatment accorded Dorland. All this informatlon could have been, and probably was, obtained from Toohey."

The treatment of Toohey indicated that the police were satisfied with his actions, Mr. Justice Kingstone holds. The allowing him out on his own bail a of $200 was a "peculiar proceeding," he says. Later he was paid, on instructions from the Chief, two sums of $25 and $5. "Not only this, but a year later when he was charged with a crime the Toronto police allowed him to go on his own ball of $1,000 when he had no property or means of any kind."

Recognized His Services. "The treatment of Toohey by the police indicates to me not only only that they recognized and appreciated the services he had rendered, but that they were unwilling to prosecute him for fear that he might disclose the active part he had taken in instigating and assisting in the crime for which Dorland was sentenced.

"This was the situation on the Monday night or early Tuesday morning: Dorland was locked in the police cell. Toohey was out on his own bail of $200. Charles Dorland and Bird had been released, and no charge was to be preferred against either of them.

"On Tuesday morning Dorland was b brought before the Police Magistrate, Judge Coatsworth. Mr. Harold Gordon was the Crown Attorney prosecuting. It was stated that there were two charges against Dorland: one under Section 115 115 of the Code, and the other, though it was not specifically mentioned, was one under Section 573, of conspiracy to rob the 1 bank, and that Dorland was prepared to plead guilty to the first charge. The Magistrate asked for a statement of the facts, but Detective McCathle. who was called, and related such of the facts as he saw fit at the request of the Crown Attorney, deliberately refrained from telling the Court anything about the shooting on Wellesley Street or the part that Toohey took in the whole affair. The facts must have been known to McCathle and also to Inspector Guthrie, who was in the courtroom.

Notes "Serious Error." "I cannot think but that this was done deliberately by McCathie, and under instructions from those in authority in police circles. Gordon says he he did not know what the real facts were, or they would, as they should, have been brought to the attention of the Court. It was a serious error and, when a crime such as h this was being inquired into, takes a on a sinister appearance. What could a have been the purpose the police had H in suppressing this important information? It must have been done, I should think, for the purpose of protecting themselves and the detectives engaged in the shooting, at the expense of Dorland.

"Having learned of Dorland's previous bad record, and that the guns were in Dorland's possession for robbing a bank, the Magistrate gave him the maximum penalty of five years under Section 115 of the Code, and the conspiracy charge was withdrawn. Had Dorland been prosecuted under the conspiracy charge to rob a bank, and convicted, as, under the evidence that has been produced at this investigation, it is now could have been, could have received a maximum sentence of seven years. Would the Magistrate, had he known all the facts as we now know them, have felt that the sentence he imposed was a just one or would he have been inclined, in view of the active part played by Toohey in instigating the crime, to consider that, to some extent at least, some allowance should be made for an accused person who was encouraged to, and assisted in, committing a crime in order that he might be caught and punished?

Anxious to Get Guilty Plea. "I do not, and cannot, accept Dorland's unsupported statement that he was promised a sentence of one yea if he pleaded guilty, but it is quit apparent from the action of the police on the Monday afternoon after the arrest and on Tuesday morning in the courtroom that the police were anxious to get Dorland to plead guilty so that his conviction could be secured and sentence imposed without disclosing the part that Toohey took in the whole affair, and also without bringing to light the behavior of the detectives when Dorland was arrested. I is curious why Dorland would, as the police say, exonerate Toohey from all blame when, till after the arrest, he had good reason to suppose Toohey was as anxious as himself to rob the bank, and had later learned that had betrayed him.

"I arm satisfied, therefore, that Dorland was directly or indirectly encouraged to plead guilty and exonerate Toohey (if he really did) in the hope and expectation of lenient treatment. Dorland was guilty of a crime a serious one and should have been punished, but the circumstances surrounding the commission of the crime and the facts leading up to his arrest and conviction do not satisfy me that Dorland received the consideration he was entitled to.

"Toohey, and Toohey alone, did encourage and instigate Dorland to go on with this crime, and afterward, if not immediately before, the attempted crime occurred the police were fully aware of it, and by the subsequent treatment of Toohey endorsed and approved of his conduct in instigating this crime. Had the whole story been told to the Police Magistrate in the first place, as 11 should have been, in my opinion, and had the police stated then, or ever before the Police Commission at a later date, what they must have known as early as Tuesday, April 8, 1930, the respective parts played by Dorland and Toohey, much of whar has happened since would have been avoided. There has been a deliberate attempt on the part of the police heads to cover up and withhold important Information that should have been given to the court and later to the Police Commission. which information, while it might have subjected certain officials to some sharp discipline, would have probably avoided the necessity of a judicial investigation.

"Clumsy But Obvious Effort." "The changing of the information and warrant on the conspiracy charge by substituting Toohey's name for that of Charles Dorland, though traced to no particular police official would tend to confirm the opinion that effort was made to disguise and pretend that the police at one time were seriously considering prosecuting their spy as an actual participant. The police records in regard to the charge laid against Dorland were not in the condition one would expect to find them, as we find 'carrying concealed weapons' appearing in the column, when the charge that should have appeared was 'having an offensive weapon for a purpose dangerous to the public peace-a different and much more serious charge. It all has the same regrettable and unfortunate appearance of a clumsy but obvious effort to cover up an incident that was not intended to appear as it really happened.

"I think that Dorland, in stating that he had been 'framed' to Gordon and Chaplan, his solicitor, had in mind that he had been encouraged in pleading guilty by what had occurred on Monday afternoon to expect leniency, and also the fact that he was led into a police trap by Toohey, a police spy.

Would Still Be Guilty. Quoting a British authority, his Lordship holds that, even if Dorland had been induced to commit the crime solely at the urging of Toohey, he would still be, in law, guilty of the offense.

"After giving this difficult and serious situation the most careful consideration, I think I can safely report that Dorland did not, in the sense I have indicated, receive the fullest and proper consideration to which he was entitled before the sentence was imposed. Had all the facts we now know been given to the Court, it might well be that the Magistrate, in imposing the sentence, might have though: that, while sinning greatly, he was also sinned against, and thereby reduced the maximum penalty."

While Detective Thomson had admitted that some of his first testimony had not been true, Mr. Justice Kingstone states that it was not within the scope of the inquiry for him to report on misstatements made by officers at the Police Commission. Thom- son had made certain statements because of mistaken loyalty to Inspector Murray, the report states.

"While what he stated before was untrue, and, I think, untrue to his knowledge, In view of his subsequently telling to the Commission the real facts. I do not think it is proper for me to advise that proceedings should be instituted against him for perjury.

"The same view is held by me in regard to the allegation that Murray was guilty of subornation of perjury. I think it is beyond my duties as a Commissioner sitting on this inquiry to consider or report on the evidence given by witnesses before the Police Commission. Refers to Magistrate.

"There is a matter that I feel I might properly refer to as a result of what has been brought to my attention on this inquiry.

"It is the practice for a Police Magistrate to sit on the Board of Police Commissioners in the cities and towns of the Province. The Board of Police Commissioners has to do with the manifold duties that are involved in the general supervision of the police, including the appointment and dismissal of all police officers and constables. The duties of the Police Magistrate are judicial. He is expected to bring to the discharge of his duties a completely impartial attitude of mind, wholly detached in every way from anything that pertains to the police approach to the commission of a crime. It is the duty of the police on proper grounds to arrest persons charged with or suspected of crime, and generally to prevent and detect crime. It would -appear at times as if a Magistrate must find it difficult to perform his duties impartially and judicially if he is closely associated and identified with the police, sitting as a member of the board.

"It is as important, it seems to me, that a man should believe and realize that he is getting a fair trial as that the trial should be fair and impartial. The public and the accused person should have confidence and be assured that when a 'man is tried no knowledge possessed by the police or police contact has in any way affected the mind of the Court before which he appears.

"In order to put our courts in a position where no such allegation could be suggested or urged. It might be well to consider the advisability of prohibiting Police Magistrates from sitting on Boards of Police Commissioners. I think the English system divorces in this sense the administration of the police body from the Judicial functions discharged by Magistrates."

With respect to Mr. Elmore's statement, near the end of the inquiry. that Toohey (his client) had instructed him to tell the Court that his (Toohey's) evidence had been untrue, his Lordship says that the evidence taken when the Inquiry re-opened satisfied him that Mr. Elmore was not warranted in making the statement he had.

"I think Mr. Elmore must have wholly misunderstood and misconstrued what Toohey said, to have taken such an unusual and exceptional course on behalf of! his client."

#toronto #royal commission #police commission #public inquiry #dorland case #police investigation #entrapment #frame up #sentenced to the penitentiary #great depression in canada #crime and punishment in canada #history of crime and punishment in canada #police informant #police spy #kingston penitentiary #bank robbery #bank robbers #police incompetence

0 notes

your-dietician · 3 years

Text

MLB roundup: Phils, Mets split after Aaron Nola's strikeout spree

New Post has been published on https://tattlepress.com/mlb/mlb-roundup-phils-mets-split-after-aaron-nolas-strikeout-spree/

MLB roundup: Phils, Mets split after Aaron Nola's strikeout spree

2021-06-26 07:35:00 GMT+00:00 – Dominic Smith’s RBI single in the eighth inning lifted the host New York Mets to a 2-1 victory over the Phillies in the opener of Friday’s doubleheader, ruining a historic strikeout performance from Philadelphia’s Aaron Nola.

The Mets, who were one out away from a 1-0 loss before Francisco Lindor’s RBI single in the seventh.

The rally cost Nola the victory on a historic day for the right-hander. He tied Tom Seaver’s major league record by striking out 10 consecutive batters and later delivered the Phillies’ lone RBI with a fifth-inning double.

After the first two New York batters reached base, Nola struck out the next 10 hitters on 46 pitches to tie the record set on April 22, 1970, when Seaver struck out the final 10 San Diego Padres batters he faced in a Mets 2-1 win.

Phillies 2, Mets 1 (Game 2, 8 innings)

Odubel Herrera’s run-scoring groundout in the eighth inning lifted Philadelphia over host to split the teams’ twin bill.

The Phillies won for just the third time in 10 games. The Mets have lost seven of 11. Bryce Harper homered to break a scoreless tie in the sixth before the Mets tied the game in the bottom of the seventh on James McCann’s sacrifice fly against Archie Bradley (3-1).

In the top of the eighth against Sean Reid-Foley (2-1), automatic runner Rafael Marchan went to third on one groundout and scored on Herrera’s sharp shot to third. Luis Guillorme failed to field the grounder cleanly and lost a chance to get Marchan at the plate. Hector Neris threw a perfect bottom of the eighth for his 11th save.

Red Sox 5, Yankees 3

Hunter Renfroe drove in a pair of runs and recorded a key out at the plate on a throw from right field, leading the Boston past visiting New York. The Red Sox snapped a two-game skid in front of their first full-capacity sellout of the year.

Xander Bogaerts also had two RBIs as the Red Sox improved to 4-0 against the Yankees this season. DJ LeMahieu drove in two runs for the Yankees, who lost for just the third time in their last 10 games.

The Red Sox had just gone ahead 4-3 on a Renfroe sacrifice fly in the third inning when Gio Urshela led off the fourth with a double. The next batter, Miguel Andujar (three hits) singled to right, and Urshela was waved home, but Renfroe scooped up the ball and gunned Urshela down at the plate with time to spare, recording his major-league-leading 11th outfield assist.

Brewers 5, Rockies 4 (11 innings)

Willy Adames hit a tying two-run home run in the ninth and Keston Hiura delivered a sacrifice fly in the 11th as Milwaukee overcame a late four-run deficit to beat visiting Colorado.

Adames finished with three hits and Kolten Wong had two for the Brewers. Joshua Fuentes had a two-run, pinch-hit homer for the Rockies.

The teams combined for 31 strikeouts, with the Brewers fanning 16 times.

Braves 3, Reds 2

Guillermo Heredia homered and made a spectacular catch late while Drew Smyly continued his June resurgence with six solid innings as visiting Atlanta held on to beat Cincinnati.

Dansby Swanson added a solo homer for the Braves, who evened the four-game weekend series and leveled their record on their eight-game road trip at 3-3.

Smyly (5-3) won his third straight start, allowing just one run and six hits. He now has a 3-0 mark with a 3.16 ERA over five June starts. Will Smith pitched around a two-out double in the ninth for his 16th save.

Giants 2, A’s 0

Curt Casali hit a home run and Johnny Cueto outdueled Sean Manaea as San Francisco opened a three-game home series against Oakland with a win.

Brandon Crawford reached a team-leading 50 RBIs with a run-scoring single, and Jake McGee recorded his 15th save to complete San Francisco’s major-league-leading 11th shutout.

Cueto (6-3) blanked the A’s on five hits over seven innings. He walked one and struck out six. Manaea (6-4) gave up one run on three hits in six innings. He walked three and struck out seven.

Marlins 11, Nationals 2

Miguel Rojas homered and finished with a season-high four RBIs as Miami snapped a four-game losing streak with a win over the visiting Washington.

Nationals left fielder Kyle Schwarber went 3-for-4 and slugged a solo homer, his 13th dinger in 14 games and his ninth in six contests. His homer was the main highlight for Washington, which had its five-game win streak broken.

Miami got Garrett Cooper off the injured list, and he went 3-for-4 with four runs, two RBIs, a homer, a double and a walk. It was his first game since sustaining a back injury on June 7.

Orioles 6, Blue Jays 5 (10 innings)

Pat Valaika walked with the bases loaded and two outs in the 10th inning to force in the go-ahead run as Baltimore came back to defeat Toronto in Buffalo and end its 20-game road losing streak.

Jun 25, 2021; Cincinnati, Ohio, USA; Atlanta Braves center fielder Guillermo Heredia (left) celebrates with left fielder Abraham Almonte (center) and right fielder Ronald Acuna Jr. (right) after their win over the Cincinnati Reds at Great American Ball Park. Mandatory Credit: David Kohl-USA TODAY Sports

The Orioles tied the game with four runs in the eighth and got the win in the 10th when Toronto reliever Trent Thornton (1-3) walked three batters. That forced home Trey Mancini, who started the inning at second base.

Paul Fry (1-2) threw a perfect bottom of the ninth for Baltimore. Cole Sulser earned his second save despite walking Bo Bichette to start the bottom of the 10th with Marcus Semien at second. Vladimir Guerrero Jr. then grounded into a double play, and Teoscar Hernandez struck out swinging.

Rays 4, Angels 3

Austin Meadows and Kevin Kiermaier each went 3-for-4 to lead Tampa Bay to a victory over Los Angeles in St. Petersburg, Fla.

The Rays won their third straight after dropping their previous seven, and Tampa Bay manager Kevin Cash picked up his 500th career victory.

First-inning solo homers by Shohei Ohtani and Anthony Rendon weren’t enough for the Angels, whose losing streak reached four games.

Mariners 9, White Sox 3

Luis Torrens smacked a pair of two-run home runs and Jake Fraley also hit a two-run shot to back 5 2/3 strong innings from Yusei Kikuchi and lift visiting Seattle over Chicago.

Seattle out-hit Chicago 14-6 en route to its ninth win in 11 games. The White Sox have been outscored 45-18 while losing six of seven.

Kikuchi (5-3) retired 10 of the first 11 batters he faced, with Yasmani Grandal’s solo home run in the second marking the lone early blemish against him. White Sox left-hander Carlos Rodon (6-3) scattered three runs and five hits in five innings with four walks and eight strikeouts.

Rangers 9, Royals 4

Texas scored four runs in the fourth and five in the sixth to beat Kansas City in the opener of a three-game series at Arlington, Texas.

Down 1-0 coming into the fourth, Texas put up four against starter Mike Minor (6-5) who had only surrendered two hits up to that point. He got hit hard again to open the sixth and ultimately gave up all nine runs on 11 hits and two walks in five-plus innings.

Dane Dunning (3-6) went five innings and got his first win in his past five decisions. Dunning allowed two runs on five hits with four strikeouts.

Twins 8, Indians 7

Luis Arraez went 3-for-4 with two triples, a double and three RBIs and Alex Kirilloff homered as Minnesota defeated Cleveland in Minneapolis.

Andrelton Simmons went 2-for-3 with three runs, Josh Donaldson drove in two runs and Nick Gordon added two hits for Minnesota, which won for the sixth time in eight games.

Amed Rosario, Bobby Bradley, Eddie Rosario and Josh Naylor each homered for Cleveland. Nick Wittgren (2-2) gave up two runs in his lone inning to take the loss.

Pirates 5, Cardinals 4

Jacob Stallings and Phillip Evans drove in two runs each and Wil Crowe (1-4) earned his first major league victory as Pittsburgh edged host St. Louis.

The Pirates won for the fifth time in seven games, while the reeling Cardinals lost their fifth consecutive game and their seventh in eight tries. Crowe (1-4) allowed four runs on eight hits and two walks in five innings. Richard Rodriguez closed out the game for his 10th save.

Cardinals reliever Jake Woodford (1-1) took the loss after allowing the tiebreaking run in the fifth inning. Nolan Arenado hit the 250th homer of his career, and Dylan Carlson also went deep for St. Louis.

Padres 11, Diamondbacks 5

Fernando Tatis Jr. hit three of host San Diego’s five home runs, helping extend Arizona’s major league record for consecutive road losses to 24 games.

The win was the Padres’ eighth straight to open a 10-game homestand. The Diamondbacks have dropped 20 of their past 21 games overall.

Tatis’ first two homers were both part of back-to-back sets as the Padres jumped out to 4-0 and 6-3 leads. Tommy Pham and Jake Cronenworth also went deep for San Diego, and Tatis finished 4-for-5 with four RBIs and four runs. He also tied Vladimir Guerrero Jr. for first in the majors with 25 home runs this season.

Dodgers 6, Cubs 2

AJ Pollock and Max Muncy hit two-run homers in the eighth inning to lift Los Angeles to a win against visiting Chicago.

Six relievers combined to give up just one run over the final five innings and help the Dodgers end a four-game losing streak. Blake Treinen (2-3) allowed one hit and struck out two in 1 2/3 innings of shutout relief to earn the win.

Chicago starter Jake Arrieta allowed two runs and five hits in five innings. He struck out four and walked three. Kris Bryant homered for the Cubs, who used four pitchers to no-hit the Dodgers in Thursday’s series opener.

–Field Level Media

Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.

Source link

0 notes