|
Post by Jack Bauer on Apr 22, 2020 15:24:01 GMT -4
How do people feel about.......How the RCMP handled this ? I personally feel like there were some Huge Mistakes made by them .....The whole thing is just sad and given the current situation ....I worry about the Families being able to get proper / adequate closure . Well lets clarify that. When you say RCMP, I think you mean the RCMP command structure ... the brass. I don't think you mean the men and women who raced into the face of danger to try to stop this guy ... they were all a little too busy to send out an alert. I think somebody dropped the ball on sending out an alert. The Premier said staff were in place to issue an alert, but in this case the order would have to come from the RCMP, and it never came. The alert would have absolutely made a difference, depending on what time it was issued. I think it's a safe assumption that people mean the brass making those decisions in an office and not the people putting their lives on the line on the actual ground and at the crime scenes. Whether the info those in the office used to not use the alert system made sense will depend on the timeline and the logic they use in defending not using it. The fact they used twitter but not the alert system doesn't sit well with a lot of people. And it shouldn't until they know why. Especially knowing people were killed that morning who may have and arguably would have changed their days based on knowing that info.
|
|
|
Post by Jack Bauer on Apr 22, 2020 15:26:13 GMT -4
The effectiveness of the alert would have depended on how far along he was in his killing spree before anyone realized he was dressed as an RCMP too. If I am holed up in my house because of an active shooter, and an apparent RCMP vehicle pulls in the driveway and an apparent RCMP officer comes to my door - I probably assume he/she has something important to relay or ask me. The timeline of who knew what and when will be important. Yeah, the fact that he was driving a RCMP lookalike vehicle is a big factor. I would rather see a comprehensive review and real findings than a quick and easy witch hunt. From the limited info we have, the public alert would have made more sense, but there may be another aspect. Part of it was not really knowing where he was, once he left Porquepique he ~apparently~ headed for Wentworth and for a long time the authorities had no idea that this fire/murder was related. I was blown away by the fact that him having a replica RCMP car isn't necessarily illegal. Him dressing up as an RCMP and pretending to be one is illegal. But building his own RCMP car....not illegal. Absolutely terrifying thought for anyone who has ever been pulled over by RCMP on a local highway
|
|
|
Post by Captain Obvious on Apr 22, 2020 16:22:29 GMT -4
Well lets clarify that. When you say RCMP, I think you mean the RCMP command structure ... the brass. I don't think you mean the men and women who raced into the face of danger to try to stop this guy ... they were all a little too busy to send out an alert. I think somebody dropped the ball on sending out an alert. The Premier said staff were in place to issue an alert, but in this case the order would have to come from the RCMP, and it never came. The alert would have absolutely made a difference, depending on what time it was issued. I think it's a safe assumption that people mean the brass making those decisions in an office and not the people putting their lives on the line on the actual ground and at the crime scenes. Whether the info those in the office used to not use the alert system made sense will depend on the timeline and the logic they use in defending not using it. The fact they used twitter but not the alert system doesn't sit well with a lot of people. And it shouldn't until they know why. Especially knowing people were killed that morning who may have and arguably would have changed their days based on knowing that info. From the press conference at 4:30, it appears they had no clue where he was until Sunday morning. I have to assume that being in the police car likely helped him escape(to Wentworth I believe). However they should have used it once he was spotted in Debert instead of Twitter. Most deaths happened before that but it possibly could have saved 2 or 3 lives.
|
|
|
Post by Captain Obvious on Apr 22, 2020 16:24:23 GMT -4
Yeah, the fact that he was driving a RCMP lookalike vehicle is a big factor. I would rather see a comprehensive review and real findings than a quick and easy witch hunt. From the limited info we have, the public alert would have made more sense, but there may be another aspect. Part of it was not really knowing where he was, once he left Porquepique he ~apparently~ headed for Wentworth and for a long time the authorities had no idea that this fire/murder was related. I was blown away by the fact that him having a replica RCMP car isn't necessarily illegal. Him dressing up as an RCMP and pretending to be one is illegal. But building his own RCMP car....not illegal. Absolutely terrifying thought for anyone who has ever been pulled over by RCMP on a local highway One of my friends is retired RCMP, they sell those cars, but you can't have the decals on the car like a real RCMP car or the lights, or the equipment inside. They are stripped before being sold at auction.
|
|
|
Post by SteveUL on Apr 23, 2020 9:06:17 GMT -4
Well I think Twitter is a more discrete way of sending out messages ... you have to be looking at it to get the message. If this guy is busy killing people, driving, lighting fires, I doubt he is watching twitter very closely ... he is looking over his shoulder every other second. But with an emergency alert, your phone goes off and you look at it ... almost nobody can miss it when it comes in. I follow NS RCMP (and NB and PEI and NFLD) on Twitter and I was not aware of this ongoing event until about 9:00 am on Sunday. I went to bed about 10:30 the night before so missed the initial tweets. I think my first knowledge of this came from somebody sharing a tweet on Facebook ... so I didn't even see it on Twitter. So for me, tweeting about it wouldn't alert the shooter to what was going on so easily (he knew what was going one, but he'd be interested in what info was out there on him and his whereabouts) ... but an Emergency Alert would assuming he had his phone with him. I think the issue with tweeting is more in regards to it being a very rural area and the people you're trying to get the message to may not be twitter users or on any social media but may have a cell phone or get the alert on radio or tv if it's sent out. When we look back to the Moncton incident, there was no emergency alert issued either. But everybody was following it on Facebook and Twitter, because it started up around 6:00 PM (if I recall) and we stayed up late into the night following it. Facebook groups popped up that were following scanner feeds and information was in abundance. Where this recent event started at 11:15 PM, many people had already gone to bed and weren't following this event as it unfolded overnight. That was the main reason to issue the emergency alert, because it is an audible sound that scares the crap out of you. Also, the RCMP and most First Responders have gone to encrypted communications so you can no longer follow their communications in times like this so the information was not in abundance this time around. But, alerting the public also alerts him. If an emergency message goes out that he is in the Wentworth area, he'll get out of there quickly. I think the only appropriate alert message would have been "active shooter on the loose, lock your doors and stay inside" ... nothing more specific than that.
|
|
|
Post by SteveUL on Apr 23, 2020 9:11:33 GMT -4
Yeah, the fact that he was driving a RCMP lookalike vehicle is a big factor. I would rather see a comprehensive review and real findings than a quick and easy witch hunt. From the limited info we have, the public alert would have made more sense, but there may be another aspect. Part of it was not really knowing where he was, once he left Porquepique he ~apparently~ headed for Wentworth and for a long time the authorities had no idea that this fire/murder was related. I was blown away by the fact that him having a replica RCMP car isn't necessarily illegal. Him dressing up as an RCMP and pretending to be one is illegal. But building his own RCMP car....not illegal. Absolutely terrifying thought for anyone who has ever been pulled over by RCMP on a local highway I think it is illegal to drive a replica Police car, but owning one is not. There are lots of car collectors out there that might have a Police car or two in a collection. I don't think his car was an old surplus police car though, I think he bought a brand new (maybe surplus) Ford Taurus and worked to make it a replica. In the image of the vehicle in his garage (I assume that's where it is), the new vehicle sales sticker is still in the passenger side window. The fact he had two replicas sort of suggests to me that he didn't initially intend to do this when he bought them, but later on it became the plan. He didn't need two cars to do what he did, so I think they were initially purchased for a different reason.
|
|
|
Post by Jack Bauer on Apr 23, 2020 10:06:50 GMT -4
I was blown away by the fact that him having a replica RCMP car isn't necessarily illegal. Him dressing up as an RCMP and pretending to be one is illegal. But building his own RCMP car....not illegal. Absolutely terrifying thought for anyone who has ever been pulled over by RCMP on a local highway I think it is illegal to drive a replica Police car, but owning one is not. There are lots of car collectors out there that might have a Police car or two in a collection. I don't think his car was an old surplus police car though, I think he bought a brand new (maybe surplus) Ford Taurus and worked to make it a replica. In the image of the vehicle in his garage (I assume that's where it is), the new vehicle sales sticker is still in the passenger side window. The fact he had two replicas sort of suggests to me that he didn't initially intend to do this when he bought them, but later on it became the plan. He didn't need two cars to do what he did, so I think they were initially purchased for a different reason. I just figured he bought 2 cars to build 1 good one from the parts but you may be right that his planning may not have been that long term and the purchasing of the cars had nothing to do with anything he was planning. Heard an interesting story from someone today on a local radio station: He was driving home from work and an unmarked police car with an office not in uniform pulled a car over. This guy pulled into a parking lot and dialed 911 to ask if the cop was actually legitimate. It ended up that it was all good and the police chief ended up reaching out and thanking him for taking that kind of precaution. But it's crazy how an incident like this instantly changes your perception of things when it comes to those we trust to be watching over us.
|
|
|
Post by Jack Bauer on Apr 23, 2020 10:10:16 GMT -4
I think the issue with tweeting is more in regards to it being a very rural area and the people you're trying to get the message to may not be twitter users or on any social media but may have a cell phone or get the alert on radio or tv if it's sent out. When we look back to the Moncton incident, there was no emergency alert issued either. But everybody was following it on Facebook and Twitter, because it started up around 6:00 PM (if I recall) and we stayed up late into the night following it. Facebook groups popped up that were following scanner feeds and information was in abundance. Where this recent event started at 11:15 PM, many people had already gone to bed and weren't following this event as it unfolded overnight. That was the main reason to issue the emergency alert, because it is an audible sound that scares the crap out of you. Also, the RCMP and most First Responders have gone to encrypted communications so you can no longer follow their communications in times like this so the information was not in abundance this time around. But, alerting the public also alerts him. If an emergency message goes out that he is in the Wentworth area, he'll get out of there quickly. I think the only appropriate alert message would have been "active shooter on the loose, lock your doors and stay inside" ... nothing more specific than that. Yeah that's all it had to be. Quick and to the point. Any way you look at it alerting anything risks alerting him which is why the twitter update looks like a poor decision in hindsight. It didn't alert him (we assume anyway) but also didn't necessarily alert all who needed to know about it. What sucks for the RCMP is that without the COVID update on Good Friday I dont think the alert system gets brought up as much after this as it's not something regularly utilized as there's just not that much of that around here.
|
|
|
Post by lirette on Apr 23, 2020 10:16:13 GMT -4
I think the issue with tweeting is more in regards to it being a very rural area and the people you're trying to get the message to may not be twitter users or on any social media but may have a cell phone or get the alert on radio or tv if it's sent out. When we look back to the Moncton incident, there was no emergency alert issued either. But everybody was following it on Facebook and Twitter, because it started up around 6:00 PM (if I recall) and we stayed up late into the night following it. Facebook groups popped up that were following scanner feeds and information was in abundance. Where this recent event started at 11:15 PM, many people had already gone to bed and weren't following this event as it unfolded overnight. That was the main reason to issue the emergency alert, because it is an audible sound that scares the crap out of you. Also, the RCMP and most First Responders have gone to encrypted communications so you can no longer follow their communications in times like this so the information was not in abundance this time around. But, alerting the public also alerts him. If an emergency message goes out that he is in the Wentworth area, he'll get out of there quickly. I think the only appropriate alert message would have been "active shooter on the loose, lock your doors and stay inside" ... nothing more specific than that. Moncton did not have an emergency alert system in place when the 2014 incident happened. It was actually one of the changes that came out of the investigation. Mostly as you say it didn't play a huge part as this information was so heavily shared. It even came as an alert on other apps like the weather network. What was happening was also in a densely populated suburb and not across a vast nova scotia countryside. He was also not targeting civilians. www.919thebend.ca/2014/10/09/moncton-unveils-emergency-alert-system/I think its really important to separate here the criticism and questions asked do not take away from the amazing sacrifice that every single one of these responders made on that night. The questions come down to that of the bureaucratic/leadership side into the procedures and protocols. I'm trying not to speculate or play armchair RCMP officer here so i'll allow the SIRT and RCMP to continue to complete their investigations. I think based on the facts they've provided to us so far there is definitely a fairness in asking why the alert wasn't sent once they learned he was outside their perimeter. The way the procedure is explained to us so far on how the message gets sent does not seem overly useful in an actual emergency. If you can imagine the various scenarios this could be needed for we need something better than 2+ hours to craft and approve a message with so many handoffs. Their statement in the press conference told us that they were interviewing a witness and became aware of the mock up car between 7-8am. I can appreciate that they may have a decison to weigh on whether to alert the public he was imitating an officer and what other issues that may cause given how many officers were out there in the field and the unprecedented nature of this event. I am not satisfied at this point though with their answers on why a simple active shooter / stay at home in your basement alert wasn't sent. I have family that live 10 minutes from where this ended and come at this from an additional perspective of not just who could have been saved but how much worse could it have gotten had they not stopped him on that highway. I trust this is going to be heavily looked at in the months to come. A lot of changes came out of the 2014 shooting in regards to RCMP preparedness, training & equipment and I expect this incident will be the same.
|
|
|
Post by Captain Obvious on Apr 23, 2020 10:17:59 GMT -4
I was blown away by the fact that him having a replica RCMP car isn't necessarily illegal. Him dressing up as an RCMP and pretending to be one is illegal. But building his own RCMP car....not illegal. Absolutely terrifying thought for anyone who has ever been pulled over by RCMP on a local highway I think it is illegal to drive a replica Police car, but owning one is not. There are lots of car collectors out there that might have a Police car or two in a collection. I don't think his car was an old surplus police car though, I think he bought a brand new (maybe surplus) Ford Taurus and worked to make it a replica. In the image of the vehicle in his garage (I assume that's where it is), the new vehicle sales sticker is still in the passenger side window. The fact he had two replicas sort of suggests to me that he didn't initially intend to do this when he bought them, but later on it became the plan. He didn't need two cars to do what he did, so I think they were initially purchased for a different reason. The sticker could have come from an auction. I doubt he would have bought a 7 or 8 year old car to have it sit so he could modify it into a police car.
|
|
|
Post by bois on Apr 23, 2020 11:44:13 GMT -4
this sums up my thoughts
we're in a terrible culture of thinking/demanding/critiquing everything right away
give them some time
I wish to make some comments on your television coverage of the horrible tragedy this past weekend.
Journalism should be fact based, open and transparent, and balanced in presentation. Your recent coverage is anything but. It seems you are looking for the raw, emotional aspects of a case, and then exploit a small fragment of the story to try to put blame for an incident on someone or some agency that does not deserve this scrutiny, especially this early in an investigation.
I am talking about the repeated and continuing comments that the RCMP did not request an emergency Alert. It is all well and good to interview the grieving relatives of the victims and air their complaints in their pain. That is one side of the story.
There is much more to the other sides of the story. You did nothing to investigate and present those aspects of the story. I offer a few aspects that could have been researched and brought to the broadcasts, so the public would get a balanced news piece.
1. Did you check out the internet and cell coverage in much of the area where this happened? To say it is spotty is an understatement. Therefore, many people would not get an emergency alert on their cell phone or computer.
2. Did you interview a hundred or so families living in and around the areas this happened in, to assess what percentage of people were aware of the situation on Saturday night, how manySunday morning and how they became aware, etc.? To me, that is an important aspect of the event.
3. Did you review all the various news agencies TV and radio coverage for the time period throughout this incident? Did any agency keep the public updated continuously on the information shared on Twitter by the RCMP? If not, why not? You are a news agency, always reporting breaking news. And I know all the news agencies follow Twitter!
4. Did you research the criteria and thresholds required in order to issue an Alert on the Alert Ready system? Why not and why not make that part of the news story?
5. Did you, even fleetingly, consider the effect your news pieces have had on the first responders who were working during this terrible event? Basically, you are telling them that is their fault that so many people died, they messed up and it cost lives. Not at all true. Wortman is solely responsible for these deaths. Put the blame where it belongs, at Wortman’s feet. For a moment, imagine the dispatch centre during the 12 hour event. Pure chaos, but controlled chaos, once the first reports came in. And it was catch up from there, as the suspect couldn’t be located and moved quickly through the numerous back roads of a very rural area. It does not surprise me that the police couldn’t locate and corral him. The area is full of little back roads and escape routes. Look at the map of the area. As the police received new information they sent it out. Often, the news was old as soon as they sent it out, because Wortman was moving quickly over large distances. Think about the psychological effect of your news report!!
I think your agency owes an apology to all the first responders. You and your agency have to stop being ‘ambulance chaser newscasters’, only reporting the most sensational or controversial aspects of an event.
You and your agency have to stop being ’armchair quarterbacks’ for your stories. You weren’t there, you don’t know how things went down. So, stop giving a one sided aspect of a story. Do your research, investigate, consider the effects of your news clip on all those affected and make a balanced report.
Doing anything less puts a dark stain on you as a journalist and on your agency as a reputable news outlet.
Thank You.
|
|
|
Post by Jack Bauer on Apr 23, 2020 13:03:57 GMT -4
this sums up my thoughts we're in a terrible culture of thinking/demanding/critiquing everything right away give them some time I wish to make some comments on your television coverage of the horrible tragedy this past weekend. Journalism should be fact based, open and transparent, and balanced in presentation. Your recent coverage is anything but. It seems you are looking for the raw, emotional aspects of a case, and then exploit a small fragment of the story to try to put blame for an incident on someone or some agency that does not deserve this scrutiny, especially this early in an investigation. I am talking about the repeated and continuing comments that the RCMP did not request an emergency Alert. It is all well and good to interview the grieving relatives of the victims and air their complaints in their pain. That is one side of the story. There is much more to the other sides of the story. You did nothing to investigate and present those aspects of the story. I offer a few aspects that could have been researched and brought to the broadcasts, so the public would get a balanced news piece. 1. Did you check out the internet and cell coverage in much of the area where this happened? To say it is spotty is an understatement. Therefore, many people would not get an emergency alert on their cell phone or computer. 2. Did you interview a hundred or so families living in and around the areas this happened in, to assess what percentage of people were aware of the situation on Saturday night, how manySunday morning and how they became aware, etc.? To me, that is an important aspect of the event. 3. Did you review all the various news agencies TV and radio coverage for the time period throughout this incident? Did any agency keep the public updated continuously on the information shared on Twitter by the RCMP? If not, why not? You are a news agency, always reporting breaking news. And I know all the news agencies follow Twitter! 4. Did you research the criteria and thresholds required in order to issue an Alert on the Alert Ready system? Why not and why not make that part of the news story? 5. Did you, even fleetingly, consider the effect your news pieces have had on the first responders who were working during this terrible event? Basically, you are telling them that is their fault that so many people died, they messed up and it cost lives. Not at all true. Wortman is solely responsible for these deaths. Put the blame where it belongs, at Wortman’s feet. For a moment, imagine the dispatch centre during the 12 hour event. Pure chaos, but controlled chaos, once the first reports came in. And it was catch up from there, as the suspect couldn’t be located and moved quickly through the numerous back roads of a very rural area. It does not surprise me that the police couldn’t locate and corral him. The area is full of little back roads and escape routes. Look at the map of the area. As the police received new information they sent it out. Often, the news was old as soon as they sent it out, because Wortman was moving quickly over large distances. Think about the psychological effect of your news report!! I think your agency owes an apology to all the first responders. You and your agency have to stop being ‘ambulance chaser newscasters’, only reporting the most sensational or controversial aspects of an event. You and your agency have to stop being ’armchair quarterbacks’ for your stories. You weren’t there, you don’t know how things went down. So, stop giving a one sided aspect of a story. Do your research, investigate, consider the effects of your news clip on all those affected and make a balanced report. Doing anything less puts a dark stain on you as a journalist and on your agency as a reputable news outlet. Thank You. There's a lot of naive expectations in most of those points. A bit of is valid, most of it is not. Journalists aren't expected to review each others coverage before being critical...they're allowed to be critical and be told someone/something else already answered that. Nobody is perfect. Any % of people being asked before needing to form an opinion is a straw man argument if i've ever seen one. Imagine not reporting on the events around a murder until you've interviewed enough people connected to it. Logic like this is why the media is slowly being killed off and we'll be left to just "trust" the people who continue to give us no reason to trust them. Every bit of criticism around the alert system not being used has been fair. Especially since we do know the people running the system wanted to send an alert but were told no. If the logic surrounding those reasons change....people are allowed to change their opinion or lessen their coverage of that item. How often have we gone from mourning someone to realizing they were a murderer? It happens. Just because it's a sad story doesn't make everyone handling it immune to any questions or criticism about the process. If the story is completely lost if every single item isn't covered to the perfection of every single individual then the reality is there will never be a story to cover.
|
|
|
Post by SteveUL on Apr 23, 2020 14:26:46 GMT -4
When we look back to the Moncton incident, there was no emergency alert issued either. But everybody was following it on Facebook and Twitter, because it started up around 6:00 PM (if I recall) and we stayed up late into the night following it. Facebook groups popped up that were following scanner feeds and information was in abundance. Where this recent event started at 11:15 PM, many people had already gone to bed and weren't following this event as it unfolded overnight. That was the main reason to issue the emergency alert, because it is an audible sound that scares the crap out of you. Also, the RCMP and most First Responders have gone to encrypted communications so you can no longer follow their communications in times like this so the information was not in abundance this time around. But, alerting the public also alerts him. If an emergency message goes out that he is in the Wentworth area, he'll get out of there quickly. I think the only appropriate alert message would have been "active shooter on the loose, lock your doors and stay inside" ... nothing more specific than that. Moncton did not have an emergency alert system in place when the 2014 incident happened. It was actually one of the changes that came out of the investigation. Mostly as you say it didn't play a huge part as this information was so heavily shared. It even came as an alert on other apps like the weather network. What was happening was also in a densely populated suburb and not across a vast nova scotia countryside. He was also not targeting civilians. www.919thebend.ca/2014/10/09/moncton-unveils-emergency-alert-system/I think its really important to separate here the criticism and questions asked do not take away from the amazing sacrifice that every single one of these responders made on that night. The questions come down to that of the bureaucratic/leadership side into the procedures and protocols. I'm trying not to speculate or play armchair RCMP officer here so i'll allow the SIRT and RCMP to continue to complete their investigations. I think based on the facts they've provided to us so far there is definitely a fairness in asking why the alert wasn't sent once they learned he was outside their perimeter. The way the procedure is explained to us so far on how the message gets sent does not seem overly useful in an actual emergency. If you can imagine the various scenarios this could be needed for we need something better than 2+ hours to craft and approve a message with so many handoffs. Their statement in the press conference told us that they were interviewing a witness and became aware of the mock up car between 7-8am. I can appreciate that they may have a decison to weigh on whether to alert the public he was imitating an officer and what other issues that may cause given how many officers were out there in the field and the unprecedented nature of this event. I am not satisfied at this point though with their answers on why a simple active shooter / stay at home in your basement alert wasn't sent. I have family that live 10 minutes from where this ended and come at this from an additional perspective of not just who could have been saved but how much worse could it have gotten had they not stopped him on that highway. I trust this is going to be heavily looked at in the months to come. A lot of changes came out of the 2014 shooting in regards to RCMP preparedness, training & equipment and I expect this incident will be the same. Don't hold your breath waiting for the SIRT report(s). I have experienced some of their investigations and find that they are just Police investigating Police and are more or less just lip service to confirm that nothing was done incorrectly. They may add in something minor that was done wrong to try to show some credibility but won't hold anybody's feet to the fire on big issues. I am not blaming the RCMP at all through this. It was a fast evolving situation with multiple crime scenes, and they did not realize this guy had a Police car and so he could slip in and out of an area unnoticed. Mistakes were probably made but that's the nature of something like this where the shooter seemed to be very organized and used remarkable (hate giving him credit, but it was critical to the extent of his damage) deception in this whole reign of terror ... motherfucker !! I am more interested in the time line of all of the deaths and crime scenes. Did any deaths occur after they detected that he had a mock police cruiser and uniform ? How long after the last victim death did they put him down ? Also reading today that he actually had a "hit list" written out and he did not get to some of the names on his list. One of those names was a guy he tried to buy a surplus police vehicle from, but they couldn't agree on price. That's the only connection that this "lucky" guy feels he had with this monster.
|
|
|
Post by SteveUL on Apr 23, 2020 14:32:55 GMT -4
I think it is illegal to drive a replica Police car, but owning one is not. There are lots of car collectors out there that might have a Police car or two in a collection. I don't think his car was an old surplus police car though, I think he bought a brand new (maybe surplus) Ford Taurus and worked to make it a replica. In the image of the vehicle in his garage (I assume that's where it is), the new vehicle sales sticker is still in the passenger side window. The fact he had two replicas sort of suggests to me that he didn't initially intend to do this when he bought them, but later on it became the plan. He didn't need two cars to do what he did, so I think they were initially purchased for a different reason. The sticker could have come from an auction. I doubt he would have bought a 7 or 8 year old car to have it sit so he could modify it into a police car. Apparently he had two vehicles ... it isn't reported yet where or when he bought them. But you could buy an unsold, never driven, Ford Taurus, say a couple of years old, from a Ford Surplus sale. The vehicle in the photo doesn't look like an old beater that had been through the wars as a regular duty RCMP vehicle, with say 1,000,000 miles on it. It looked newish to me. But if this guy is planning to go out with guns a blazing, he doesn't really care about how much money he is wasting on what he needs to get to make this all happen.
|
|
|
Post by CrazyJoeDavola on Apr 23, 2020 14:41:42 GMT -4
Have they even reported on whether he was married, divorced, has kids etc? Who else works in his practice etc?
|
|