Read on Twitter
Seriously, the statement issued by the RCMP today is incredibly vague. Obtuse, even. It's insulting. The timeline of events provides no times of day. It does not detail any police action over the course of 12 hours. It does not say how many people were injured.
There's no word on how many people knew the perp, or how those that did were related.
One problem — it's not even the main problem — with the lack of clear information is that it leads to widespread rumours. You would not believe the crazy stuff I'm hearing. Is it true? I dunno. I have to chase it down. But the RCMP's lack of clarity lead to distrust. Of the RCMP.
And some of the information in the press release is just wrong. For instance:
"Q: Did [the perpetrator] have a criminal record? A: No." But as I noted the other day, he has a 2002 conviction for assault. I got that info with a simple email to the court.
"Q: Did [the perpetrator] have a criminal record? A: No." But as I noted the other day, he has a 2002 conviction for assault. I got that info with a simple email to the court.
It's pointed out to me "criminal record" doesn't apply to a conviction that was vacated, as was his 2002 conviction after his 9 months probation (and $50 fine). But why word it that way? He was convicted of assault. It's relevant! Whether it's part of a "criminal record" or not
