Prosecution drops criminal charges against Michael Bryant

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RFISP_PrhFo

We should protest this obvious miscarriage of justice.

I think we should spray paint "weapon of mass destruction" on Bryant's car. Maybe we should start spray painting all cars with that label.

I would bet this is a legally reasonable decision. Given the phalanx of lawyers Bryant would bring to bear on this case I would not have bet on a conviction. However it is still an injustice and I would have preferred it be put to a judge.

I don't claim to have a particular insight on the facts of the case or the law. My concern is the way the case is reflected in the street. By that I am thinking on an incident approaching Spadina Circle. The entrance to the circle is a sharp right hand turn, a minivan cuts me off I brake hard to avoid getting creamed as his tires bump over the curb. I catch up to him at the next light and ask "What were you thinking?" in the most diplomatic tone I could muster. He starts yelling at me about how bike should not be allowed on the streets.

Everyone knows that Bryant accelerated to high speed on the wrong side of the road to smash Sheppard's head into a mailbox. My concern is that minivan wielding idiots will feel more justified in their already bizarre behavior.

I bet another cyclist gets killed this week.
I want Peck to come to Bells on Bloor this week to explain to us why he choose to sentence more of us to death at the hands of motorists who already feel justified in dangerous and reckless driving.

This is not mainly about cycling and drivers, though it is also about the fact that the same 'incident' with a car will never get you the same charge done with any other dangerous machine, it's about privilege: there's one law for each socio-economic stratum. Watch the video, and if you are not well connected, ask yourself what would have happened to you in a court of law if you had done exactly what Bryant did under the same circumstances.

For starters, the only lawyers I know are bankruptcy lawyers, and I'd have to hire the cheapest lawyer I could find anyway; I couldn't afford to hire a PR firm, even if my ethics were so poor that was my first phone call; I would not have been able to get away with avoiding a breathalyzer, esp. if I had left the scene and driven to a hotel bar for a drink. My @$$ would be in jail, even though my income is 'middle', I'm white, male, without piercings or tattoos. Hate to think what would happen if I were 'disadvantaged'...

"why is this being decided by one person instead of a jury of 12?" Because justice is not blind, to money or influence.

So where and when is the protest? Not necessarily the venue, but I can imagine a huge turn out for Critical Mass Friday. I never go: Friday I will.

This is not mainly about cycling and drivers, though it is also about the fact that the same 'incident' with a car will never get you the same charge done with any other dangerous machine, it's about privilege: there's one law for each socio-economic stratum. Watch the video, and if you are not well connected, ask yourself what would have happened to you in a court of law if you had done exactly what Bryant did under the same circumstances.

For starters, the only lawyers I know are bankruptcy lawyers, and I'd have to hire the cheapest lawyer I could find anyway; I couldn't afford to hire a PR firm, even if my ethics were so poor that was my first phone call; I would not have been able to get away with avoiding a breathalyzer, esp. if I had left the scene and driven to a hotel bar for a drink. My --- would be in jail, even though my income is 'middle', I'm white, male, without piercings or tattoos. Hate to think what would happen if I were 'disadvantaged'...

"why is this being decided by one person instead of a jury of 12?" Because justice is not blind, to money or influence.

So where and when is the protest? Not necessarily the venue, but I can imagine a huge turn out for Critical Mass Friday. I never go: Friday I will.

This is not mainly about cycling and drivers, though it is also about the fact that the same 'incident' with a car will never get you the same charge done with any other dangerous machine, it's about privilege: there's one law for each socio-economic stratum. Watch the video, and if you are not well connected, ask yourself what would have happened to you in a court of law if you had done exactly what Bryant did under the same circumstances.

For starters, the only lawyers I know are bankruptcy lawyers, and I'd have to hire the cheapest lawyer I could find anyway; I couldn't afford to hire a PR firm, even if my ethics were so poor that was my first phone call; I would not have been able to get away with avoiding a breathalyzer, esp. if I had left the scene and driven to a hotel bar for a drink. My tuchus would be in jail, even though my income is 'middle', I'm white, male, without piercings or tattoos. Hate to think what would happen if I were 'disadvantaged'...

"why is this being decided by one person instead of a jury of 12?" Because justice is not blind, to money or influence.

So where and when is the protest? Not necessarily the venue, but I can imagine a huge turn out for Critical Mass Friday. I never go: Friday I will.

This is not mainly about cycling and drivers, though it is also about the fact that the same 'incident' with a car will never get you the same charge done with any other dangerous machine, it's about privilege: there's one law for each socio-economic stratum. Watch the video, and if you are not well connected, ask yourself what would have happened to you in a court of law if you had done exactly what Bryant did under the same circumstances.

For starters, the only lawyers I know are bankruptcy lawyers, and I'd have to hire the cheapest lawyer I could find anyway; I couldn't afford to hire a PR firm, even if my ethics were so poor that was my first phone call; I would not have been able to get away with avoiding a breathalyzer, esp. if I had left the scene and driven to a hotel bar for a drink. My tuchus would be in jail, even though my income is 'middle', I'm white, male, without piercings or tattoos. Hate to think what would happen if I were 'disadvantaged'...

"why is this being decided by one person instead of a jury of 12?" Because justice is not blind, to money or influence.

that is it, the worms will get their chance at bryant's flesh also.

This is not mainly about cycling and drivers, though it is also about the fact that the same 'incident' with a car will never get you the same charge done with any other dangerous machine, it's about privilege: there's one law for each socio-economic stratum. Watch the video, and if you are not well connected, ask yourself what would have happened to you in a court of law if you had done exactly what Bryant did under the same circumstances.

For starters, the only lawyers I know are bankruptcy lawyers, and I'd have to hire the cheapest lawyer I could find anyway; I couldn't afford to hire a PR firm, even if my ethics were so poor that was my first phone call; I would not have been able to get away with avoiding a breathalyzer, esp. if I had left the scene and driven to a hotel bar for a drink. My tuchus would be in jail, even though my income is 'middle', I'm white, male, without piercings or tattoos. Hate to think what would happen if I were 'disadvantaged'...

"why is this being decided by one person instead of a jury of 12?" Because justice is not blind, to money or influence.

Why are comments not showing up?

The message is: if a motorist feels you are obstructing his way, he is entitled to drive into you and maybe nearly over you and then try to drive away, and don't react to a hit and run attempt because you're a cyclist, and less worthy than someone in a car.
Media reports (CBC) also cite the involvement of Mr. Sheppard in 6 other car/bike frictions, but a big bike rider likely has one near-miss a week from a motorist.
And what happened to the Failure to Remain charges?.. maybe it wasn't an "accident"...

It's true - certified legal loophole folks. Just make sure they've had a few drink and bad credit history.

Go Canada.

A trial should have been done to give everyone a peace of mind.

People always protect their own, or those they identify with. Not many prosecutors of a calibre for this trial ride bikes, much less messenger, much less have had run-ins with the law and live on a prosecutor's entertainment expenses. That's why this should have gone to a trial in front of a representation of all of society, because the rigging paid for beforehand was so obvious.

I met one of the people working for Navigator on this case: "It's unfortunate what was done to him (Bryant)". Of course he had to bring up Sheppard's rap-sheet and poverty, so I pointed out that was a red-herring: "Last I heard we don't have a death penalty no matter who screwed up." I had to leave before I punched him in the face. Just about the most odious person I have ever spoken to. Decent people don't take jobs like that.

I hope there is a huge turnout for Critical Mass this Friday! Not usually my cup of tea, but I'm going this week.

This really pisses me off... enough that I'm sending the following letter to the Attorney General and to Dalton McGuinty. I suggest you all write similar letters....

May 25, 2010.

To:
Ministry of the Attorney General
McMurtry-Scott Building
720 Bay Street, 11th Floor
Toronto, ON
M7A 2S9

CC:
Dalton McGuinty, Premier
Legislative Building
Queen's Park
Toronto ON M7A 1A1

Today I heard the news that all charges against Michael Bryant were dropped… supposedly because, according to Mr. Richard Peck, “there's no reasonable prospect for conviction”.

Excuse me?

I saw the video evidence.

Only a fool would believe that Michael Bryant was NOT driving in deliberate way to inflict injuries on the cyclist, Darcy Allan Sheppard.

And it doesn’t matter that Mr. Sheppard had some alcohol in his blood… he’s not the one who killed someone.

I absolutely believe that if I, Peter Stern, hit and killed a cyclist in the same manner, in the same circumstances, I wouldn’t have the luxury of the crown just dropping the case… no matter how much remorse I showed.

Today I absolutely believe that we do NOT have a Justice System in Ontario.

We only have a Legal System.

The system we have is only about what is legal, not what is Just.

I personally have observed people getting convicted on charges backed with far flimsier evidence than the evidence that Mr. Bryant had against him.

I saw Mr. Bryant mentioning in an interview today that this isn’t about class or privilege.

I disagree.

At this very moment, I have a friend in jail simply because a female employee he fired for drinking alcohol on the job cried rape. And she did this after getting fired.

And even though the rape kit proved that none of his DNA was on or in her (and I know for a fact he wouldn’t force himself on anyone, let alone an employee) AND that he had other employees countering the accusations against him, he DIDN’T have the luxury of the crown dropping the charges against him.

I’m sure if my friend had a $100,000+ legal defense or the benefit of Police Union lawyers, the outcome would have been quite different.

For one thing, he wouldn’t have had to cut a deal to plead “guilty” because he couldn’t afford the legal costs associated with a proper legal defense.

I believe that there are two tiers of justice in Ontario and Canada… The first tier includes those who are powerful politicians, their friends and members of police unions.

People in this group RARELY get convicted because evidence mysteriously gets “tainted” or “lost”. And even if that doesn’t happen, Crown Attorneys seem to prosecute these cases with all the firmness of Jello Pudding.

The second and much lower tier is the rest of us. Those of us who can’t afford PR firms who slander the victim or don’t have the leverage to threaten to limit the career of any officer or Crown employee who won’t go easy on us.

If everyone had the same legal and PR representation that Mr. Bryant had, I estimate that the number of convictions in Canada would drop by 80 to 90%.

I am exceptionally angry over this and I have absolutely no faith that we have a legal system that truly aspires to the concept of Justice.

I’m adding this to my list of issues to keep in mind for when the next election rolls around.

Peter Stern
Toronto, Ontario
(address info deleted)

Well, I know what his Saab looks like, as I'm sure I've ticketed the thing before. Wonder if it's on the tow list yet?

I am deeply unsettled by these results. As pointed out earlier- what does this mean for the way drivers proceed to deal with these altercations - which for many of us occur DAILY? I have a hot temper, a strong sense of justice, and when my body is thrown in a near-death situation because of a driver's error or ignorance, I will often altercate and I suspect the same for many of us.
Bryant is 'humbled' by the case (The Star). OH BOO. Is this supposed to bring solace to those who lost someone from their lives? Is this supposed to be some sort of conjecture to make us believe he was NOT favored by the SOLE adjudicator?

NOT a chance! This is a load of crap . So - what happens now? How do we take action?

At least we'll know who to avoid, if you send us the number.

Needless to say, the self-appointed 'bike union' had nothing to say on their website last I looked. Useless.

Well, good. I know that next time I need to defend myself and my significant other against a drunk who attacks people, perhaps my life won't be ruined.

Navigator took this matter under their wing and it now reads like a Martha Stewart version of accidental circumstance. Michael Bryant had the choice between gas pedal & brake, he needs to be held accountable to his choice.

This Friday, one of the two involved in this incident will sipping a martini in his Forest Hill home, the other will be lying still in his grave.

Justice has not been served, not yet. ****

Watch the video... Bryant attacked Darcy first.

IF you don't want to have to defend yourself don't go revving then ramming your car into people.

What a horrible attack it must have been.

Read what the prosecutor said in court and it's clear that the charges should be dropped.

Even the cyclist's stepfather, Allan Sheppard, agrees with the decision:

> Allan Sheppard, the dead man’s adoptive father, said after that if he had been presented with the same evidence he wouldn’t have insisted on a trial. “I’m content with the result as it came,” he said on the steps outside Old City Hall.

I am a driver.

That alone will probably earn me a lot of heckling and abusive comments here. I was here in this blog when the incident went down and got into a lot of arguments with many people on this forum. I respect their opinions just as long as they respect mine and do not threaten do drive me into the gutter. That said, I have a few observations I would like to make:

1) I see this incident as a very unfortunate accident. The only reason why this is getting so much press is that it involves a former politician, and a conservative one at that (cyclists do not like Conservatives, from what I hear). Bryant isn't getting away scot free however. You can bet that Bryant loses a lot of sleep over the entire incident where a man lost his life. I know I would. Even Conservatives have a soul.

2) I've seen some videos of the event and if Bryant DID run Sheppard down (which may have started the whole situation), then at the very least he should have been charged with some form of non-homicide vehicular assault, not murder or negligent homicide. Sheppard's own reaction escalated the situation to one where bodily harm was VERY likely.

3) Bike riders in general do not have that angelic halo that fellow bikers bestow upon them, they too need to follow the laws of the road. Forgetting that Bryant may have hit Sheppard by accident, but I've seen some rather obnoxious bike riders on the road (and nearly gotten into an altercation with one after HE was the one who cut me off and threatened me). The more everyone, including bikers, respect the laws of the road and admit that they are not infalliable, the better relations between drivers and bikers will be. Road rage is not a car-specific problem. Let this entire incident be a lesson for bike riders and car drivers: stay safe, stay calm, and respect the other people on the road, whether it be bike, car, or pedestrian.

4) For the bikers union: if you want a cause celebre, Mark Allen Sheppard shouldn't be it. Rather, concentrate on the large number of bikers who were killed through no fault of their own, did not fight back, did not swear, but rather obeyed the rules of the road only to have an idiot driver not do so. I don't mean to demean the victim; a life lost is indeed a tragedy, but had Sheppard not retaliated, and Bryant simply ran him over, there would be more sympathy towards bikers and we'd all be clamouring for Bryant's head.

1. Bryant served with the Liberal government. You may feel he is conservative, but you shouldn't capitalize the word as that implies party affiliation.
2. Bryant did strike Sheppard's bike first that is not an 'if'. I've stalled a car many times, you are still responsible for the motion of the car regardless of what kind of weaselly lawyer type you are.
3. Why should bikers have to be angelic? On any given day if you whiz by a thousand bikes, a handful of them have recently had a near collision - they may be scared, angry or whatever. Expecting polite sociable behavior is unreasonable. However road rage IS a car phenomenon. Pedestrians around union station definitely face a congestion issue, however they don't get into fist fights over it. I get mad a bikers who are on the wrong side of the road, but you never get that follow you to the next exit and pull a gun type of auto rage. Cars bring the element of mortal danger to transportation - not bikes.
4. I can't speak for the bikers union, but I am sure they would be happy to have no 'cause celebre' at all.

We need bike lanes. The roads need to make accommodations for the safety of bicycle riders.

IMO. Tragically.

Al had his demons, in a society that condones the suffering of people with their demons by having slashed services for addiction and mental health. It's also no surprise that the guy with native blood, and an 'alternate' career got the crap end of the stick.

Bryant used his vehicle as a weapon, whether belligerently or in dubious self-defence, and that is never taken as seriously when it is a car. We've all been threatened. Bryant also had the ability to make his first call to a PR firm, which was able to spin vehicular assault and leaving the scene into 'self-defence'. Whether he was able to pull strings with his professional and social connections we'll never know, but the fact that he could afford a PR team and lawyers 95% of us never could, means he was going to walk, one way or another.

We the sheeple have to wake up, this is the way every primate society works: the functional sociopaths reaps the spoils, without the consequences. The killers of millions, the horrible boss, the driver who kills, have this in common: they are or emulate sociopaths, because their success is the only thing they care about. The one hope for humans is to eradicate the sociopaths, and those who emulate them. No political movement has ever changed this, because they've cut down a few trees, but left the forest.

1. Bryant hit Sheppard with his car.
2. Bryant had the opportunity of stopping the car and instead his calous actions resulted in the death of Al Sheppard.
3. This never went to trial - so the verdict was never given. In my opinion Bryant IS guilty, but a civil suit will need to make point.
4. Al Sheppard was on trial here, NOT Michael Bryant. When asked what he would have done differently, Bryant responded, "I would have stayed at home". I would argue that if he had never hit Sheppard from behind and tried to flee the scene., then there would have been a very different outcome.

Michael Bryant killed a man, and he needs to be held accountable.

So Bryant's excuse for ramming Shephard with his car is basically that he was unable to maintain control of his car from a stopped position? Apparently the dimming of the car's headlights was consistent with the stalling-out and re-starting theory, but shouldn't Bryant have expected his car to lurch towards Sheppard again when repeating the same actions that brought it so close to the bike moments before? And knowing that the car was already almost touching the bike, does it really take a full second ("one-one thousand..") to realize that the car's next motion would hit Sheppard, whether or not Bryant was looking down at the time?

If Sheppard was only verbally aggressive at this point (aside from "blocking" Bryant's vehicle) and only Bryant's (accidental/incompetent?) actions escalated the dispute to the physical level, how can it be said that Sheppard was the aggressor? If Bryant was unable to start the car without hitting Sheppard and his vehicle offered no protection from a possible assault when still, maybe he should have removed the keys and walked/ran away while calling police. There was no criminal charge he could be convicted of? Come on.

Bryant was simply dropping the clutch BADLY to scare the shit out of darcy. Motorists try to intimidate me like this when they want to turn right on red.

Bryant dropped the clutch rammed darcy hard enough to send him sprawling. Was he hurt at that point? More so than Bryant ever was.

NExt Bryant suddenly finds REVERSE!! OMG REVERSE!!! I DON'T HAVE TO RUN EVERYTHING DOWN IN FRONT OF ME. WHY DIDN'T I THINK OF THAT FIRST?? OH YA CUZ I WAS TRYING TO INTIMIDATE DARCY?!!? K I'LL JUST REVERSE AND TRY TO LEAVE THE SCENE NOW, I BET THAT GUY IS GONNA BE ANGRY I RAN HIM DOWN.

Not even a DANGEROUS DRIVING CHARGE CAUSING DEATH.

GIMME A BREAK!! CORRUPT LIBERAL TRASH.

Wake up people, the majority of us live under a system of plutarchy that is trying to choke and drain the life blood out of each and everyone of us in a different ways mentally, physically, socially, politically, economically, etc. We are under assault by a system that always favors a few at the expense of many. It's happening all over the place and it is in the news. Unless there is unity between the suffering majority of people, all is lost. The system thrives on the exploitation of the multitude that is kept weak and divided, poor and helpless.

They found a prosecutor that was from outside the province of Ontario. Richard Peck is from British Columbia and Michael Bryant is also originally from British Columbia. Both attended the same law school there too. Why not someone from a totally unconnected province at all?

Blatchford made a point anyone but a moron would agree to: this ain't the justice we'd get. Blatchford

May Bryant be remembered as the man whose car had a mind of its own.