Interference With A Candidate During The Election Process

Posted on Wednesday, December 07 at 14:44 by whelan costen
A full account will be provided to the press on request. “Flyers in hand, I approached fellow "villagers", offering them cheery introductory greetings in my most pleasant demeanor. Once through the food-court and then on down the main corridor, lined with shops, all tenants in this community-oriented shopping plaza, a veritable mecca of merchandise. I focused on those without a purposeful demeanour, people with a moment to spare; I didn't wish to appear intrusive; I searched out those receptive-looking individuals. I didn't get too far when I became the subject of a search - a mall security agent did zero in on me, asserting that I was causing a disturbance. I assured him that I wasn't and the gentleman who had been conversant with me till we were interrupted by the agent, did not disagree with me. Nor did he object as the security agent, commandeering my attention, herded me along with his imposing presence, insisting that I'd been causing a disturbance and that I would have to leave. He herded me around the corner, turning west, headed towards the Hudson Bay store. By now, the agent was insisting that I was trespassing, that everyone but myself had received an invitation and that I had to leave. I assured him that I had a stack of invitations, just like everyone else, here, piled up with our newspapers. I told him; at best, his employer's policies were infringing on my duty to inform my fellow "villagers", that indeed, they had more choices than were being conveyed to them through standard broadcasting means. There's a great deal being left out, these days, really. He understood, saying that he'd been to my site. It became plain for me to see that my concerns were pre-empted by size, first and then by numbers as a second agent joined us and between them, forced me through a side door that opened up into a long, empty corridor. Up until now, I'd allowed myself to be herded but at this point, I resisted, futile, however valiant, I was eventually forced, face-first to the concrete floor, my arms twisted behind my back, with these two agents perched on top of me. In the melee, my flyers and forms had gone flying out of my grasp, stripped like a football and then ground under-foot in the ensuing struggle. Perhaps I shouldn't have gloated at how long it took the two of them to subdue me; they only twisted all the harder and sat more firmly upon me. Still, in spite of a lingering back-ache, I figure that the imlications of their asserted position, does deserve to be challenged. I also figure that about ten minutes lapsed with me in this face-down position as we waited for an RCMP officer to arrive. In the meantime, another hired agent arrived to assist his buddies. Eventually, they handcuffed me, picked me up and escorted me like a common criminal, to their office. One of security agents yanked me about, supposedly to prevent my bumping into other pedestrians. I made a few passing comments about the cost of making unpopular political statements, earning me even more aggressive steering behaviour, now challenging my ability to maintain my footing. I dug in, earnestly in deliberate protest. Once inside the sanctity of their office, the security agent that had been steering me, became more civil. I remained indignant. Constable M.E. (Mike) LOERKE Kelowna Detachment - Watch #4, eventually attended, culminating in the creation of FILE #: 05-65205 and my signed (under protest, threat duress and intimidation) agreement to a life-time ban from the private premises of Orchard Park shopping mall. I was only then that the hand-cuffs came off, after I indicated this obvious handicap to my ability to acquiesce to their demands. Then, they didn't want to give me a copy of "the agreement". the good constable, Mike Loerke, intervened, first getting their agreement that it was indeed, a contract and then by defending my right to a copy of the document. They countered that they had no means - the photo-copier was locked in the manager's office. They conceded that they would provide me with a copy, the good constable, Mike Loerke, giving me his personal assurances that he would see to it, himself if need be. On the way out, Constable Loerke told me that he agreed with me, fundamentally but that he took issue with my methods. Constable Loerke, I say to you; In the last 10 years, I have exhausted every "conventional remedy" that has appeared to be available to me - none of them have worked. It is only after considerable trial and assessment that I arrive at such an outrageous conclusion, leading me to the next step - those less conventional approaches, all the while becoming less compliant in the face of growing malicious ignorance. Clearly, it is not so much that which I do as what I refuse to do, now, that commands your attention, primarily.” Contact info: Connie Fogal, Leader ,Canadian Action Party/ parti action Canadienne Tel: (604)872 2128; or (604) 708 3372 (FAX: 604) 872 -1504 E-MAIL conniefogal@telus.net Catherine Whelan Costen, Canadian Action Party President Tel: 403-660-0449 FAX: 403-684-3464 Email: cathpublish@wildroseinternet.ca Canadian ActionParty Head office : # 385- 916 West Broadway, Vancouver BC, V521K7; e mail: info@canadianactionparty.ca (Note: apology to Mr.Thomson for mispelling his name on original)

Contributed By



Article Rating

 (0 votes) 

Options




Comments

  1. Wed Dec 07, 2005 11:37 pm
    Insane,

    I think the security officers should be charged.

  2. Thu Dec 08, 2005 12:09 am
    Is it illegal for private property owners to restrict access to those they don't want on their property? I don't think so.

    Does CAP and it's candidates believe in upholding property rights? I certainly hope so.

    Do malls generally have a "no solicit" policy on their property? I do think so.

    Should David Thomas have known that he was taking a risk by campaigning at a mall, which is private property and whose owners/management/security may take issue with someone bothering their customers with something that is not related to their business? One would think so.

    Is the cry of "candidate interference" a ridiculous accusation, or is it a ploy to finally get some media attention on what is generally an unknown party? We think so.

  3. Thu Dec 08, 2005 2:20 am
    Mr Scott don't even get me started. Your not so subtle Conservative haha overtone is disgusting to say the least.

    I have been involved in security for 15 years in BC and what these security guards did is not right.

    First - how the handled the situation was wrong. Citing the reading of a website as a reason for removal is even more foolish on their part.

    Second - if handcuffs or other type of restraint were used, that is against the applicable laws regarding the operations of private security. They are NOT allowed to use restraint devices under any circumstances!

    Regarding private property issues - certainly private land owners have certain rights under the law and the security company acts in the duty of the those rights on behalf of the property owner. Thing is, not all private places of business restrict campaigning. The candidate had no way of knowing. If the guards had read their standing orders to the candidate referring to the private owners wishes for no election campaigning then I am sure this candidate would have moved on peacefully and without a scuffle taking place.

    Without knowing more, but at this point it seems the guards did not cite their standing orders at any point, but acted out of what we call "bully syndrome". If these guards were on my watch, they would all have the week off for their actions without pay for their use of a restraint device. If they had prior problems, they would be removed from their jobs.

    Catherine or Connie feel free to contact me regarding the rules and regulations that oversee private security operations in BC.

    ---
    If there was ever a time for Canadians to become pushy - now is the time - for time is running out on this nation called Canada.

  4. Thu Dec 08, 2005 2:25 am
    I should have also asked - since he was indeed taken into detention by the security guards - did they read him his rights and did they tell him they were conducting a citizens arrest? These are important points, when the time of the arrival of the peace officer is factored in.

    ---
    If there was ever a time for Canadians to become pushy - now is the time - for time is running out on this nation called Canada.

  5. Thu Dec 08, 2005 3:17 am
    Well leave me see... Who owns this private security company ? How much does this security donate to the Liberals...Conservative Party.. NDP and are they unionized, you know the NDP use their connection with unions sometimes.

    THIS WAS A DIRTY MOVE !

    ---
    Good government is not a party government

  6. Thu Dec 08, 2005 5:15 am
    >>>Interference with a Candidate during the Election Process<<<

    Democracy in Canada was effectively destroyed today by 2 mall cops! This innocent looking food court was the site of the most blatant assault against the freedom loving people everywhere since the beer hall putsch! Oh the humanity!
    What is next? Cuddly puppy killing??? Think of the children Canadians! Vote Cap and protect the citizens >right< to campaign on other peoples property however they want to!

  7. Thu Dec 08, 2005 5:40 am
    >> Your not so subtle Conservative haha overtone is disgusting to say the least.<<<

    It seems that the idea that people have the right to say what can and cant happen on their own property is now “disgusting”.

    Well Roy, I hope you don’t mind but we in the Redneck Conservatives Party (The RCP) are going to set up our campaign headquarters on your front lawn tomorrow and pass out leaflets. We have to dig up your garden to set up the dunking booth but hey, its political expression so shut your pie hole about it. If you ask me to leave I am going to babble (in the goofiest way possible of course) something to the effect that: “I told him; at best, his employer's policies were infringing on my duty to inform my fellow "villagers".

    After you boot my idiot ass off your property I am going to write a press release ( again, in the goofiest way possible) complete with a photo of your shoe print on my ass and cry about like an 8 year old girl on the RCP website. Hopefully some dittoheads will agree that this was a big affront to the democratic process and that I should get media attention for my goofy political party, as well as an ice bag for my ass.

  8. Thu Dec 08, 2005 7:16 am
    Property rights are not the issue, its how the security officers handled the situaiton that is the problem. What they did violated the candiates Charter Rights, and they violated the Provincial regulations regarding citizens arrest. They had the right to escort him off the property, not take him into a hallway and tackle him. If he was cooperating, then they had no right to touch him at all. That kind of behavior is not acceptable from Police, let alone a Private Security guard.

    Don't be such a dickhead RCP.

  9. Thu Dec 08, 2005 7:42 am
    I think there are a couple of issues here that some are trying to downplay. Is a mall open to the public? Even a private club that is open or invites the public must have public access rules, etc, a shopping mall is not a private residence. Is there a sign on mall entrances that says if we don't like your politics you aren't allowed in? The entire democratic process has become so 'who cares' that people fail to see the big picture. I have certainly seen plenty of photo ops of politicians meeting the people in shopping malls, so what's the difference?

    The candidate wasn't campaigning he was trying to perform his duty according to the election act, to secure signatures from eligible voters in his riding. He wasn't being disruptive, and the security guard obviously had a bias, when he mentioned the site. Who's site was he refering to? The CAP website, or Mr Thomas' website?

    As Roy mentioned to rough someone up publicly, and detain them making them a spectacle in front of possible voters,is definitely wrong, and could in fact have caused a perception that the candidate was doing something illegal.

    The election process is difficult enough for small party candidates, or independants, if people don't like the process, they should request that 100 signatures and $1,000.00 deposit not be required. That would prevent these occurances. The big parties don't have this problem, they just get their buddies to sign up at the meetings, the party pays the money, pays for their signs, their entire campaign is set out and they just walk into the program.

    Of course healhty competition isn't exactly a strong point for the big parties as we know...many people won't even sign a nomination form if it isn't the right colour, so much for democracy!

    ---
    If I stand for my country today...will my country be here to stand for me tomorrow?

  10. Thu Dec 08, 2005 8:00 am
    The question now becomes one of equally applied force to ALL campaigners canvassing on a mall.
    Does it follow that I can level a charge against ANY campaigner, say Paul Martin or Steven Harper and expect the rent-a-cop to act similarly?

  11. Thu Dec 08, 2005 8:05 am
    shoulda signed in on the above
    Dio

    ---
    Your mantra has been your opinions are stifled due to their contrary nature, when they are actually stifled for being without perceivable foundation

  12. Thu Dec 08, 2005 8:47 am
    This is what I'm wondering what about going door to door, invading people's private space at home, interrupting their dinner, or catching them sleeping, how is the election process suppose to be open and yet still respect the desire of so many people not to even participate in the process.

    Many people say, I don't want to hear about politics, well geez politics is running our lives, like it or not...Town Halls are not public either, as we know candidates that have been thrown out, or not allowed to speak. In my riding the newspaper is giving all candidates fair coverage, fair according to 'one' of them I guess, the parties with seats can have 250 words a week to answer a specific question, anyone without a seat has 100 words to address the same question. So if people continue to turn agaisnt the process because of their dislike of the current political climate, we are going to lose democracy and be ruled by the corporate dictatorship....but when it happens it'll be too late to participate. Really sad

    I still maintain that in a democracy once an election is called, all candidates are equal, nobody is a sitting MP, as the House isn't sitting. Another reason for CAP's strong stand on parliamentary reform. Democracy doesn't imply censorship, and like it or not we are being censored.

    ---
    If I stand for my country today...will my country be here to stand for me tomorrow?

  13. Thu Dec 08, 2005 9:30 am
    This candidate should not be persecuted or prosecuted. Give him a chance to run his futile campaign wherever he chooses to do so.

  14. Thu Dec 08, 2005 11:50 am
    Well yes, it is private property and all that, but let us recognize the changes that have happened in Canadian urban life in the past 50 years or so. Today most of us live in cities, the center of city life has not been protected by development of truly public spaces in most instances, and we have seen private developers take over city scapes very nearly completely. They even put up ugly box like buildings with no stores giving on the sidewalk to drive us into their malls. They have turned to ever bigger malls, engraving car use into the structure of cities, and creating gigantic stores that devastate local shopping areas and kill off thousands of small businesses. These malls and their owners are destructive of many civilized values. And now they dare to directly injure public electoral activity as strikingly shown by these private thugs in Kelowna.
    Here then is a suitable demand to put to every political candidate: Will you support law change as needed to guarantee the right of political expression in commercial spaces to which the public is invited. Yes or No.



view comments in forum


You need to be a member and be logged into the site, to comment on stories.




Your Voice

To post to the site, just sign up for a free membership/user account and then hit submit. Posts in English or French are welcome. You can email any other suggestions or comments on site content to the site editor. (Please note that Vive le Canada does not necessarily endorse the opinions or comments posted on the site.)

canadian bloggers | canadian news