By the time you finish reading the following sentence you will already have pre-determined in your mind what happened and who you will favour, based on who you view as having the higher ‘social ranking’.
A woman with a mental disability filed a complaint against her employer Government of Manitoba with the Labour Board and MHRC, and claims she has been treated unfairly and denied due process of her complaints.
CAUTION:
May appear further from the truth than the way things actually are.
The family watched a documentary of a City of Victoria police officer using excessive force. The 57-second video clip showed a man being kneed and kicked while being handcuffed by another officer. The armchair quarterbacks in my house were totally horrified and stated, “Well, that’s way worse than what happened to you, Mom! I mean, they got it on video and everything.”
The discussion followed as to whether a person getting kicked in the back by a likely 'jacked up' street cop caught up in the moment was worse than someone who was psychologically and mentally abused in a calculated and ongoing basis by various government bodies and authorities over a number of years.
At first glance, yes the guy was kicked in the back, which is instinctively wrong on many levels. However, on the plus side, the guy was not charged with any crime--nor did the police try to plant evidence on him so they could save face--to support the police acting with brutal force.
The guy has likely gone on with his life. He likely didn't have to explain over and over again to friends, family and acquaintances, "honestly, I did nothing wrong!!" Any physical bruises have likely long since healed, and as to any mental scarring – well that does heal quickly when you are given a tremendous show of support for your pain and suffering by the community overall. He also likely didn't lose his job over it. There is no black smudge on his permanent employment record.
Other positive action in favour of this 'guy': There actually was an investigation of the officer's conduct. The decision to not lay charges on the officer was made in light of the fact that witnesses (not fellow police officers) did support the police's claim that the man did resist efforts to be handcuffed. There was an acknowledgement from the Criminal Justice Branch that the amount of force used by the officer did call “for close scrutiny" so there is admission of questionable conduct which would likely be reviewed.
In my case I was repeatedly, mentally, 'kicked like a dog' over a number of years by a front line supervisor and then the attacks continued on with high level government authorities entrusted to protect those most vulnerable. At no time, had I ever been advised that my record of employment was anything but exemplary; and never given an opportunity to correct the misinformation from a smear campaign carried out after I was terminated from employment; there was never a proper (or any) investigation, or hearing, and the online reference of personal information in violation of personal information by the Manitoba Labour Board, as reported in the Ombudsman report, after having it online for 1.5 years, only to then be re-posted by the Labour Board on a different webpage on its website.
This evidence certainly is stronger than a 57-second clip. There is solid evidence spanning over three years of well documented wrongdoing and criminal behaviour. In Canada (where Manitoba is a province of) perjury and obstruction to justice are criminal offences and Government authorities are not (supposed to be) above the law.
Society does tend to judge without having all the facts based on pre-determined beliefs. Our sense of fair play is based on social norms much like that of the game, Rock-Paper-Scissors. In a conflict situation between a police officer versus a punker with spiked pink hair wearing metal and leather; or a police officer vs. an Aboriginal homeless man, society tends to instinctively side with the police officer. But when society sees a regular-Joe type guy being kicked by a police officer on the news, in the papers and on YouTube, the world reacts on a Paper Rock Scissors mentality and the 'regular guy' is favoured.
Whereas my story has yet to raise an eyebrow, compassion or show of any support for those most vulnerable to Manitoba Government's undue hardship as evidenced by a petition of 21 signatures (as of the date of posting to over 180,000 YouTube viewers of the guy being kicked): deemed a 'person of inconvenience' by mental association. The invisible-ness of it all even further reinforced when my story is passed over for stories such as "lies, damned lies and ..." in Winnipeg Free Press Driving them crazy about EGAD! "...parking spots" A conspiracy going on at the Winnipeg International Airport on the basis that someone had to spend 10 minutes before actually finding a parking spot.
Scissors beats paper – paper beats rock – Rock beats scissors - and Government beats on those most vulnerable with its bullish ways. Is MB Government #WINNING?!!
No comments:
Post a Comment