Canadian RCMP Murdered Man With Tasers and Pile-On at Vancouver Airport

An eyewitness’s video recording of a man dying after being stunned with a Taser by police on October 14th at Vancouver International Airport has been released to the public. The 10-minute video recording clearly shows four RCMP officers talking to Robert Dziekanski while he is standing with his back to a counter and with his arms lowered by his sides, but his hands are not visible. About 25 seconds after police enter the secure area where he is, there is a loud crack that sounds like a Taser shot, followed by Dziekanski screaming and convulsing as he stumbles and falls to the floor. Watch the video, filmed by Paul Pritchard, here at
Another loud crack can be heard as an officer appears to fire one more Taser shot into Dziekanski. As the officers kneel on top of Dziekanski and handcuff him, he continues to scream and convulse on the floor. One officer is heard to say, “Hit him again. Hit him again,” and there is another loud cracking sound.

Police have said only two Taser shots were fired, but a witness said she heard up to four Taser shots. A minute and half after the first Taser shot was fired Dziekanski stops moaning and convulsing and becomes still and silent. Shortly after, the officers appear to be checking his condition and one officer is heard to say, “code red.” The video ends shortly after. Minutes later, ambulance attendants arrived but their efforts to revive Dziekanski were unsuccessful and he was declared dead.

RCMP spokesman Cpl. Dale Carr said no one can judge what happened to Dziekanski by just watching the video. “It’s just one piece of evidence, one person’s view. There are many people that we have spoken to,” RCMP spokesman Cpl. Dale Carr said at a press conference Wednesday afternoon. “What I urge is that those watching the video, take note of that. Put what they’ve seen aside for the time being. And wait to hear the totality of the evidence at the time of the inquest,” Carr said.

But retired superintendent Ron Foyle, a 33-year veteran of the Vancouver police who saw the video tape, said he didn’t know “why it ever became a police incident … It didn’t seem that he made any threatening gestures towards them,” Foyle said. Much of the video was shot through the glass walls that separate the international arrivals lounge from a secure area outside the Canada Customs exit.

The video was recorded in three segments. The first segment shows Dziekanski before police arrive. Four RCMP officers subdue Robert Dziekanski after stunning him with a Taser on Oct. 14 at Vancouver airport. He is clearly agitated, yelling in Polish, and appears to be sweating. He can be seen taking office chairs and putting them in front of the security doors. He then picks up a small table, which he holds, while a woman in the arrivals lounge calmly speaks to him in apparent effort to calm him down.

In the second segment, Dziekanski picks up a computer and throws it to the ground. Three airport personnel arrive and block the exit from the secure area, but Dziekanski retreats inside and does not threaten them. Then four RCMP officers arrive in the lounge. Someone can be heard mentioning the word Tasers. Someone replies, “Yes,” as the officers approach the security doors. Police have said repeatedly that there were only three RCMP officers involved in the incident, but the video shows four men in RCMP uniforms. People in the lounge can be heard clearly telling the police Dziekanski speaks no English, only Russian. His mother later said he only spoke Polish.

Police enter the secure area with no problems and can be seen with Dziekanski standing calmly talking with officers. They appear to direct him to stand against a wall, which he does. As he is standing there, one of the officers shoots him with a Taser. RCMP officers have also said police did not use pepper spray because of the large number of people at the airport at the time. But the video shows Dziekanski standing alone with the four officers in an otherwise empty area, which is separated from the public area by a thick glass wall.

Paul Pritchard shot the video with his digital camera, but afterward he surrendered it to police for their investigation on a promise that they would return it within 48 hours. The next day, police told Pritchard they would not be returning the recording as promised. Carr previously stated investigators kept the video longer than they anticipated in order to protect the integrity of the police investigation while they interviewed witnesses. Saying he feared a coverup by police, Pritchard then engaged a lawyer to start legal proceedings to reclaim the recording. Police returned the recording to him on Wednesday.

Dziekanski, 40, died on Oct. 14, hours after he arrived at Vancouver International Airport. He was on his way to Kamloops to live with his mother in the B.C. Interior. The Polish immigrant arrived from Europe the previous day around 4 p.m., but for some unknown reason he did not clear customs until after midnight. Dziekanski’s mother had already returned home to Kamloops after waiting for several hours at the airport. She claims airport officials offered her no help locating her son.

The RCMP’s integrated homicide investigation team, the B.C. coroner’s service, the Vancouver International Airport Authority and the Commission for Public Complaints Against the RCMP are each conducting their own investigations into the incident.

– Article from, where photos and video can be viewed

Be sure to visit, a fantastic resource filled with the brutal facts about the RCMP’s history and current-day abuses and cover-ups.


Cold-blooded Cops Kill

To read the barbarous and murderous history of the RCMP, written by CC Editor Marc Emery, as well as incredibly timely information on what to do if you see Canadian police murdering a citizen or brutalizing them, go here: Tips on Surviving an Encounter With The RCMP.

Thankfully, Paul Pritchard was on the alert for imminent murder when one of the RCMP are heard asking a superior “Can I taser him?” even before encountering Robert Dziekanski. The homicide was premeditated, as two RCMP use Tasers, then one more applies the same knee-on-neck pressure that RCMP in Vernon used on Cannabis Activist Neil Magnuson earlier this summer with non-fatal results (see that video of RCMP brutality here).

The RCMP originally claimed Dziekanski resisted, but like everything that comes out of an RCMP’s officers mouth, its all lies and self-serving rationalization. Three RCMP officers are complicit in a murder but I would take a bet from anyone that these killer KKKops won’t even lose a day’s pay, let alone be dismissed, fired, let alone charged with manslaughter or criminal negligence resulting in death or outright homicide.
Police explanation to Dziekanski’s murder by police:
“It’s just one piece of evidence, one person’s view. There are many people that we have spoken to,” RCMP spokesman Cpl. Dale Carr said at a press conference Wednesday afternoon.

What did RCMP say after all the evidence showed the RCMP murdered Ian Bush and covered it all up?
Here is the brief synopsis of murder & cover-up of Ian Bush of Smithers, British Columbia…

***The night of the shooting, RCMP officers didn’t ask Const. Paul Koester what happened; they supported him, told him it wasn’t his fault and advised him to get a lawyer. Officers testified at the inquest that they considered Koester a victim. Ambulance attendants were initially denied access to the detachment. Bush’s body was left there for 24 hours, allowing decomposition that made the eventual autopsy more difficult. RCMP officers attended the autopsy and offered theories about what might have happened to the pathologist. He forgot to examine a visible (over 8 inches in area) bruise on Bush’s thigh. Koester didn’t provide a statement on what happened until 18 days after the shooting. Then, it was a written statement prepared with the help of a lawyer. He shredded his original handwritten notes after the RCMP investigators said they didn’t want to see them. And RCMP investigators didn’t interview him until three months after the shooting. Then, they asked only the questions that they had provided to Koester’s lawyers two days in advance of the meeting. No one in Canada — including police officers — has to answer police questions. But if the shooter had been anyone other than a fellow Mountie, would investigators really have patiently waited three months for the first interview? Would they have missed the chance to interview a person involved in a shooting that first night? Most people expect RCMP officers to have loyalty to the force and fellow Mounties. That’s expected. It also makes it essential that they not be in charge of investigating possible wrongdoing by fellow officers. In this case, the RCMP investigators accepted Koester’s eventual statement that Bush attacked him. He was kneeling, the officer said, with Bush choking him from behind. He feared for his life, pulled his gun, reached around behind his back and shot Bush in the back of the head. But at the inquest, RCMP investigators couldn’t demonstrate how that was physically possible. One of Canada’s leading blood-splatter experts testified the shooting could not have happened in the way the RCMP claimed. No one except Koester knows what happened that night.

When journalist Gary Mason of The Globe and Mail asked the RCMP media department about numerous contradictory facts relating to the Bush death that the RCMP were evading or stonewalling, Constable John Ward stated, “The public doesn’t have a right to know anything.”

So what we have is more Dead men and a murdering national police force that gets away with brutality and homicide and cover-up every day.



  1. Gary Williams on

    What is being relayed here regarding police failure to properly investigate the Bush killing is, believe it or not, entirely consistent with the new training many RCMP are receiving from a US org. calling itself “Force Science”. It purports to be a scientifically accurate look at ways of achieving greater professionalism among LE agencies but is in fact a simply another effort by LE friendly legal services to construct a scientific sounding “smoke and mirrors” defense for officers involved in shootings where there is no rational defense otherwise available. They proudly brag about getting officers off who have shot unarmed people several times in the back while claiming they were coming at them brandishing a firearm, etc. etc. The defense is usually some kind of “proof” offered to juries that stressful encounters will make them actually believe the things they said in their initial reports, thereby making them innocent of any thought they probably had of killing some low-life drug addict, or other “America-hating traitor and welfare parasite”.

    Here are just a few of the ways a killer cop should be treated by the others after learning of an OIS (officer-involved shooting)

    “An officer’s memory often will be helped by revisiting the scene and doing a “walk-through” before being interviewed.

    Hoag recommends that only the officer, his attorney and possibly a police association representative (union rep/lawyer) be present at the walk-through. “No IA investigator, no criminal investigator, no one representing the agency” to inhibit, monitor and possibly misinterpret the conversation, Hoag emphasizes. No audio- or videotaping of the walk-through should be allowed.

    “Many times the walk-through experience will surface a lot of emotions for the involved officer,” Hoag explains. “He may start second-guessing his actions, make impulsive statements like ‘Maybe I didn’t need to shoot,’ be emotionally affected to the point he can’t speak, break down crying and so on. You can’t predict which officer is going to be affected by what emotion, and no officer needs to suffer the indignity of having his raw emotions later made public in court or elsewhere.”

    14. It is best for officers who’ve been involved in a shooting NOT to be required to write a report of the incident. “A written report by an involved officer can easily be jumbled and poorly written,” Artwohl explains. Lewinski adds: “An officer’s official story after a shooting is the most important statement he’ll probably ever give. How to structure it, what important elements (like fear of death or of great bodily harm) to include, how to properly articulate feelings and actions–all this is far different from the ordinary daily call reports officers write, and it may be beyond the writing skills of many.

    Artwohl puts it: “Information is best gathered by careful interviewing of all participants and officer witnesses by highly skilled investigators trained in questioning survivors of critical incidents. This should lead to a professional, well-written report by the investigators that make an officer’s written reports unnecessary.”

    You got that? A “good” investigator assumes the cop is innocent and was completely justified in doing whatever. It’s therefore the investigators job to make a report for him….one that relays this assumption exactly, and ONLY, on any and all official reports of the incident.

    Of course other such FSRC “recommendations” are usually couched in scientific or legal jargon of a sort the uneducated may read as evidence that FS is merely trying to be as accurate as possible. But a simple review of the direction, and often just the titles of their research papers will make it obvious to anyone with half a brain that their overall intent is to keep killer cops from ever being successfully prosecuted.

  2. Gary Williams on

    Kamloops RCMP just shot a friend of mine in the back of the head FOUR TIMES,
    causing his now driver-less vehicle to crash into a gas-station/bistro complex thereby endangering many, many more lives with their act of murderous and reckless aggression. What isn’t being said by the news media is that they had just shot a great guy whose sense of fair-play and justice was undoubtedly far more sophisticated than that of his killers. The proof of my assertion rests on their attempt to claim that it was his driving that put them in a situation forcing them to shoot.

    You see, their trainers now tell them that /any threat/, no matter how slight, is to be considered ample justification for the use of lethal force. This no matter how slight that threat may in actuality have been. They get this from trainers whose own training is from the perspective of military soldiers doing peace-keeping rounds in foreign countries where the very real possibility exists that the locals they encounter actually do want them dead! This Us vs Them perception of the world may work fine when it takes place far away from civilized Western society, but it is absolutely irresponsible to inject such a mindset into the thought processes of young recruits whose presence as such indicates someone with authoritarian tendencies in the first place.

    But in any case, a witness came forward saying that his driving became erratic only /after/ he was shot dead by RCMP officers.

    Now I ask you……How much lower can a person sink than to use a lie that exonerates oneself while blaming the very person you have just shot dead for behaving in a way that caused their own death? For those of us knowledgeable about the authoritarian personality, such self-justifications and rationalizations are entirely typical. To quote a science journal related to such matters, “It appears that authoritarianism has pathological dimensions manifested in violence and distorted psycho-sexual development” (Boshier, 1983, p. 159). This is supported by a study conducted by Walker, Rowe, and Quincey (1993) in which there was a direct correlation between authoritarianism and sexually aggressive behaviour. An investigation done by Muehlenhard (1988) revealed that rape justification and aggression toward subordinate individuals was much higher among traditional authoritarians than in others.”

    And now consider the fact that such people are armed with weapons and personal body armor should they ever really need it, but also have a large and politically powerful machine standing behind them right up to and beyond the point where it becomes obvious to all that they are lieing through their teeth. The behaviour of the entire RCMP organization at the Braidwood Enquiry was of a manner that epitomizes the extremely dangerous state-of-being known as “siege mentality”. And now consider the fact that there are probably thousands of them out there enjoying the protection that the uniform gives them.

    And typical of their fight to avoid being found out for what they’ve
    become, the call by psychologically “normal” citizens for an outside investigation of this latest killing, it now appears that RCMP “brass” managed to get Calgary LE officers to lead this “investigation”. Apparently they are hoping that this latest deception of theirs will silence calls for a review of the whole RCMP institution. Yet this is only the most recent of a long, long string of ‘abuse of authority’ situations that now make it clear they are the status quo within the RCMP.

    Kamloops B.C. btw, is also the town where Robert Dziekanski’s mother
    lives, and is where he was hoping to be shortly before being murdered at the Vancouver Airport by yet more pathological cops. The Braidwood Inquest making it obvious that those ones were intent on seeing exactly how much they could get away with and still remain protected by RCMP institutional silence (or “Blue Omerta”, an apt phrase I have begun to see being used to describe these cover-ups).

    However, if I have anything to say about this matter, the beginning of
    the end for RCMP “omerta” begins now. Civilian oversight of LE is /long/ overdue. Yet they stubbornly, almost rabidly resist what every independent body has called for. And they do it for one simple reason – their own training, choice of trainers, and cadet selection process, culture reflecting a siege….”Us vs Them” mentality … cannot bare the light that outside scrutiny will bring down on their sick little world.

    The continued inability of clearer minds to be able to weed out officers
    displaying traits indicative of the Authoritarian Personality Syndrome is a situation that MUST LEAD to the rampant siege mentality now so evident. The vision they have of themselves as “noble and selfless” public servants performing “gallant deeds” in the face of “extreme danger” is a delusion fostered with an eye toward manipulation by the corporations who constantly hammer home this self-concept in the promos they receive almost daily from them.

    Corporations like Taser International have huge advertising budgets
    which they spend on ad agencies who in turn employ their own psychologists whose job it is to twist their target audiences perceptions of the world in ways that favor their own bottom line. TI and a whole host of body-armor and weapons manufacturers have a large financial stake in convincing LE agencies that their very lives are on the line daily, and are at huge risk during each and every encounter they have with non-LE people.

    But let’s be clear here. What limited amount of danger they do face is
    of an amount that places LEOs well down on official lists of societies most dangerous work-places. Check work-place injury stats yourselves… You’ll see that LEOs are nowhere near the top, with virtually every blue-collar trade or occupation placing far higher than LE in terms of personal danger….this despite what we see on the television set. Yet somehow the people who die so we can eat crab for dinner don’t count because they get paid handsomely for their efforts.

    But do loggers, miners, slash-burners and tree-planters make enough to last them the rest of the year? Of course not. But neither do we hear them howling about it using every media source known to man. Nor do Atlantic seiners throw big international “wail-fests” every time a BC halibut boat goes down. But a cop gets shot by someone he was attempting to kill in the first place, and we hear no end of their attempts to have the rest of us worship the ground they walk on while demonizing those who chose to defend their own lives /despite/ the fact that they may have been being shot at because they decided to flee charges of being in possession of a stolen vehicle or gram of marijuana.

    Why should the right to defend one’s own life disappear simply because they were being shot at by a bully trying to enforce a misdemeanor crime against someone they have a personal dislike for due their liberal attitudes? The answer is “It doesn’t”. But those who defend the belief in “law and order at any cost” are defending barbarism, pure and simple. Defending the use of deadly force to stop teenagers in a stolen vehicle is a way of thinking that epitomizes those who will also readily submit to an authoritarian, dictatorial form of government.

    Laws DO NOT justify themselves merely by their existence. That should be self evident. But those who use slogans like “the Law is the Law” are often using such oversimplifications as a way of hiding their own inability to think in the complex, abstract ways more typical of educated or more intelligent individuals. Empathy is itself an abstract concept, one difficult for most militarists, prison guards, and LE-types to use in ways the rest of us do to make us more socially sensitive to needs and wants of others. Orders, rules, and pre-constructed religious concepts are instead used to free them from the responsibility to at least /appear/ capable of doing the heavy thinking that those of us capable of personal choices on weighty ethical matters must always do.

    The phrase “I was only doing my duty” was heard ad nauseum at Nuremberg. These trials also made it possible to research the pre-war socio-political nature of those who later became Hitler’s most brutal henchmen. As a result, we now know they will almost certainly reappear from the same sector that provided Himmler et al’s most trusted German “patriots”. They came then

    from Germany’s police and prison staff and/or had been among those who most strongly supported and defended them whenever their aggressive nature became a public spectacle. And they behaved, pre-WW2, exactly like those who now defend Dziekanski’s killers are doing, and who can be absolutely guaranteed to now defend this death here in Kamloops. And they will continue to defend them regardless of how circumstances evolve in the media. They do it because their defence of “official” killers serves a very strong desire to find ways of justifying these very same violent impulses in themselves.

    The psychological profile of the authoritarian personality, one that has been achieved through extensive research done at our most prestigious universities and conducted by our most eminent scholars, is now very clear about a set of cognitive deficiencies found in the psyche of those so afflicted. Anyone familiar with the research can immediately see how this personality, when left to their own devices, will almost surely result in exactly what is now happening throughout law-enforcement.

    And not coincidentally, the RWA-SDO personality (as it’s known by social psychologists) is also one very much attracted to law-enforcement and military careers. Unfortunately for the rest of us, certain social elements here in Canada still have a large impact on the way the rest of us perceive authority. Their influence has blinded many to the fact that authoritarians are very often the people MOST in need of supervision, not the least. This faulty assumption society has long made re: the peaceful nature of typical LEOs, has also allowed this disaster to unfold almost completely unchecked.

    How this could happen despite this very same tendency of RWA-SDO personalities described here being the reason the framers of the US Constitution felt it necessary to enshrine therein a mandate guaranteeing perpetual civilian control over all military arms of government. This is to remain in effect even during times of total war. Yet somehow that warning is forgotten when it comes to those whom we give military-like authority over the life and death of our own civilians. This oversight MUST be rectified immediately.

    But in any event, this shooting here has hit close enough to home that
    I’ve decided to make his murder the event that will take my up ’til now unfocused yet considerable energies, putting them toward a complete dismantling of the dysfunctional culture now pervasive in the RCMP. While omerta is still favored by most RCMP rank-and-file for obvious reasons, iT must be widely known that it is /treasured/ by some for it’s ability to shield them from civilian justice. Psychopaths currently employed by the RCMP are of a mind that would otherwise rank among societies most dangerous individuals, and yet are now safely embedded within RCMP ranks due it’s culture of silence. It’s now time that this “blue omerta” was placed in it’s own long-overdue grave.