JonboyE

Fair enough. I don't know John Furlong but I know someone who does, who has known him very well and for a long time. He is someone whose judgment I have a lot of respect for, and he can't say enough good things about Furlong.

acer rose

Haven't read the report but based on this summary I find it had to understand how the police managed to avoid more serious criticism. Problems 1, 3, 6, 7 and 8 are bad planning on the part of the police. Given the gathering was a public space I'm not sure how that 4 and 5 weren't also the responsibility of the police but for the sake of distributing blame you could put at the door of the city along with 1.

In terms of the conclusions, I'm not sure exactly what authority Translink have to suspend service just due to crowd numbers. During the Olympics they had to suspend service after the Gold medal hockey game but only because the city was gridlocked. Once the riot started, Translink could probably make a case to shut down service but up to that point who would want Translink deciding who is allowed to go where.

Conclusion 2 seems like a soft target in the "we must be seen to be doing something as a result of this report" category. I was downtown in the afternoon before the game. After my meeting I wandered down to the venue outside the CBC offices and immediately turned round and went home. The mood was ugly. It wasn't alcohol driving the sentiment of the crowd at that point it was more like some sort of tribe on the warpath, not unlike the feeling of town on the afternoon of the local derby match back in the 70s and 80s. It was absolutely not the family-based crowds that came downtown during the Olympics.

Conclusion 3? Genius! If the police had been able to stop the riot the riot would not have occurred? Something like "plans by all involved a were completely inadequate" would have been a bit less weasely and might have allowed those responsible to step up, take responsibility and retain a modicum of dignity.

JonboyE

Although the report itself is rather bland, appendix K is a critique of the VPD's role written by senior officers from Ottawa. It is not flattering. It is particularly critical of the failure of VDPs planning and control, and lack of coordination with the City of Vancouver.

JonboyE

I had to highlight this. Written by the Ottawa officers (so not people of the great conspiracy some would have us believe in):

A relatively small number of agitators, armed with weapons and incendiary substances, also had a significant role to play in inciting widespread civil disobedience.

It is in the summary on page 292.

Alan2005

It's this talk of agitators, instigators, anarchists that I find irritating etc. These words are deliberately (and manipulatively) chosen by the authorities to instil a feeling that these people are somehow from 'outside'. Everyone can feel ok, because it's not a Vancouver problem right? It's those damn anarchists.

My view is that it doesn't matter if they came prepared, they are still hockey fans, and they are still local Vancouver / lower mainland people. Coming prepared for agro doesn't make them anarchists - it makes them hockey fans who like fighting. We don't blame football hooliganism on 'agitators' and this is no different. When the arrests are eventually made I know I'll be proved right.