|
|
| Don't have an account yet? Sign up as a New User
|
|
| Support uws |
 |
|
|
|
|
| Feds blasts UW Police in lawsuit reply |
Contributed by: ryan on Monday, April 14 2003 @ 11:27 AM CDT
|
The Federation of Students severely criticised what it calls negligence, nonfeasance and inactivity of UW Police on New Year's Day in its reply to UW's defence in the bar lawsuit. The six-page reply also says that Feds bars were safe and properly run in response to UW's description of problems that were in the statement of defence.
A man was assaulted early in the morning on New Year's Day 2003 after a party at Federation Hall. A fire alarm was pulled and there were a number of fights outside. The Feds reply states, "...when altercations took place, the Federation staff was obliged to step in to assist in the situation, mitigate it, render assistance and control it because of the negligence, nonfeasance and inactivity of the campus police."
Feds also points to the issue of contracting out as the university's motivation. Feds stated, "...the discussions, meetings, draft agreements and dictates were driven by the University’s unlawful conduct rather than malfeasance on the part of the Federation staff or the events of January 1, 2003."
Also on the issue of contracting out, Feds says, "the AGCO in or about the month of February 2003 advised the University’s counsel that any plan whereby the equivalent of net revenue or profit would be remitted to the Federation, would still be contracting out and a violation of the Liquor Licence Act."
This reply follows Feds' statement of claim and UW's statement of defence. These documents explain each sides position in the lawsuit.
The injunctions are scheduled to be heard 28 April; mediation will occur after the injunctions are heard; and, if necessary, it will go to trial after mediation.
|
| |
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, April 14 2003 @ 12:27 PM CDT |
It seems to me that this doesn't have much of anything to do with the proper issue between Feds and UW. Why have they now dragged the Kampus Kops into this? Agreed, it is an important issue, but it's not even relevant to the lawsuit.
So much for a timely solution. My only hope now is that Feds will eventually run out of fingers to point.
[ Parent ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, April 14 2003 @ 03:10 PM CDT |
sbwoodside@yahoo.com
Wow... that's pretty bad.
"10. The Plaintiff states that when altercations took place, the Federation staff was obliged to step in to assist in the situation, mitigate it, render assistance and control it because of the negligence, nonfeasance and inactivity of the campus police. The Plaintiff asked the campus police to contact the Waterloo Regional Police, but the campus police did not act. The Plaintiff contacted the Police instead.
"11. The Plaintiff further states that had the sign in procedure referred to in paragraphs 24 and 25 of the Defence been implemented on that night, the individuals involved would have been allowed in pursuant to that procedure."
it goes on to describe all of the procedures they were following, including stuff they didn't have to do but did anyway.
I guess that no-one wanted to drag the Kampus Kops into this but with the university continuing the stonewall, they had no choice but to let this new cat out of the bag.
simon[ Parent ]
|
| |
| Authored by: ryan on Monday, April 14 2003 @ 06:16 PM CDT |
In the reply:
9. At the time of the incident on January 1, 2003, [...]At approximately 12:30 a.m., at a time of sub-degree temperatures outside, approximately 1,000 patrons were forced to leave the premises.
On the Feds website:
[...]on New Year's Eve the fire alarm at Fed Hall was pulled by an unknown patron emptying all of the event's 800 participants outside.
[ Parent ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Matt on Tuesday, April 22 2003 @ 06:06 PM CDT |
| Is the hearing where the injunctions will be presented open to the public? And what about the mediation? And where would they be held? It would be interesting to attend. [ Parent ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Matt on Tuesday, April 22 2003 @ 11:51 PM CDT |
My only experience with UW Police involved being pulled over and given a ~$20 ticket for not coming to a "complete stop" at a stop sign at the T intersection coming into campus at the main entrance in front of SCH.
I was shocked because I came to a very-nearly-complete stop (I had to make a right turn, so obviously I didn't zoom through the stop sign).
Anyway, as far as I'm concerned, UW Police are completely useless and waste their time giving out tickets for picky, minor infractions instead of doing a more thorough job of policing.
BTW, I appealed the ticket and it was dropped.[ Parent ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Shaun T on Tuesday, July 19 2005 @ 01:14 PM CDT |
| Dontcha just love 'dem FEDS? *They* are claiming that someone *else* is incompetent?? hahaha... [ Parent ]
|
| |
|
|
|
