Friends
What really bothers many of us out there, is that this man is in this country illegally. In this posting I have posted two pieces, the attack that happened to the lawyer in Brampton, and the second part is a criminal history of the attacker. This single man requires a full police station, to work full time on his spree of cases, cases that are spread out all through Brampton, Mississauga and Toronto. He has been shot by police before, he just can’t live a crime free life. And now he has not only shot the lawyer but he has come back and torched the damn office in the same day.
And this is not the first lawyer he has shot Man who shot Toronto lawyer sentenced to 12 years
Cops reported that Delong parked his car on Admiral Rd in Toronto, around the corner from Barrs' office. When he got out, officers saw that Delong was wearing a disguise--a blonde wig and a …
But we cannot complain about his immigration status for that makes us anti immigrants, we are racists, and we want the country to belong to only whites, and we live in Trump’s ass. We are reminded that not all illegals are criminals and sanctuary cities do not have a crime spike. This is the man Democrats protect, if he was in Illinoi I would not be surprised if Chuck Schumer goes into the jail to visit him, comfort him and demand for him to have an Air Condition for Toronto is too hot. Yes we have very lefty politicians in this city, this province and this country that have comforted this man through his crime spree. But I cannot write about him because I am an immigrant too that thinks today that I am white.
Read the crime history of this man and explain to me why he is in this province and not deported. Do you think he will become a better citizen with time? When and after we have spent how much tax payer’s money?
================================================================
Prominent Brampton lawyer shot, office torched in 12-hour span
Peel Regional Police say officers responded to a shooting call at the Sodhi Law Office …
=========================================
Man accused of trying to kill Toronto lawyer was out on bail on Mississauga charges
Grayson Delong, 51, remanded in custody
A man accused of trying to kill a defence lawyer in Toronto before being shot by undercover police officers Tuesday (Sept. 20) was out on bail in connection with a break and enter at a Mississauga appliance store at the time of the brazen daytime shooting, The News has learned.
Ontario court records show Grayson Delong, 51, of Toronto, has an extensive criminal history in Mississauga and Brampton. Across the GTA, as one court document states, he has amassed more than 60 criminal convictions. He is also under a court-ordered weapons ban.
Delong, 51, at one time a Mississauga resident, is facing 15 charges in connection to Tuesday’s shooting of a man identified as Toronto criminal lawyer Randall Barrs, gunned down outside his office on Bedford Road in Yorkville.
Delong’s charges include attempted murder, disguise with intent to commit an indictable offense and several gun and weapons charges.
Undercover Halton officers who were allegedly tracking Delong for an unrelated break and enter investigation, shot Delong during the dramatic daytime incident. Both Barrs and Delong were taken to hospital with serious injuries. Barrs has been released from hospital. Delong was remanded in custody and will be in court Monday (Sept. 26).
The province’s Special Investigations Unit, which probes cases of serious injury or death involving police to determine whether officers should be charged, is investigating the shooting involving the Halton police officer.
It is not clear if Delong and Barrs knew each other.
Both Delong and Barrs are recovering from injuries that are not considered life-threatening, SIU spokesperson Jason Gennaro said Wednesday.
The license plate on the silver Honda Civic driven by the shooter is registered to Brampton resident Retty Widjaya, 51. She told the Star Wednesday that the plates on her silver Honda Civic were stolen sometime between Sept. 11th and 12th while parked in the garage of her apartment complex.
Widjaya reported her plate missing to Peel Regional Police.
Court records viewed by The News Thursday show Delong was arrested by Peel police and charged with break and enter in connection with an incident at a Mississauga appliance store on Queensway East and Stanfield Road on Jan. 28 of this year.
Delong was released on bail April 11 and was last living at Wilkinson Road Shelter in Brampton, court records show. Delong is due back in court Oct. 18 on the break and enter charge.
Court records also show Delong has amassed more than 60 criminal convictions since the 1980s that include mischief to property, assault, escaping lawful custody, assaulting police and contempt of court.
Delong was charged in November 1993 with two counts of assaulting police, two counts of mischief and one count of threatening in an incident where two Peel police officers suffered broken noses struggling for a gun while arresting Delong in connection with a taxi driver being threatened.
Delong had been convicted of assault with a weapon, three counts of assaulting police, and one count of mischief in an incident at a pizzeria on Lakeshore Road in Mississauga in 1983. But, the Ontario Court of Appeal ordered a new trial for Delong because police failed to announce entry into his home when they arrested him.
Meanwhile, in 1989, Two Peel police officers charged with assaulting a Delong in 1985 on an unrelated assault charge were found not guilty.
-with files from Torstar
===================
The crime history of Grayson Delong
DocumentCited authorities 11Cited in 16Precedent MapRelated
R. v. Delong (1989), 31 O.A.C. 339 (CA)
MLB headnote and full text
Her Majesty the Queen (respondent) v. Grayson Delong (appellant)
(715/87)
Indexed As: R. v. Delong
Ontario Court of Appeal
Goodman, Grange and Griffiths, JJ.A.
February 15, 1989.
Summary:
The accused was convicted by a jury of assault using a weapon, three counts of assaulting police officers while they were engaged in the execution of their duty and mischief. The accused appealed from conviction.
The Ontario Court of Appeal allowed the appeal, set aside all the convictions and ordered a new trial on all counts.
Criminal Law - Topic 1414
Assaults - Assault of a peace officer - Jury charge - Police arrested the accused after entering his residence without warrant - The accused was charged with, inter alia, assaulting the officers - The trial judge found that the arrest was lawful and that the officers had been engaged in the lawful execution of their duty - The accused alleged that the arrest was illegal and that the Crown failed to prove that the officers were engaged in the lawful execution of their duty - The Ontario Court of Appeal held that it was incumbent on the trial judge, notwithstanding his conclusions, to leave the issue of the alleged illegal arrest with the jury and so direct them - The court held that the charge given in this case was inadequate - The court stated that the judge was obliged to charge the jury in five areas respecting the alleged illegal arrest - See paragraphs 14, 17 to 18, 33 to 34.
Criminal Law - Topic 1414
Assaults - Assault of a peace officer - Jury charge - Police arrested the accused after entering his residence without warrant - The accused was charged with, inter alia, assaulting the officers - The accused alleged that the arrest was illegal - The Ontario Court of Appeal held that the jury should have been directed that if they concluded that the police were trespassing when they entered the residence, that the next question was whether the accused was arrested in the residence or whether steps were taken to effect his arrest while in the residence - Notwithstanding any trespass, the arrest could be legal if the accused left the residence voluntarily, not under restraint, and was arrested outside - The court held that the trial judge erred in instructing the jury that s. 450(3) applied to protect the officer's conduct in this case - The court held that whether the arrest was initiated or completed on private premises, the arrest would be unlawful if the police had been trespassing at the time they arrested or initiated the arrest - See paragraphs 35, 40 to 42.
Criminal Law - Topic 1414
Assaults - Assault of a peace officer - Jury charge - The Ontario Court of Appeal referred to the four criteria used to determine if a peace officer making an arrest on private premises without warrant was acting in the execution of his duty, including the requirement that the police properly announce themselves before entry - The court held that a police officer, without warrant, even accepting that he has reasonable and probable grounds to believe that a person on the premises has committed an indictable offence, may not lawfully enter the premises to effect the arrest without the announcement except in those situations where the police may enter without announcement in order to save someone within the premises from death or injury, to prevent the destruction of evidence, or where the police are in hot pursuit - As part of the announcement the police must identify themselves as law enforcement officers - This identification requirement may be waived if the officers were uniformed and plainly visible so that the occupier of the premises could not doubt their identity - The court further held that the requirement of prior announcement was not limited to cases of forcible entry - See paragraphs 22 to 25, 29.
Criminal Law - Topic 1420
Assaults - Defences - Self-defence - Jury charge - The accused was charged with, inter alia, assault and assaulting the arresting police officers while they were engaged in the execution of their duty - The Ontario Court of Appeal held that the trial judge's jury charge on the issue of self-defence was inadequate - The trial judge erred by simply reading to the jury ss. 34, 35 and 37 of the Criminal Code, without attempting to relate those provisions to the evidence - The court held that the trial judge misstated the law respecting evidence of the assault victim's propensity for violence, to show the probability of the victim having been the aggressor and to support the claim of self-defence - See paragraphs 58 to 63.
Criminal Law - Topic 4370
Procedure - Jury charge - Directions regarding self-defence - [See Criminal Law - Topic 1420 above].
Evidence - Topic 4207
Witnesses - Privilege - Communications to public officials - Statements to police officers - The accused was charged with, inter alia, assaulting the arresting police officers while they were engaged in the lawful execution of their duty - The accused filed a complaint about the conduct of the officers - The Ontario Court of Appeal held that the statements of the subject police officers and of any witnesses proposed to testify for the accused, obtained during investigation of the complaint, were not privileged and should be produced at the accused's trial - See paragraphs 45 to 57.
Police - Topic 3061
Powers - Arrest - General - The Ontario Court of Appeal held that an arrest is effected by the compulsory restraint of a person either by actual seizure or by the touching of his body with a view to his detention - The person being arrested must be informed that he is being arrested and the reasons therefore - Until it has been made clear to the person that he is under arrest, the arrest is not complete in law - See paragraph 37.
Police - Topic 3073
Powers - Arrest - Without warrant - Of person in a dwelling - [See second Criminal Law - Topic 1414 above].
Police - Topic 3073
Powers - Arrest - Without warrant - Of person in a dwelling - [See third Criminal Law - Topic 1414 above].
Cases Noticed:
R. v. Landry (1986), 65 N.R. 161; 25 C.C.C.(3d) 1 (S.C.C.), refd to. [para. 13].
Eccles v. Bourque et al. (1974), 3 N.R. 259; 19 C.C.C.(2d) 129 (S.C.C.), refd to. [para. 23].
R. v. Miller (1986), 57 Sask.R. 37; 25 C.C.C.(3d) 554 (C.A.), affd. (1988), 83 N.R. 239; 64 Sask.R. 320; 39 C.C.C.(3d) 288 (S.C.C.), refd to. [para. 25].
R. v. Landry (1982), 63 C.C.C.(2d) 289 (Ont. C.A.), refd to. [para. 30].
R. v. Whitfield, [1970] 1 C.C.C. 129 (S.C.C.), refd to. [para. 37].
R. v. Inwood, [1973] 2 All E.R. 645 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 37].
R. v. Adams (1972), 21 C.R.N.S. 257 (Sask. C.A.), refd to. [para. 42].
R. v. McKibbon (1973), 12 C.C.C.(2d) 66 (B.C.C.A.), refd to. [para. 43].
R. v. Fuhr, [1975] 4 W.W.R. 403 (Alta. C.A.), refd to. [para. 43].
R. v. Bunn (1986), 42 Man.R.(2d) 267; 29 C.C.C.(3d) 133 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 43].
Slavutych v. Board of Governors of the University of Alberta (1975), 3 N.R. 587; 38 C.R.N.S. 306 (S.C.C.), refd to. [para. 51].
Campbell v. Paton et al. (1979), 26 O.R.(2d) 14, refd to. [para. 52].
Neilson v. Laugharne, [1981] 1 All E.R. 829, refd to. [para. 55].
R. v. Scopelliti (1981), 63 C.C.C.(2d) 481 (Ont. C.A.), refd to. [para. 63].
Statutes Noticed:
Criminal Code, R.S.C. 1970, c. C-34, sect. 25 [para. 16]; sect. 34, sect. 35, sect. 37 [para. 59]; sect. 450 [para. 19]; sect. 450(1)(a) [paras. 20, 22, 31]; sect. 450(2) [para. 42]; sect. 450(3) [paras. 13, 41-42, 44].
Criminal Code, R.S.C. 1985, c. C-42, sect. 495 [para. 19]; sect. 495(1)(a) [paras. 20, 22, 31]; sect. 495(3) [paras. 13, 41-42, 44].
Counsel:
Keith E. Wright, for the appellant;
Eric H. Siebenmorgen, for the respondent Crown;
Steven L. Moate, for Peel Regional Police Force (intervenant).
This appeal was heard before Goodman, Grange and Griffiths, JJ.A., of the Ontario Court of Appeal on November 3 and 4, 1988. The decision of the Court of Appeal was delivered by Griffiths, J., and released on February 15, 1989.
EM On the 49th Parallel
Thé Mulindwas Communication Group
"With Yoweri Museveni, Ssabassajja and Dr. Kiiza Besigye, Uganda is in anarchy"
Kuungana Mulindwa Mawasiliano Kikundi
"Pamoja na Yoweri Museveni, Ssabassajja na Dk. Kiiza Besigye, Uganda ni katika machafuko
Highly recommend checking out dhesirealestate for accurate and updated listings.
ReplyDeletehttps://dhesirealestate.com/