WTF: A Hotline to Hurt the Homeless
What crazy upside down are we living in when a major city has a hotline not for the poor and homeless to call for assistance, but for local business owners to call when they want police to come and shoo some vagrant away?
That's exactly the setup the police department had with business owners in Edmonton, a Canadian city with a population of over one million.
That juicy tidbit came out yesterday in a hearing concerning a 2005 incident in which nine homeless people were driven around in a police van for an hour and a half. Police leaders admitted that they had the helpline and would pick up intoxicated homeless people that business owners complained about. They were supposed to drive those people to shelters or to residences that the captives, I mean, the homeless people specified.
Now, a free ride to a shelter could be enormously helpful for a homeless person, particularly if it's one of the many overcrowded shelters that have to turn people away when they show up too late and find that the shelter's full. But having to act intoxicated and irritate a shopkeeper to get that free ride? Not so helpful.
In the case in question, the officers allegedly drove around aimlessly and refused to turn on the air conditioning or stop so someone could use the bathroom. One homeless woman who was in that van said some of the male passengers began to urinate in hopes of getting public urination tickets that would include the officers' names and badge numbers so they could file formal complaints.
The police supervisor testified that the van roundups were supposed to be compassionate. Neither he nor any other officers, however, kept records of what happened when, where or to whom. So the police have no records to clear their names. But the homeless woman who testified yesterday admitted to being an alcoholic who has trouble remembering events, so her testimony probably won't hold much weight. In a case of "cop said/homeless person said," who do you think comes out on top?
Photo credit: aflcio







COMMENTS (3)