Apparently Faulkner will register a conviction in his administrative system when in fact no such thing occurred. A person may not even go to trial, may have done nothing wrong but agree to an administrative arrangement to avoid high legal costs at trial. This is not an admission of guilt nor was any conviction registered in court. Faulkner though buttresses his statistics by recording an administrative conviction that never happened. Are these some of the facts he uses to get what he wants. Next time you see him walking the streets in his red stilettos ask him if he has any biases in his work? Here is one way Faulkner may be registering a higher conviction rate and this practice is not uncommon. Dr. Phil among others keeps uncovering false allegations made against men that have life changing consequences. http://www.drphil.com/videos/?Url=/house/flv/8041_1.flv&background=header_drphil_video.jpg Would Faulkner while wearing his red stilettos entertain this to increase his conviction rate?MJM
Facts support police budget increaseIan Gillespie's opinion published on Jan. 8 titled Police budget not justified by crime reflects the adage that "one should not let facts get in the way of a good story." Unfortunately, rhetoric such as this causes unnecessary division within our community and mistrust of the police service, apparently in an attempt to create controversy where it does not exist.
As chief of police, I have never used crime rates to support the budget. Most who understand the complexities of crime rates will understand the rationale in not using them.
The London police department is a community service, and therefore, our budget is based on demands for our service by the citizens of London. Demands also are imposed upon us from the courts and through government regulations and legislation. If the demands for service begin to exceed our capability to respond, it is my responsibility to make this clear to everyone.
None of the positive facts has been articulated in this paper by those who attended the committee of the whole budget presentation last week, so I feel it is incumbent on me to state facts that all taxpayers should know.
Fact No. 1: Ministry of Municipal Affairs financial information returns compared Tier 1 police services, which are services that are solely municipal, not regional. For 2008 (the most recent reporting), London police service expenditures as a percentage of the total property tax levy were second lowest of all Ontario Tier 1 municipalities.
Fact No. 2: Statistics Canada reports that for 2008, London police service per-capita costs were the third lowest of all Ontario municipalities with a population greater than 100,000.
Fact No. 3: Maclean's magazine this year ranked the best/worst run cities in Canada. As a city, London was ranked No. 7 -- the highest ranking of any Ontario city. In safety and protection, though, London ranked second in Canada.
Fact No. 4: Police Resources in Canada - 2008 shows total police expenditures increased on average by 46.3% from 2002 through 2008. In the same period, the London police service increase was 53.9%, which included the hiring of 85 police officers, authorized by municipal council in response to demands for service.
Fact No. 5: Too many police in our city? Not true! In 2008, London had one police officer for every 620 citizens. In 2007, the average in Ontario was one to 522 citizens and in Canada one to 512 citizens.
When Gillespie asks that "somebody -- anybody at city hall stand up to Chief Murray Faulkner and stop giving in to his department's seemingly endless demands," one must remember it is not my department; it is London's department. They are not my demands, but the public's demands for protection and service.
If it is facts you want, I have more. You are entitled to your own opinion, but not your own facts. I never have and never will use the overall crime rate to justify the budget.
Posted By: Murray Faulkner, chief of police for the city of London, london
Posted On: January 19, 2010
Editors Note: As published in The London Free Press on Jan. 19, 2010.
LFP A great friend told me once, "if you dont read the news, you're un-informed, if you do, you're mis-informed". The LFP should start looking at the second point of view and stop the bias
I'm not buying it either. The fact that Chief Faulkner had his opportunity when he and Mr.Gillespie met, to state his peace, only to read a more non-favorable article, tells me that Mr.Gillespie didn't buy the Chief's bluff. The fact that Mr. Faulkner is now trying to defend the article through these letters, may tell me that Mr.Gillespie refuses to interview the Chief any further, due to the Chief's conduct. Could it be possible that no one at the Free Press will interview the Chief? Has the Chief burned his bridges at the Free Press? Hence, this being his only source of media. Should Mr. Faulkner's budget not get passed, it will be interesting to see just how long afterwards it will be before he resigns.
Faulkner's Letter to the Editor Faulkner's so-called Fact No. 6: On October 22, 2008, at a Community Consultation Meeting at London Police Headquarters in relation to the budget, Chief Faulkner claimed, "Last year (2007), in Ontario, 94% of all Domestic Violence-related homicides were perpetrated by men." The London Police Service In-House Domestic Violence Statistics that I recently obtained show that for the period between April 1 to June 30, 2007 (that "last year" period), there were "0" female-perpetrated Domestic Violence Homicides. Many will recall that Kelly Johnson's murder of Dave Lucio occurred DURING that same quarterly period of time, namely June 7, 2007. What does this mean? Specifically that Murray Faulkner did not classify Kelly Johnson's murder as an incident of Domestic Violence, even though it was the classic "If I can't have you, nobody can" DV situation. The result was a blatant misrepresentation of the so-called statistics that Mr. Faulkner alleged to be true during that budget meeting on October 22, 2008. Since Murray Faulkner is so willing to misrepresent the truth about one of London's most tragic recent events such as the murder of Dave Lucio, one wonders what sort of classification games he has played with his other so-called facts stated in his recent Letter to the Editor.