Thursday, March 22, 2007
RCMP will investigate RCMP?
RCMP Staff Sergeant John Ward has announced a new pilot project created to oversee high profile RCMP investigations in British Columbia. Could this mean ... the B.C. Rail affair? Could it mean specifically RCMP Sgt Debruyckere's role as team leader whose job was to investigate whether any fraud or breach of trust offences were committed in relation to the sale of B.C. Rail, because Sgt Debruyckere was brother-in-law to Kelly Reichert, then-executive director of the provincial B.C. Liberal Party?
Ward said this new pilot project will run throughout B.C. for a year and, if successful, may expand across the country. He said the program has been launched by both the RCMP and Commission for Public Complaints Against the RCMP.
Source: The Vancouver Sun, 22 March 2007.
Please double-check. So far I haven't found the story you mention in The Globe and Mail or in the Ottawa Citizen.
And since they're not associated, I'm just wondering if you saw it in another CanWest newspaper, or what.
Would you let us know? Thanks.
Amazing story it is too. I saved it as a pdf. to reread later, only scanned it quickly.
I know why the RCMP are so resistant to having an independent body audit/investigate/review them (whatever you'd like to call it). But better they bite the bullet now and gain some integrity and pride and respect while they still can.
geo: I don't know how you can be so sure that the story was on The Globe's front pages all across Canada. So thanks for the tip. I would've completely missed it, without the help you both provided.
I really don't know what to make of the story. It's never just a simple "Him bad, Him good" in that hellish reality where some people live and work.
I hope people will look it up and read it (6 pages) for themselves. I've copied the title and editor's introduction here:
'The machinations of Mr. Young': How a liar conned the Mounties
Globe and Mail Editor's Note: The article that follows is incomplete. That is not normally something we do. Usually we make our work as complete as possible. In this case, we are hobbled by legal restrictions.
The story is about a man who became an RCMP informant and was eventually enrolled in the Witness Protection program in spite of ample warning that he was an unreliable liar.
This individual went on to commit a heinous crime. We can neither describe the details of the murder nor the current identity of the killer.
The Globe and Mail publishes this story today in conjunction with The Ottawa Citizen, a highly unusual act in itself, and one which speaks to the importance the editors of the two newspapers place on this matter. Greg McArthur and Gary Dimmock researched and wrote this story at The Citizen. Greg is now a reporter with The Globe and Mail. For legal reasons it was modified jointly with The Citizen after he left.
Both Greg McArthur and The Citizen have been waging a legal battle to publish it for the past six months. A court ruling yesterday allowed us to tell this part of the story.
But this is more than just the story of an individual gone bad. It is an issue of public policy. But the blanket legal requirement of the Witness Protection Act against ever disclosing the identity of a person accepted into the program — no matter how awful his subsequent actions — inhibits our efforts to not just tell this story, but to examine the RCMP's role in this affair.
Edward Greenspon, Editor-in-chief
GREG MCARTHUR AND GARY DIMMOCK
Globe and Mail, and Ottawa Citizen
Well, another day another edition of The Globe and Mail. Imagine my surprise this morning, 23 March, when I opened our copy of The Globe and Mail to see a banner headline across the top of the front page which, unlike the one you saw, says:
The Secret Agent who conned the Mounties! How a fast-talking Victoria man took the RCMP for hundreds of thousands of dollars as an informant with a code name E8060, provided no useful informtion, and ended up as a police-protected killer. (Pp.A14-15.)
Same story, though. With photo of the Saanich house where the guy grew up.
Here's what bothers me, as the editor of this insignificant small blog and as a citizen of a parliamentary democracy:
1) The RCMP didn't enact the "Witness Protection Act", did they? This is federal legislation. Needless to say, the police are obliged to follow the laws of the land.
2) I'm terribly uncomfortable whenever a specific group (whether an ethnic group, political, religions, professions, or workers such as police) is identified as a target. The next step down the slippery slope is to suggest that the targeted group may be legitimately abused by the public. I mean, hello??
3) My gosh, there are people trying to blame the RCMP even for the loss of B.C. Rail! Ask why.
4) This story of a protected witness going wrong, has nothing to do with the "sale" of B.C. Rail so, unless or until it does, it's an inappropriate topic here.
Excellent questions! I'm glad you are asking them, thinking about them, tossing them back and forth, and not asking me to take a position for or against anybody or anything in the B.C. Rail affair. Bravo!
I have no problem with people investigating the RCMP's role in the B.C. Rail affair -- or assessing Gordon Campbell's role -- or Gary Coleman's role. In fact, don't you find it odd that those public figures are NOT investigated?
How often have Gordon Campbell's plans for this province been weighed -- in comparison to the amount of time spent weighing the ulterior motives of the RCMP? You get my point.
What does trouble me is when we're virtually told (as Mason did in that December article) to denounce the RCMP. And just co-incidentally, the RCMP can't exactly speak up in its own defence, either, can they.
You bet I'd like to know how Brueckyere was placed in that position without taking into account the appearance of a conflict of interest. But the defence lawyers have taken care of that, right?
I hope you continue to read, assess, opine, and weigh in here with your thoughts. Good to hear from you.
It stipulates that the findings of a Public Inquiry will not automatically become known to the public which, of course, paid for the Public Inquiry.
Whatever is found will go to the Cabinet which, at its discretion, may withhold the information. The public may beg and plead to know "Was the 'sale' of B.C. Rail honest and above-board?" but the Cabinet under Bill 6 has given itself the legal right to refuse us that information.
Darned if I can see how this fits under Canada's Charter of Rights.
But it's something to think about, when blaming the RCMP for trying to keep its business secret.
Opposition seeks answers on Witness Protection Program
A Victoria case raises 'disturbing questions' about secrecy and accountability, NDP and Liberals say
CanWest News Service
Saturday, March 24, 2007
OTTAWA -- Opposition parties are calling on the Conservative government to answer "disturbing questions" raised by suggestions of potential abuse of the Witness Protection Program by an RCMP agent in Victoria, as well as concerns over its secrecy and lack of accountability.
"We don't know if there's systemic issues here, or if it's isolated," Liberal public safety critic Sue Barnes said Friday. "I think it raises some disturbing questions about the operations of the Witness Protection Program."
NDP public safety critic Joe Comartin wants the federal government to launch an independent inquiry into the case of an informant-turned-agent who allegedly supplied false information and later committed murder as a protected witness.
Full story: Canada.com
If you believe the above I have some nice swamp land in florida if somebody is interested in prime beach front property.