Sunday, July 08, 2007


Christy Clark on "impartial inquiries"

Christy Clark, former deputy Premier to Gordon Campbell at the time of the police raids on the B.C. Legislature, is suddenly a journalist or something? Or a lawyer? An RCMP specialist? Even an elected official? Nope. None of the above.

So is she stepping up to the podium on the eve of the B.C. Rail trial trying to change the subject, with this sweetly concerned attack on the R.C.M.P.? I think so.

Ms Clark hasn't provided one scintilla of new information about the Ian Bush Inquest. Every comment is taken from the already-published work of other journalists [without credit]. If anybody else had submitted such a piece of journalism, they'd have been laughed off CanWest's premises.

So what's this all about, anyway? - BC Mary.


Christy Clark: RCMP's Bush investigation requires impartial inquiry

Christy Clark,
Special to The Province
Published: Sunday, July 08, 2007

The case of Ian Bush, who died while in police custody, should lead us all to one inescapable conclusion: The RCMP cannot be allowed to investigate themselves.

The inquest into Bush's death has given us a glimpse into the unique process the RCMP uses to investigate one of its own. The fact that Mr. Bush was killed is tragic. The way the RCMP conducted their investigation into his death is cause for alarm.

Ian Bush was just 22 in 2005 when he was shot in the back of the head by a rookie RCMP officer in Houston, B.C.

The officer stopped Bush outside the local hockey arena because he had an open beer. When the cop asked his name, the young millworker jokingly gave a fake one.

Bush hadn't had any serious brushes with the law. He lived with his mom, helped her pay the mortgage and paid part of his sister's college tuition too.

He wasn't pleased when Const. Paul Koester arrested him for his small transgressions that night. According to witnesses, the two exchanged words, but there was no hint of violence. Unfortunately, there are no witnesses to what happened next. The two were alone at the station when 20 minutes after they arrived, Bush was killed.

Const. Koester tells it this way: He was releasing the young man when Bush attacked. He wrestled Koester face down onto the couch, lay on top of him and started strangling him.

Koester says he was on the verge of passing out when he managed to reach around to his holster and grab his gun.

He somehow got his arm behind Bush's head, before slamming his gun into the back of his head three times and shooting him dead.

An independent blood-spatter expert, who is also an Edmonton police officer, told the inquest it would have been "physically impossible" to create the blood stains found at the scene if Koester had been underneath Bush.

He says it's more likely that Koester was on top, holding Bush down, when the gun went off. That testimony isn't the only thing that will undermine public confidence in the investigation.

The RCMP gave Const. Koester 18 days to consult his lawyers about his version of events before they got his carefully-prepared statement.

Then, they gave him a further three months before interviewing him about it. And before that, they supplied Koester with a list of the questions they intended to ask. So there weren't too many surprises.

It's not exactly the kind of interrogation you'd expect in a case where a man took a deadly bullet in the back of the head. But it is exactly the kind of investigation that the RCMP have become well known for when it comes to one of their own.

Ian Bush is dead. His family deserves the answers that can only come from an independent inquiry into how the investigation was handled. That at least might give them some peace.

The rest of us deserve the peace of mind that can only come from knowing the RCMP is no longer accorded the privilege of investigating itself.


Agreed, Ms Clark, the family of Ian Bush deserves that. But there's something more you should care about: the rest of us deserve the peace of mind which will come only from an independent, impartial inquiry into a matter you know a lot more about, namely, how the publicly-owned B.C. Rail was auctioned off.

Let the media begin calling for an independent Public Inquiry into that. Let the calls begin now. Let the Public Inquiry get under way as soon as the Basi Virk Basi trial ends, no matter how it ends. OK?



Write again, if you can, bearing in mind that this web-site is dedicated entirely to the single topic of the B.C. Rail Trial.

BC Mary.
Here, here, Mary. Bring on that Public Inquiry, indeed. The public wants the whole truth & nothing less. Unfortunately the court system cannot be counted on now that they have become sooooo politicized. It's long overdue that cover-ups are uncovered through through public pressure.

Gee, the Province sure knows how to increase their already sagging subscriptions!! Good grief - why on earth would they have Christie, whose husband's home office was raided by the RCMP, do a so called Special Report like this - Give me a break . . .

It all looks like a scene from Faulty Towers, to me LOL!
Check your facts before you make assertions. Christy's house was not "raided" by the police. You just defamed Mark Marrissen. The rcmp went to their home without a search warrant and asked them to provide documents VOLUNTARILY which they did.
Guys, guys ... it's about the "impartial Public Inquiry" topic here, OK?

The need for an impartial Public Inquiry into the sudden disposition of B.C. Rail.

A Public Inquiry at the end of the Basi Virk Basi trial, no matter how the trial ends. OK?

Thanks, secondlook, the public really does deserve the peace of mind that would result from an impartial public inquiry into the disposition of B.C. Rail.

My point was that the media would be doing a public service to begin asking for that now.

That ... and TV cameras in the courtroom ... would go a long way toward letting some sunshine in.

More tomorrow.

Touchy, touchy, Anonymous . . .

The point being that RCMP landed on the doorstep of Christie & Mark's husband wanting documents directly surrounding the BC Rail/Raid on the Leg investigation.

Why did he have any documents at all?

Why did his wife, Christie exit stage left along with Gary Collins & a few other Ministers just as things were heating up?

Defaming Mark M???? Seems the pre-trial evidence & their own actions will suffice.

Christie's column was in bad taste. Shame on the Province.
Is it still possible to 'defame' Mark Marissen and Christy Clark?

I didn't thing that was an option any longer. Isn't this the same Christy Clark who was a quest host on CKNW interviewing candidates for the Liberal leadership without ever disclosing her role as part of one of the candidates' team? After all, a certain amount of that political mud that she's so good at slinging has begun to stick to her.

As to the information about the 'raid' on the Clark/Marissen household...I think I'll wait to see the whole disclosure package when it comes out in court or in a public inquiry before I draw any conclusions whatever about the matters which seem to have upset anonymous (7:11 pm) so much.

In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if some of the many people who are stopping by the 'Raids' these days are folks with a somewhat 'professsional' interest in the outcome of this case.

Remember Skookum1 and Wikipedia?
Post a Comment

<< Home