SEXUAL OFFENDERS HIDING WITHIN THE WATERLOO REGIONAL POLICE?

The Waterloo Region Record published the following story on February 2, 2018 titled "SIU investigating 4 sexual assault allegations involving officers". The investigation is of the Waterloo Region Police (WRPS). The alleged assaults are in regards to a class action lawsuit that was filed last June and in which a number of complaints including sexual assault were stated. Further to the initial lawsuit there were three Affidavits filed this past December, in support of the suit, and in which three new complainants also added more allegations against specific officers within the WRPS.

The fact that the SIU is investigating these complaints is a good sign. That said however the fact that they didn't go to the SIU a long time ago is worrisome. There are many possible reasons for this not occurring including the understanding that it could be career suicide. The promotion within the WRPS may very well be, as alleged, discriminatory. In other words rather than promotions based upon merit, the criteria could be extremely subjective including opinions of the very same officers accused of illegal or immoral behaviours. Hence who in their right mind, seriously trying to get ahead in the force, would want to allege criminal misconduct by one (or more) of their superiors?

CANADA'S MILITARY SHARES BEHAVIOURS WITH HER POLICE FORCES

Apparently Canadians will soon be seeing in detail how yet another male dominated institution treats female members. We already know from lawsuits and Human Rights complaints how the RCMP as well as some provincial and municipal police forces treat female officers. Twenty years ago I exposed how the City of Waterloo's Public Works Department treated their female employees. All of these male dominated organizations condoned bullying, harassment and sexual assault.

Yesterday's Waterloo Region Record carried a story titled "Pm orders review of arguments against military lawsuit". It seems as if federal Justice Department lawyers have taken an aggressive stance against the proposed class action lawsuit filed last year by three former service members. They are seeking $800 million for themselves and others in similar situations. Beyond the aggressive stance is a claim by these lawyers that the government does not owe a duty of care to individual members within the Armed Forces nor must they provide a safe and harassment free work environment. Obviously that flies in the face of statements and actions of Prime Minister Trudeau over the last couple of years. Interestingly though they are in line with comments recently made by the lawyer for the Waterloo Region Police Services Board who are facing a similar class action lawsuit.

JUSTICE DELAYED IS JUSTICE DENIED

The title of today's posting is in regards to a civil suit that is potentially about to start in Toronto this week. The Waterloo Region Record carried the story this past Monday titled "Kitchener man's civil trial stemming from G20 to start". The man, Luke Stewart, filed his statement of claim in 2011. Seven years it's taken to merely get close to starting in court. That is pathetic. Literally witnesses could have died, retired or simply disappeared. That is not justice.

The G20 Conference occurred in June 2010 in downtown Toronto. Mr. Stewart claims he was assaulted and detained illegally by Toronto Police Services. He is suing the Toronto Police Services Board. Furthermore his personal property, a pair of swimming goggles were seized from him. He was attempting to attend a legal protest and had the goggles for defensive purposes in case police deployed chemical weapons (tear gas). This apparently is the only civil suit to date to have gotten this far. There have been other minor legal actions taken against police including one criminal conviction for assault.

WATERLOO REGION POLICE SERVICES BOARD & MINISTRY OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS & CORRECTIONAL SERVICES

Those are the two most guilty and blameworthy bodies for the local mess here in Waterloo Region according to Kelly Donovan in her book "Systemic Misfeasance in Ontario Policing and the Coordinated Suppresion of Whistleblowers". Clearly throughout the rest of Ontario the local Police Service Boards in conjunction with this provincial Ministry are at fault. Basically uninformed, out to pasture former and current local politicians combined with status quo provincial appointees are a huge problem. Do not forget these names: Ken Seiling Regional Chairman, Tom Galloway Regional Councillor & Police Services Board Chair and Karl Kiefer Regional Councillor. Those three are all members of the Police Services Board. Former Regional Councillor Jim Wideman was as well. Our regional council also appoints one of the other members of the Board along with three additional provincial appointees.

My comment on status quo provincial civilian appointees may be by provincial intent or may be by inexperience. If your a new member of the Board you are extremely unlikely to rock the boat until after you've gotten some experience and varied input from more than just the vested interests all around you. The lack of training given these individuals as to the relevant legislation and their duties and responsibilities essentially guarantees that they won't be confronting even obvious problems. It certainly appears that this lack of training is intentional. It's all about power and control and I would suggest from the choice of Chair to the regional council having control over four out of seven appointees; it's clear who are in charge. Again it is this Board who allegedly choose the Chiefs and Deputy Chiefs. This is supposed to be part of the civilian control over our Police Services. What is apparent from both the class action lawsuit and the book by Kelly Donovan, this civilian "control" is a sham. Through knowledge, financial and legal power, manipulation and intimidation, the Waterloo Regional Police Service are and have been in charge of the Police Services Board for a very long time. Apparently with the full knowledge and support of our Regional Council.

Ask yourselves this. When was the last time you saw an announcement in your local newspaper advising you when and where the next PUBLIC meeting of the Waterloo Regional Police Services Board was occurring? Exactly! Here in Woolwich Township, despite the long sham of honest public consultation around the Uniroyal now Lanxess property and environmental degradation; we still have these PUBLIC meetings announced in our local paper. NEVER does our local Police Services Board do so. They and Regional Council prefer out of sight and out of mind in order to avoid informing citizens as to what is and is not going on.

CLARIFICATION OF OPINION PIECE REQUIRED RE: WRPS

I am very disappointed in the opinion piece by Peter Shawn Taylor in last Thursday's Waterloo Region Record titled "Police deserve their day in court". In his sub-title he suggests that comments made about the class action lawsuit are "disconcerting". Indeed they are as in very disconcerting. I would take less umbrage with his opinion article if his tone and bias was a little less evident. He suggests that the police deserve their day in court as if that is a positive to allow them to explain themselves. Based upon my life experiences and knowledge of past history of both gender discrimination and police behaviour and attitudes; I suggest that indeed the police deserve their day in court as in I hope they get their asses hauled into court and have to "explain" why they've either broken provincial laws on these matters or turned a blind eye to them for decades. Yes I believe the allegations in both the lawsuits and the recent Affidavits and I and others need not apologize for that. Our Regional Police just like our school board (WRDSB) literally have millions of dollars of taxpayers' money per year to play with and that is exactly what they do as they attack legitimate concerns and complaints of parents, local residents and citizens. They do this with lawyers, lawsuits and courts constantly. In other words stop feeling sorry for the bullies. At long last they're on the defensive and it's about time.

Mr. Taylor exaggerates. "As soon as the allegations are made, the case is closed.". No it's not. There will hopefully be some kind of opportunity for Patrick Brown for example to fully respond to the allegations against him. Many people like myself, a non-Conservative, understand that those allegations are anonymous and do not have the weight of an identifiable person stepping forward and signing their name to a written Affidavit or Civil Lawsuit as six current or former police officers have done. Yes I will agree with Mr. Taylor that in the Patrick Brown case he has been already punished. Especially with anonymous allegations, that is unacceptable.

Mr. Taylor suggests that we must vigorously resist any attempt to impose mob-based tactics on our court system. Really? O.K. I might agree in principle with that statement however I see virtually no attempt to do so by anybody. Secondly do you think our courts are so damned good in the first place that they don't need a serious good kick in the ass? Justice! Horseshit, it's all about money. Who's got it and is most willing to spend it greatly determines the outcome especially in civil law. Who can buy the most experts. Who can buy the best lawyers. Who can buy the best private investigators. And on and on.

James Bennett. Please. He promised that "...the truth will be properly revealed under cross-examination in coming months.". Well that's almost certainly horse manure. Little or nothing of the truth will be revealed either by the courts or by cross-examination in the near future. This is our judicial system of which he's been sucking at the teats of for decades. Every additional court appearance, delay, rescheduling, motion etc. are all money in the bank for him and his fellow lawyers. NOBODY within the judicial system has any incentive to get the lead out and get on with cases. Delay is usually the name of the game by one party or the other if not both.

Mr. Taylor then suggests that the Sexual Violence Task Force want the regional police to pay out $167 million immediately because "getting to the truth might have "negative impacts"" on women and girls. Such trollop Mr. Taylor. The negative impacts are in response to the words of Mr. James Bennett, lawyer for the Waterloo Region Police Services Board and presumably the union (?) as well. Mr. Bennett has publicly called the victims of systemic gender harassment and abuse, liars. Well puck you Mr. Bennett. You sir are in absolutely no position to be calling other people liars. Those words of yours are what could cause "negative impacts", not the truth.

Then finally Mr. Taylor, to his shame, hints that this lawsuit is all about female police officers looking at a possible $167 million payday. Let's see exactly how long and how well you would last in a hostile and toxic work environment. I and others have done it for years and decades. Sitting behind your typewriter/word processor wordsmithing articles; I expect that you have not, probably ever. Instead of blaming the victims try empathizing with them, rather than with the perpetrators.

INSP. PAT DIETRICH (NAMED IN LAWSUIT) TO RETIRE

The Waterloo Region Record carried the following story yesterday titled "Superintendent named in lawsuit to retire". The Superintendent was named as a police officer who took advantage of his position in regards to his treatment of some female officers. One female officer in particular has made serious accusations regarding his conduct towards her. This recently announced retirement effective yesterday was unexpected and will only serve to give even greater credibility to the Plaintiffs in the lawsuit and to the Affidavits recently filed in support of the lawsuit.

The other astounding item in this article is the fact that the Police Union (WRPA) earlier this month filed a grievance against the Waterloo Region Police Service (WRPS). Hoo boy does that ever smell in regards to this Union's (oops - Association) credibility. The lawsuit was filed last June. Those police officers have stated that they went to the Waterloo Region Police Association (WRPA) over a period of years and received little to no assistance. The Affidavits were filed in December 2017. Then and only then, after waiting to see the fallout from the lawsuit, does the Police Union get off their backsides and actually file a grievance. I feel that the stench of corruption is permeating. Union President Mark Egers is saying all the right things in yesterday's article. Filing the grievance however is decades late.Tom Galloway the Chair of the Waterloo Region Police Services Board and a regional councillor advised that the board does not get involved in employee matters or with union/management business. From what I can see the board pretty much has a hands off policy on just about everything dealing with the Waterloo Regional Police. Whether this is entirely of their own choosing or due to provincial government legislation I am not sure. Regardless it must change or otherwise get rid of this useless taxpayer funded board.

ONCE AGAIN WOOLWICH COUNCIL PUT THEIR INTERESTS AHEAD OF THE PUBLIC'S

Well last night Council and Staff's vacancy appointment scam unfolded pretty much to script. If you're a politician, lying to the voters is simply all in a day's work. It's all about their will and wishes versus what is in the public interest. Two speakers via Delegation advised Council and the public that the fastest, easiest and most responsive to public wishes was to simply appoint the runner-up candidate in Ward 1, Dr. Dan Holt. He was third with 1,036 votes for the two available positions in Ward 1. Lisa MacDonald also advised Council that the Staff Report was inaccurate with its' claim that an official Appointments Process involving advertising for Applicants, interviewing Applicants and then deciding on the winner would only cost $1,000-$3,000. Apparently Staff and Council like to add in Staff wages when they are totaling costs for say Election Financing Audits and Hearings but not so much when it doesn't suit them. They also forgot to add in the wages of the Township's taxpayer funded lawyers (Smith Valeriote).

Dr. Holt advised Council of his interest in representing Ward 1 residents as well as of his and other candidates having stepped forward in the last election, putting themselves out there, speaking publicly and spending time and money in order to get elected. An Appointments Process soliciting applications from far and wide was unnecessary, time consuming (2 months) and expensive. Furthermore the public had already spoken as to whom they wanted to represent them for this term of council.

Two other Delegates spoke. I am somewhat in awe of Jacqueline Hanley. She appears friendly, sociable, confident and out-going. She also speaks very well. The problem was in her message. She confidently advised that results in the last election were not to be a criteria as they did not represent the wishes of the public. She claimed that a wide open new Application Process potentially drawing in lots of applicants was far more democratic than relying on the results of the last election. In other words, unstated by her, was that the decision of five Councillors (actually 3- the majority) was allegedly more democratic than the votes of 1,036 Woolwich voters. Councillor Patrick Merlihan asked her the only question of any Delegate last evening. Could she explain or clarify how Councillors deciding could possibly be more democratic than the votes of over a thousand citizens. She was taken aback and stumped.

Then we had the last Delegate, Julie-Anne Herteis. Oh my. Julie-Anne "resigned" as Chair of CPAC before the very first public meeting ever occurred. This was after she stormed out of a meeting in the Councillor's Boardroom at which I was present. The kindest thing said after her sudden departure was that she was not "chairperson material". Julie-Anne later told Mayor Todd Cowan that she was going to resign as a Councillor. This was in her first year on Council. He talked her out of it. Then she didn't run for Council again in October 2014 to absolutely no one's surprise. Anyone who saw her at Council meetings found her knowledge base minimal and her grasp of the issues even less so.

Last evening she made it clear that she wants to throw her hat in the ring both now and in the fall. What are you doing Julie-Anne? You hated your time on Council. Is this simply for the part time salary available to Councillors? I absolutely do not know her outside her role as a past councillor. I have heard several good things about her work at Chartwell and about her social outings. She may be a wonderful human being but she simply does not have the necessary skills to be voting on issues affecting her fellow Woolwich residents.

Councillor Murray Martin introduced a Motion to accept the Staff Recommendation to hold a formal and extensive Appointments Process. He voted YES and did so without any explanation of his position. Larry Shantz followed him by voting YES also without explanation. Councillor Merlihan clearly explained why he felt that the best, least politicized move was to appoint the next runner-up Dr. Dan Holt. He therefore voted NO. Councillor Mark Bauman explained that he felt that the best decision for Woolwich was to vote NO and then appoint the next runner-up, Dr. Holt. Sandy Shantz as Chair broke the tie by voting YES, without any explanation.

The only surprise for several of us in the gallery was Mark Bauman voting NO along with Pat Merlihan. Then history and memory kicked in. This crap has happened before. In Council's In Camera meeting before they go public they claimed they were discussing an Ontario Municipal Board settlement. It is no difficult trick for even the dumbest of councillors to finish up the proper In Camera discussion and then go on to discussing another issue illegally in private (ie. in camera). This Council and others have been caught breaking Ontario law around In Camera meetings (Municipal Act) before and the most recent was only 2 1/2 years ago.

Setting up a phony vote ahead of time so as not to give the appearance that everybody on Council are against one councillor, Pat Merlihan, is child's play. In fact a few phone calls or e-mails prior to even the In Camera session would work just as well. I saw this done at the end of 2006 when the lame duck Council (after the election) gave the go ahead for the Jigs Hollow gravel pit. Losing Councillor Murray Martin changed his position and then voted against the proposal (Jigs Hollow Pit) knowing there was a majority vote in favour already. All of this is about Woolwich Councillors serving their own interests not the public's. Keep in mind that for the 2006 vote Councillor Mark Bauman had not yet (for years) revealed that he was in a conflict of interest position due to his relationship with Ray Kuntz, one of the proponents for the Jigs Hollow Pit. Mark voted in favour.