B2001RSAC0-32w
Notice of Confidentiality WITHOUT PREJUDICE, EXTREME OR OTHER WISE
RSAC DOCUMENT
RSAC DOCUMENT #: B2001RSAC0-32w
RSAC FILE # : 205.00207BPS223/227MNO PAGES THIS DOCUMENT:
************************************************************ONTARIO CIVILIAN COMMISSION ON POLICE SERVICES
25 GROSVENOR STREET
1ST FLOOR
TORONTO, ONTARIO
CANADA M7A 1Y6
TEL: 416-326-1189 FAX: 416-314-2036
TOLL FREE: 1-888-515-5005 1-888-311-7555*** ATTENTION SHELDON PRIOR ***
RE OCCPS # 01-COM-0018
OCCPS # 01-COM-0019
OCCPS # 01-COM-0046
BRANTFORD POLICE SERVICE # 00-10
BRANTFORD POLICE SERVICE # 00-12
BRANTFORD POLICE SERVICE # 00-16
DEAR SHELDON PRIOR;As per RSAC documents [B2001RSAC047A & B2001RSAC046A], dated 17 January 2001, to your service, relevant to your files 01-COM-0018 & 01-COM-0019, RSAC has made reply to all matters these files and file BPS # 00-16, OCCPS # 00-COM-0046 in this communication, to the best of ability.
The matter at hand is not a simple one and must be looked at with all factors present. All matters related in these files arose from a single event dated 13 May 2000, and given BPS Inc. # 00-13317. Accusations by Marlene Adams against RSAC. There are many factors that must be considered and reference to past Police contact with certain members must be mentioned, as well as past reference to file contacts. This matter has been addressed to RCMP and to The Attorney General, Toronto, and the Justice of the Peace Review Council, Toronto.
The inference of a Marlene Adams and Mr. Niemeyer’s association caused concern to RSAC to a large degree, compounded by the fact Marlene Adams mother worked at a office located at the Court building Brantford. An office that RSAC had prior reserved concerns over, that were not made open to agencies, at this point.
The matter at hand in court appearances and events related after Court appearances to Marlene Adams and John Wilson matters against RSAC has met a confirmed statement from the Attorney Generals Office, Toronto, that an Obstruction of Justice has / had occurred, in matters related to the discussion at hand in this communication. With this in mind and the source of the obstruction being attached to the Court building one must consider all the facts present. This confirmation was received to RSAC in a Taped communication to the Attorney Generals Office, Toronto. This obstruction occurred at the Court House thus the reference to Marlene Adams mothers employment in said Court Building must be addressed in this letter.RSAC’s concern for security breach resulting in Marlene Adams contact, that it was decided long before 13 May 2000 [bps inc.#00-13317], to address the issue with RCMP, National Security, Other Agencies. RSAC had made statement of the fact to Marlene Adams 12 May 2000, that attention would be addressed to RCMP.
RSAC has had similar / like scenarios before his table in the past. RSAC had concern to interference into a contact by police. Present at 34 Rawdon Street this time period were files relevant to Neumeyer / National Security / etc.
Files relevant to RSAC Security.
Threats to files and computers had caused this concern, to be increased. It is further Increased at present.
Reference to RCMP contact is available.RSAC is aware of his high profile status and it is a concern to RSAC. High Profile attests to differential attention by police. RSAC thus treats all contacts with reservations, and possible attachment to required agencies. It is the environment, and a permanent in RSAC contacts.
Matters related to this conversation with the Attorney Generals Office, Toronto, are presently under review within an agency held in Toronto. A report / reply has not yet been received to this review / investigation. It is felt by RSAC that discussions and reference to agency(s) involved should not be discussed / and restricted in discussion at this point, so as not to jeopardize this/their review / investigation at that level / agency, presently.
RSAC can state that communication related to matters at hand have been sent / directed to RCMP National Security, by RSAC [253.00rcmp243.ns01], as will a copy of this letter / communication. Considerations are present, within the mind set of RSAC to address the issues to The Department of National Defence {DND}, with reference to further concerns already addressed that direction. RSAC can not advise of any actions made by these agencies if any.
RSAC has expressed concerns relating to the attack upon the Constitution at this end, by members of agency(s) referred.
In reference to John Wilson and Marlene Adams. Both have Criminal Records. Kevin George Bonderove also has a criminal record. RSAC has attained one also.
RSAC was unaware of the contents of the Criminal records of these persons known as John Wilson, Marlene Adams, and Kevin Bonderove at the time of these events from May 2000 to August 2000, but has obtained copy of their records since.
These records are essential as they are admissible to attest to credibility, in Court(s). They are also used by Police in determining events and their actions as they investigate a complaint ; or are supposed to be considered in determining their actions. However this is not the case always it would seem. RSAC will direct this tribunal to case law that is contained in the Criminal Code of Canada, that should be considered as did Justice Edward when he stated in Court in RSAC presence that he was not going to waste valuable Court time in matters of which RSAC was arrested to weigh the credibility of John Wilson against that of RSAC and that the Crown should find resolve in resolution discussions and bring an end to the matters that had RSAC in custody. This may have been an error on the part of Justice Edwards to direct a compromise, thus not allowing RSAC to find total defeat to the accusations against him at that time. RSAC has however the rights to appeal / review, and the more errors in law will allow the appeal to be required, with fresh evidence brought forward to disprove the statements of Marlene Adams and John Wilson.It must be noted that the Brantford Police issued a warning to the general public in the City of Brantford back in 1995 that John Wilson was being released from Jail and was residing back in the City of Brantford. RSAC was unaware of this.
Members of The Brantford Police Service have a History also attached to their records, with reference to RSAC files attached to OCCPS files, and the old Police Complaints Commissioner, Toronto, in files retained.
NOTE: Justice Edwards granted RSAC an order to allow him access to laptop as RSAC advises Justice that he keeps notes much like a Police Officer and prefers to use laptop but does maintain some notes in manual diary book. Justice agrees that the times are a changing and grants RSAC access to laptop to defend himself. Court Orders are not recognized by Jail or Police and Police do not file Criminal Charges against the jail or any Members of same. RSAC did file a complaint on the matter. RSAC released from, jail and considers inability to gain access to laptop per Court order and this is a considering factor in accepting deal to plead guilty with intentions to appeal upon release and has done so. the appeal has not concluded yet. Police have seized RSAC diary books in the past and are aware of RSAC procedures to record facts.
Complaints to the matter to be addressed to the Attorney General on these issues above the concerns addressed to National Security, RCMP.============================================================
BRANTFORD POLICE MEMBERS INVOLVED THESE MATTERS [BPS]
*****************************************************COMPLAINT 00-COM-0018 / 00-10
BPS Inc.# 00-26233
Sgt.D. Hammond / Complaint Investigator 00-10
PC.V. Steeves
PC.C. Cotton
PC.C. GranthamCOMPLAINT 00-COM-0019 / 00-12
BPS Inc.# 00-27126
Sgt. Balazs / Complaint Investigator 00-12
Cst.K. Reeder
Cst.J. Sawkins
Sgt.T.CarriereCOMPLAINT 00-COM-00 / 00-16
BPS Inc.# 00-23607 / 00-24127 / 00-
Sgt. Pottruff / Complaint Investigator 00-16
Cst.Terry Ann Fortier
Cst. Butterfield
Cst. Farrow
Cst. TollarCOMPLAINT 99-COI-0261
Sgt.Osborne / Complaint Investigator
BPS Inc.# 00-20974 / B&E 34 Rawdon Street / RSAC’s room / locked cabinet in said room.
Cst.T.Fortier
Cst.S.Seibert============================================================
PERSONS CONECTED / CONTACTED / REFERED TO MATTERS DISCUSSED / NOT BRANTFORD POLICE
************************************************************[1] Marlene Adams, suspect in B&E / accusser in RSAC complications
[2] Jonathan Lloyd Wilson, suspect in B&E
[3] Trevor Robert James Pratt, suspect in B&E
[4] Justice Malloy, Denied bail / stated friend of RCMP member Tim Hughes / rsac has filed complaint against said justice to the jp review council
[5] Justice Edwards,
[6] Dale Henderson, Lawyer
[7] Ruth Clinahan, Att.Gen.Office Toronto
[8] Murray Segal, Ass.Dep.Att.Gen.Att.Gen.Office Toronto
[9] Paul M. Taylor, Att.Gen.Office Toronto
[10] Elinore R. Cantlon, witness for rsac
[11] Candy King, witness for rsac
[12] Chad King, witness for rsac
[13] Betty Bernard, witness for rsac
[14] Dorthy Frey, witness for rsac
[15] Wess, witness, for rsac
[16] Charles Trowhill, witness for rsac, landlord 34 rawdon street
[17] Peter Poole, witness for rsac
[18] Darlene Winter, witness for RSAC
[19] Mike Denton, driver tiger taxi, x-boy friend of Marlene Adams, lives at 157 Market Street / suspect in theft of property at 34 Rawdon Street
[20] Angela Cocorn / name received from Sgt.Pottruff
[21] James Jennings, Owner, Tiger Taxi
[22] Robert Kindon, Crown Attorney, Brantford
[23] George Orsini, acting Crown Attorney
[24] Keith Swanson, acting Crown Attorney
[25] Kevin Bonderove, witness, complainant,
[26] Superintendant Smith, Surrey RCMP
[27] Ontario Judicial Council
[28] Dave Hubbley, RCMP National Security
[29] Winsome Cain, Ombudsman, Ontario
[30] Jodie Foster, witness police
[31] Justin Griffin, lawyer
[32] RCMP London, Ottawa, Hamilton============================================================
Criminal Case law relevant to this hearing
and
that being prepared in Appeals CourtsSimilarly, defence counsel may lead the accused’s criminal record during his examination-in-chief and whether the criminal record is brought out in direct or in cross-examination it goes only to the accused’s credibility:
R. v. St.Pierre (1974), 17 C.C.C. (2d) 489, 3 O.R. (2d) 642 (C.A.).It constituted error for the trial judge to direct the jury that the accused’s previous convictions for dishonesty were of little weight on the issue of the accused’s credibility because the value of the goods stolen was less than $200:
R. v. Turlon (1989), 49 C.C.C. 93d0 186, 70 C.R. (3d) 376, 32 O.A.C. 396 (C.A.)these facts are taken into account supposedly by police when they conduct an investigation into a matter, and will cause charges to be laid on the past record of an individual, in similar and like cases. Why police did not consider or research upon accusations of John Wilson, further can with these facts only support the negligence of these officers involved or said police service, and or it will show the prejudice that may lay at the base of these matters.
John Wilson and Marlene Adams have convictions for thefts on their records and possession of stolen property. This should have been used when determining credibility of statements made by each to Police.
RSAC has a criminal record but it contains no convictions for thefts, possession of stolen property, or break and enters, etc.************************************************************
26 September 1998
f98.09i.26bps / 28/23-98 / 28197-98 / 98-28123 / occps file ? /
26 October 1999 = 276.00bps030rcmp / threats to rsac by drug unit / j.Wilson / Cst. butterfield states he did not hear threats made by alleged members of the Joint Forces Drug unit Brantford/RCMP / John Wilson had been their that date and signed statement to effect, to RCMP / RSAC does not believe Cst.Butterfield did not hear these`threats / RSAC still waiting for communications from RCMP, Ottawa and The Privacy Commissioner, Ottawa on this matter / Matter is under review by RCMP Public Complaint Commission, Ottawa / seems to be indicators that file may be secured under National Security Files / The process with federal process is lengthy in duration in receiving results
refer to files / butterfield / 00-coi-0366 / no bps response / rcmp related 990.td.rcmp / 5100-7127/018 privacy commissioner Ottawa / 00-atip-31525 rcmp Ottawa / 2000-030 rcmp Hamilton / 1999-pcc-1298 rcmp pcc / rsac # 211.00pco.192rcmp / 5100-07127/017 privacy commissioner Ottawa /============================================================
04 October 1999 = RSAC contacts Tim Huges and leaves voice mail to his answering machine at the Brantford Police Station, concerning some information RSAC came upon concerning a coke dealer on Erie Avenue, and above City Taxi, on Dalhousie Street, Brantford.
============================================================
04 October 1999 = RSAC finds package of what seems to be Cocaine in his mail box.
============================================================
06 October 1999 = RSAC is threatened at Court House Brantford by Police, suspected of being RCMP, Cst. Butterfield, Brantford Police Service was present at the time of these threats being made by Police. Cst.Butterfield denies hearing these remarks. John Wilson present when these remarks are made at RSAC.
Conversation at the time centered around a drug dealer [coke], in Court on this date and that RSAC had fed information to Tim Hughes, RCMP. Conversation led to how RSAC new that he was a Coke Dealer and RSAC responded that Cst.Butterfield should confer with RSAC’s RCMP babysitter in B.C., as he would tell him that RSAC "was quite the little investigator" as it was referred to RSAC in B.C.. It was at the completion of this Statement by RSAC that RSAC met the response of "is there not a standing order to shoot this guy on site." RSAC had wanted to turn coke in to police. Had advised this to lawyer John Renwick when RSAC attended to Court this date. Lawyer John Renwick made indications to RSAC that persons who threatened RSAC were RCMP members. RSAC attends to lawyer Dale Henderson’s office and confers with secretary of events this date.============================================================
14 October 1999 = RSAC observes person at walk bridge that runs across the Grand River, that resembles a person thought to have been an RCMP member in attendance 06 October 1999 when RSAC was threatened by suspected RCMP members. RSAC file reference 028bps.99th.rcmp / RCMP # 2000-030,Hamilton 99-lint-5797, London / RCMP PCC # 1999-PCC-1298
============================================================
14 October 1999 = Tim Hughes RCMP member located at the Brantford Police Station makes allegation to Brantford Police that RSAC called and threatened him. RSAC is not arrested until 26 October 1999, reference BPS Inc.# 99-30564./ RSAC file reference 028bps.99th.rcmp / RCMP # 2000-030,Hamilton 99-lint-5797, London / RCMP PCC # 1999-PCC-1298
============================================================
26 October 1999 = RSAC arrested at 286 Darling Street, Brantford, @ 10:08 hrs., on allegations that RSAC made threats to Tim Hughes RCMP Member, Hamilton detachment located at the Brantford Police Station. It is indicated RSAC made these threats 14 October 1999. RSAC is asked by the arresting officer why a Detective is handling this matter, when it is usually a regular police officer that conducts this type of complaint. RSAC advises that it is probably because RSAC is high profile.
Refer to BPS Inc. #’s 99-30564 and # 99-31371 / RSAC file reference 028bps.99th.rcmp / RCMP # 2000-030,Hamilton 99-lint-5797, London / RCMP PCC # 1999-PCC-1298============================================================
14 January 2000 = RSAC released from Jail after pleading guilty to some charges alleged 14 October 1999, that RSAC was arrested for on 26 October 1999, refer to BPS Inc.# 99-30564. Justice Ken Lenz, makes comment to the point that matters could bring the administration of justice into disrepute. RSAC advises the Judge that if the Judge believes the allegations against RSAC. RSAC would like the Judge To know that if RSAC made these remarks, they would only have been made by RSAC, with the application of self-defence being attached as a result of threats by Police at RSAC October 1999 at the Court Building in Brantford of which these matters were heard. RSAC can advise that the Federal Prosecutors office, a local Lawyer and others are referred to in documents received from RCMP on this matter as witness potential witness, or persons to be interviewed into the threats against RSAC. This guilty plea on this arrest 26 October was met by joint agreement, and is under appeal. It must be noted RSAC has yet to receive all relevant materials to complete this appeal, and is in discussions with agency in Ottawa to obtain them from the RCMP.
============================================================
31 January 2000 = RSAC and RCMP meet at the Salvation Army Hostel to discuss the matter of complaint against RCMP for threats made at Court House, Tim Hughes, other 44 Queen Street, Brantford. The interview is taped and RSAC receives copy of taped conversation from RCMP, as per requirements.RSAC file reference 028bps.99th.rcmp / RCMP # 2000-030,Hamilton 99-lint-5797, London / RCMP PCC # 1999-PCC-1298
============================================================
01 March 2000
RSAC moves into 34 Rawdon Street, rents room.
Charles Trowhill, landlord still resides at residenceJohn Wilson residing at said address, Marlene Adams met around this time at said address. RSAC rents house after Charles Trowhill moves out at the end of . RSAC is left in charge of house by landlord when he moves out. RSAC has intentions to get rid of some person living there as control is gained at house. Marlene Adams and male friend are consideration as is John Wilson. John Wilson is required for the time to assist rental payments. Marlene Adams, as far as RSAC can determine, never paid Charles Trowhill any rental monies during her stay, at this residence 34 Rawdon Street. RSAC was in the thought that Marlene was a friend of Charles Trowhill, the owner of the house at 34 Rawdon Street until 01 October 2000 when the Bank regained control.
It is at this time that Marlene advises RSAC that she is Pregnant and has no place to stay. Returns next date with boyfriend Josh Ghent, and others.============================================================
08 March 2000
Sgt. Pottruff was in attendance to 34 Rawdon Street to see John Wilson RE: allegations by female of sexual assault / assaults ; Sgt. Pottruff was with another officer, refer to diary notes. Sgt. Pottruff made conversation with Marlene Adams and her boyfriend Josh Ghent.
============================================================
Charles Trowhill moves from 34 Rawdon Street to 132 Dalhousie Street. RSAC left in charge, around March 2000
============================================================
RSAC asks Marlene Adams and her boyfriend to move out. Marlene Adams calls her mother to ask her if she can return home to live, in April 2000. Marlene returns periodically in need of a place to stay for a NIGHT.
============================================================
NOTE: During the period from April 2000, to 12 May 2000 when RSAC asks her to move out from 34 Rawdon Street to the time Marlene Adams contacts Police 12 May 2000, she returns periodically in need of a place to spend the night, as she missed her curfew at home at her mothers, it is understood.
During the period that Marlene attended to house 34 Rawdon Street after RSAC gained control she accuses John Wilson of making sexual advances at her. RSAC advises John Wilson to not touch Marlene Adams as she does not want his advances to continue.============================================================
10 April 2000
RECEIVED A CALL THIS DATE ASKING FOR MERLENE, BY VOICE RECOGNITION RSAC DETERMINED IT WAS IVAN NEUMEYER, LOOKING FOR MERLENE, HE CALLED MORE THAN ONCE, AS THERE IS A VOICE MAIL FROM HIM ON THE ANSWERING MACHINE, STATING HE GOT HER CALL, SHE STATES THAT SHE DOES NOT KNOW HIM
RSAC RECEIVED THE SECOND CALL AND TOLD NEUMEYER THAT SHE DID NOT LIVE HERE ANYMOREexcerpt from diary notes
MERLENE CALLED ME UPSTAIRS AND ASKED ME IF SHE COULD SPEND THE NIGHT, AS SHE WAS EXPERIENCING DIZZY SPELLS
SHE HAD ARRIVED EARLIER AFTER CALLING FROM THE POOL HALL / BAR
SHE SAID SHE WAS GOING UPSTAIRS TO LOOK FOR SOME CLOTHES AS SHE HAD ANOTHER FUNERAL TO ATTEND TO, SHE WAS UP THERE QUITE A WHILE BEFORE SHE CALLED TO ME TO ASK ME IF SHE COULD STAY FOR THE NIGHT
CHECKED MESSAGES ON THE PHONE AND THERE IS ONE FROM IVAN NEUMEYER THAT CLEARLY INDICATES THAT HE KNOWS MERLENE BUT WHEN I ASKED HER OF THIS SHE DENNIES THAT SHE KNOWS HIM = CAUTION, AS SOMETHING SMELLS A FOUL, MERLENE MUST BE WATCHED MORE CLOSELY AS A RESULT OF THIS RECOVERY OF KNOWLEDGE
THIS VOICE MAIL MUST BE RETAINED ON MY OWN TAPE SYSTEM / STORAGE============================================================
11 April 2000
05:41 11/04/00
MERLENE STAYED OVER NIGHT, SHE CALLED ME UPSTAIRS LAST NIGHT AND ASKED ME IF SHE COULD SPEND THE NIGHT AS SHE WAS NOT FEELING WELL, I SAID I SUPPOSE, SHE WAS UPSTAIRS SORTING OUT SOME CLOTHES
UP DATE NOTES TO YESTERDAY DOCUMENT 10 APRIL 2000
05:57 11/04/00============================================================
15 April 2000
S advised that he had seen John and Marlene at Mack’s Milk on Erie Avenue stealing stuff. They were taking it out the back door. It was thought by RSAC that Marlene had a job at that location. RSAC questioned John to the fact and John replied he had an account their and that he was paying for it at the end of the month. RSAC said that if he was stealing from the store he did not want that kind of behavior attached to the house. RSAC advised John that he would not be surprised to see Police at the door, if he was stealing from their, as the place has a video camera. RSAC was not happy with this. RSAC in conversations determined that John was not telling the whole truth to the matter when a conversation developed before RSAC between John and Marlene. In latter dates RSAC learned that Marlene was kicked out from the store.
RSAC was finding the matter of John and Marlene interesting in the fact, she accused John of molesting here twice but would end up with him for the day or they would meet. John and Marlene disappeared to Paris Ontario for a weekend.RSAC asked them what kind of game they were up to. Marlene had at one time told RSAC he should kick John out.
On many occasions RSAC would wake to find Marlene sleeping over, as John had let her in.
RSAC decided to keep an eye on the situation and record.
Marlene was definitely a problem at times when she was in attendance. She it is understood knew John long prior to RSAC knowledge of her.
RSAC could not confirm nor deny these allegations attached to Mack’s Milk.
However it is understood that Merlene’s alleged employment did not seem to extend past this period.============================================================
05 May 2000
RSAC wakes this date to find Marlene Adams sleeping. RSAC not sure when she arrived. John Wilson let Marlene in last night. RSAC wakes Marlene and asks her to leave as RSAC has the Real Estate coming this date. She was moody. She when RSAC sat down in chair in living room ignored RSAC. Marlene was sitting on the Couch. Marlene left and slammed door. RSAC went to door and told her that she did not have to come back. RSAC did not invite her here.
============================================================
06 May 2000
RSAC goes for his daily bike ride and observes Marlene Adams at the Carnival. RSAC approaches her to speak to her. RSAC asked her when she was coming to get the rest of her stuff and the cats. She walks away from RSAC. RSAC approaches again. Marlene tells RSAC to bugger off. RSAC leaves and wants no problems.
Cats are delivered to SPCA on Monday by John Wilson at request of RSAC. Marlene is advised that cats went to SPCA on 12 May 2000, when she attended to 34 rawdon street after her trip to Toronto area with carnival============================================================
07 May 2000
RSAC obtains phone # of Marlene’s mom from John Wilson and tries to call her Mom, but receives no reply.
RSAC decides to place the rest of Marlene’s stuff on the front porch. RSAC does not want her back in the house if he can help it. RSAC advises John Wilson of decision. John agrees. RSAC secures items in plastic bags. leaves getto Blaster in house until she arrives.John Wilson advises RSAC that he thought he saw Marlene walking around the block last night, after midnight. She was with 3 males. John positive it was her. John questioned what she was doing. RSAC stated trying to cause trouble.
RSAC calls City Taxi and asks were 22 Charles Street is and is told it is West Brant. RSAC is considering calling a cab and sending Marlene’s stuff to her mothers.
============================================================
08 may 2000
Merlene’s cats taken to SPCA at the request of RSAC by John Wilson.
============================================================
11 May 2000
Marlene called RSAC. call received at 19:00 11/05/00.
Marlene advised RSAC she would be back in Brantford tomorrow.RSAC calls Dale Henderson, Lawyer.
===========================================================
12 May 2000
Marlene Adams called 34 Rawdon Street / Marlene attended 34 Rawdon Street / Marlene was asked of her association with Ivan Neumeyer, RSAC, as phone messages had been received to voice mail 34 Rawdon Street phone, as well as a phone call was received by RSAC personally, by RSAC. / RSAC has had discussion with RCMP re Mr.Neumeyer and RSAC was the subject of some complications from Mr.Neumeyer / Marlene refused to answer question / Marlene advised that rsac would have to address the issue of her association with Ivan Neumeyer to RCMP / Marlene left with John Wilson to Merlene’s address on Ontario Street / sent John Wilson back to house with note to call her next day. /
Marlene had made comment that she was investigating RSAC. / It was further learned, at a latter date from 12 May 2000 that Merlene’s mother worked in the lower floor of the Court House building in a non related agency to the Court Building. Revelation to this fact, of Merlene’s mothers employment location came to RSAC knowledge between the time of 13 May 2000 and 27 June 2000 when RSAC was arrested on the 13 May 2000 allegations. Located in this building where Marlene Adams Mother works is the Welfare Office, the Probation Office, The Disability Office, a small coffee shop, an Accountant office, as well as the Court Facilities.
RSAC has had concerns addressed to this building in various agencies located, as referred, to RCMP. As indicated in this document in another location the Attorney General has been addressed to Obstruction by the Court and The Justice of the Peace related to matters of concern RE: John Wilson and Marlene Adams.============================================================
13 May 2000
RSAC called Marlene this date @ 08:19 hrs., [taped], as per her request / Marlene concerned with my advising RCMP to her asks what will happen / RSAC advises with all probability nothing, don’t be concerned, RSAC has to / Marlene asked RSAC to bring over some music tapes to her / RSAC reluctant but conceded to her request / RSAC logs computer off at 09:28 hrs and RSAC attends to address on Ontario Street and delivered music tapes / RSAC left Ontario Street / RSAC requested Marlene to attend and retrieve any property that might be there as soon as possible / RSAC returned home around 1200 hrs., to find Marlene and another female at 34 Rawdon Street with the children / Marlene made the kids freshie / Marlene could not figure out how to get the property from 34 Rawdon Street to Ontario Street / she was advised to call her taxi cab friends who she had a standing account with, as her x boyfriend drove for said taxi "Tiger Taxi" / Tanya the female with Marlene advises that she let Marlene into her house because Marlene told her that she was pregnant and had no place to stay. RSAC and other were aware that Marlene was no pregnant. Marlene had told John Wilson and RSAC that she had a miscarriage while out of town last week with the carnival. ya right. RSAC does not believe this either. Tanya advises that she was instructed to keep an eye on Marlene by Marlene male friend with the carnival. RSAC hears information that he is connected to a biker group.
13 May 2001 = Brantford Police attend to 34 Rawdon Street and knock on door. RSAC does not answer. Police leave.
13 may 2000 = 00-13317 / refer to files / 143.00bps.01 / 219m.00bps.143 /
and related files / 220.00min.143bps / 00-13 / 00-coi-0338 / 245.00min143omb [Wilson] / 254.00min243.143bps [btfd jail] / 00-26233 / illegal access laptop / crt order /============================================================
NOTE:
Between the period 13 May 2000 the date Marlene Adams made accusations to Cst.Farrow [00-13317], about RSAC to 27 June 2000, when RSAC was arrested at 34 Rawdon Street, RSAC remained at 34 Rawdon Street, and did not leave residence.
Police attended residence several times during this period but RSAC did not answer the door. Police were observed in driveway by RSAC at one date during this period with their "hands on their weapons" even though they were still in their holsters. Others also observed this "hands on guns" by Police in attendance during this period. During his period there was an internal investigation against police for threats to "shoot on site" RSAC, that were made at the Court House in Brantford, in 1999. This matter of threats has not met conclusion and is still under review. RSAC has concerns to these remarks prior to them transpiring and after they did. This is only one reason when asked for RSAC’s new address by Police, RSAC has refused to give it to Police. RSAC has concern also to a contact at 34 Rawdon Street by John Wilson, when RSAC was sure few persons knew were he was, and that some of those few were Police. To say the least RSAC does not trust the Police, at this location, and can support that fact with many facts. It must be noted that there are factor that are held to RCMP files in British Columbia, that assist to this feeling.============================================================
14 May 2000
police called to RSAC Mothers house looking for RSAC, advise her that if she hears from RSAC to tell RSAC that if RSAC does not call Police will issue a warrant for the arrest of RSAC. RSAC learns latter that Police were prepared to arrest 13 May 2000 after talking to Marlene and RSAC feels that to be the truth by the force that was used to knock on the door 13 may 2000 at 34 Rawdon Street, when Police attended looking for RSAC. Cst.Farrow called to RSAc’s Mother’s.
Police attend to house 34 rawdon Street and knock on door RSAC does not answer. Female knows name of RSAC"s cat. RSAC observes BPS cruiser across the street.
============================================================
15 May 2000
RSAC sends John Wilson to meet Lawyer Dale Henderson, with bag of tapes. john is not aware of what is in the bag. RSAC does not tell John.
John will son returns to 34 Rawdon Street and advises RSAC that bag was delivered to Richard Cook, Dale Henderson’s partner. Dale Henderson states that he will call RSAC and leave voice mail. RSAC can access from anywhere RSAC tells Dale Henderson in letter sent with John Wilson and bag of tapes. RSAC advises Dale Henderson that RSAC will surrender at his office or Court Building in presence of witnesses.John advises RSAC that Marlene is staying at Tanya’s a new friend of Marlene. John states that he saw Police in Back yard last night. Cst.Farrow the investigating officer [00-13317] is alleged to be a second cousin to Marlene, as told to him by Marlene Adams.
15 May 2000
RSAC checks voice mail. Marlene called and played her music to voice mail. RSAC saves call to tape. voice mail checked at 12:31 15/05/00
15 may 2000
police attend to 34 Rawdon Street as told to RSAC after he returned from neighbors by John Wilson. John did not answer the door. Police arrived just after RSAC had left to neighbors. RSAC has recorded time of entry at 00:57 15/05/00 or 15 may 2000 when he returned to base 34 Rawdon Street.
============================================================
16 May 2000
RSAC receives call to 34 Rawdon Street from Marlene Adams she plays her music over the phone. John Wilson heard this music being played to voice mail. John Wilson present when call came in.
============================================================
excerpt from RSAC notes made 17 May 2000.
17 May 2000 – she is a nut
THIS DATE 15:33 17/05/00 MERLENE CALLED 34 RAWDON STREET AND JON ANSWERED THE PHONE. MERLENE WANTED JOHN TO CALL LONG DISTANCE FOR HER TO
1-519-852-1764 CELL # TO JEFF
RSAC WAS PRESENT TO HEAR EVERYTHING AND JOHN TOLD HER HE DID NOT KNOW WHERE RSAC WAS, THEY TALKED ABOUT HER STOVE AND JOHN TOLD HER WHERE THE FUSE PANEL WAS, SOME GUY NAMED STEVE WAS THERE.
JOHN SAID IT WAS NOT HIS PHONE AND HE COULD NOT MAKE A LONG DISTANCE CALL, BUT THEN STATED HE WOULD MAKE JUST THIS ONE AFTER HE LISTENED TO HER FOR A FEW MOMENTS, I WROTE A NOTE AND GAVE IT TO JOHN THAT STATED TO TELL HER NOT TO CALL HERE AGAIN, JOHN SPOKE TO HER BUT FAILED TO READ THE NOTE ; HE HUNG UP AND I TOLD HIM THAT HE WAS NOT MAKING ANY LONGDISTANCE CALLS; JOHN THEN RETURNED A CALL TO MERLENE AND SAID HE COULD NOT MAKE ANY LONG DISTANCE CALLS FOR HER AND THAT HE DID NOT WANT HER CALLING HERE GAIN.
MERLENE STATED AS JOHN ADVISED THAT WE WERE NOT TO CALL HER AGAIN AND THAT IF HE SAW ME TO TELL ME TO CALL THE POLICE.
JOHN TOLD MERLENE IN THAT CONVERSATION THAT NO ONE HAS CALLED HER FROM THIS PHONE.
JOHN HOWEVER WAS ABLE TO GET THE PHONE # OF HER BOY FRIEND AND MERLENES CELL PHONE FOR WHAT REASON I DON’T KNOW, JON SAID THAT HE GOT THEM AS HE THOUGHT IT MIGHT BE IMPORTANT TO HAVE THEM? IT MAY BE IF I CAN GET PHONE RECORDS OF ALL THE CALLS TO BASE AS IT WILL DETERMINE WERE ALL THE CALLS ARE COMING FROM THAT CAN NOT BE TRACED BY *69,
IT WILL ON THOUGHT GIVE US THE ABILITY TO CALL BELL CANADA AND HAVE THESE PHONE # BLOCKED SO THAT THEY CAN’T CALL THIS PHONE #17 May 2000
Excerpt from RSAC document "BPSMA.TXT"
SINCE POLICE CONTACT TO THIS MATTER I HAVE RECEIVED CALLS FROM WHO I BELEIVE TO BE MERLENE AND SHE PLAYES HER MUSIC OVER THE PHONE, THE SAME MUSIC SHE LIKED TO LISTEN TO ON THE STERIO, I WAS TOLD BY K ON SAT THAT MERELENE CALLED SEVERAL TIMES LOOKING FOR ME AND SHE LEFT VOICE MAIL / IT MUST BE NOTED THAT THIS HOUSE WAS RECEIVING CALLS THAT HAD NO SOURCE AND THAT AFTER THESE CALLS CAME THROUGH THE VOICE MAILS WERE NOT IN SAVE FORMAT, AND HAD DISAPPEARED, BUT SINCE CHANGING THE PASS CODE NO VOICE MAILS HAVE DISAPPEARED THAT I CAN DETERMINE
I FIND THIS TO BE SERIOUS IN THE FACT THAT THE POLICE HAVE BEEN KNOWN TO TAMPER WITH EVIDENCE IN BRANTFORD, AND ONE MUST BE IN THOUGHT TO THE FACT THAT RCMP SAY THEY HAVE NO PAPER WORK ON THE DELIBERATE OVERDOSE IN BC
K AND I HAVE DISCUSSED THE SECURITY CODE PROBLEM, AND WE DETERMINED THAT MERLENE COULD HAVE GOT IT FROM OVERHEARING US TALK ABOUT THE PASS CODE WHEN SHE WAS HERE, BECAUSE I NEVER TOLD HER THE PASS CODE
I HAVE ADVISED JOHN NOT TO CONTACT MERLENE AS IT MIGHT BE IN HIS BEST INTEREST AS SHE MAY TRY TO GET HIM THROWN IN JAIL ALSO
MERLENE TRYED TO GET ME TO KICK John OUT ON AN OCCASSION.
John SAID THAT THE LAST TIME HE RAN INTO HER SHE BECAME A LITTLE BITCHY WITH HIM, I HAVE DEEP CONCERN FOR John AND MERLENE CAUSING HIM TROUBLE ALSO [15 MAY 2000][MACKS MILK]
TANYA NOW WANTS JOHN TO COME AROUND AND I THINK THERE IS ALTERIER MOTIVES IN HER REQUEST, AND HAVE ADVISED JOHN OF THAT FACT
I REMEBER A FEMALE FROM THE MUGS CROWD COMMING OVER TO TALK TO ME AND I MADE REFRENCE TO NEUMEYER THAT SHE WAS PROBABLY OVER TO TRY TO FIND OUT SOME INFORMATION, AS THIS FEMALE APPROACHED ON THE PRETENCE OF RENTING A ROOM
ONE CAN NOT UNDERESTIMATE THE FACT THAT IT HAS BEEN REFERED THAT ALTERIER MOTIVES WERE BEHIND THE NEUMEYER ALLEGATIONS OF THEFT TO GET ME MOVED AND ONE MUST REFER TO THE CONVERSATION THAT THE NEUMEYER LOCATION WAS NOT A GOOD LOCATION FOR ME WITH A MEMBER OF THE BRANTFORD JAIL
ONE HAS TO CONSIDER ALL FACTS
I NEED TO KNOW THE NEUMEYER CONECTION WITH MERELENE
I FURTHER RECALL THAT I SAID TO K WHEN HE TOLD ME SHE CALLED AGAIN, WHAT DOES SHE WANT KNOW, HE SAID SHE WANTS YOU TO CALL HER, K ALSO SAID SHE HAD LEFT VOICE MAIL, THAT LATTER DISAPPEARED
ONE MUST REMEMBER THAT I CALLED JANE STEWARTS OFFICE ABOUT POLICE AT THIS ADDRESS AND THAT I DID NOT WANT THEM HERE AND THAT I HAD A CONCERNS THAT I WOULD LIKE TO HAVE THEM DEAL WITH BUT I CAN NOT CONTACT THEM, I WAS REFERING TO THE FACT I WANT TO CALL POLICE TO COME AND GET MERLENE’S STUFF AND TAKE IT TO HER SO I COULD AVOID ANY CONFLICT, I MENTIONED THIS FACT TO THE HOUSE ALSO, HER STUFF WAS ALL ON THE FRONT POURCH AND I SPOKE TO MERLENE AND TOLD HER SHE COULD COME AND GET HER STUFF ANYTIME SHE WANTED
I HAD FEELINGS THAT SOMETHING WAS AFOUL TO COME AND IT CONCERNED ME AS FAR BACK AS THE FIRST OF APRIL, AND I HAD CONCERN ON SECURITY TO FILES ETC., I MADE NO REFRENCE TO THIS TO ANYONE AND KEPT THIS THOUGHT TO MYSELF
I HAVE CONCERN IN ALL OF THIS AS THERE HAS BEEN SERIOUS VIOLATIONS AGAINST ME BY LAW ENFORCEMENT IN THE PAST
MERLENE’S MOM WORKS AT THE COURT HOUSE IN THE ACCOUNTING OFFICE LOCATED NEAR THE COFFEE SHOP AT SAME LOCATION
ONE ALSO MUST REMEMBER THAT NEUMEYER STATED THAT HE GOT HIS VCR TAPES BACK AFTER THEY WERE STOLEN, BUT HE SAID HE NEVER GOT MINE BACK, HOWEVER THEY WERE ALL STOLEN AT THE SAME TIME, POLICE [HAMMOND] STATED WHEN I SPOKE TO THEM ON THIS THAT THEY NEVER HAD MADE A STOLEN PROPERTY RECOVERY LIST WHEN THEY RECOVERED THE TAPES AT THE PAWN SHOP. I RECEIVED DIFFFERENT INFORMATION============================================================
18 May 2000
[9] insertion made 13:05 18/05/00
john said he heard that the charges were related to rsac’s alleged attendance at marlines, in the am before she came to house to with Tanya and kids, on Saturday 13 may 2000
rsac said to john if that was the case why did they come here after these allegations, and Marlene made freshie for the kids, nothing happened here, then rsac received calls from her and when rsac finally called to talk to her rsac was advised of police contact, what rsac would not respond to her calls so she decided to try and get rsac charged???============================================================
18 May 2000
14:18 18/05/00
Police were at the door
male and female
rsac saw no car and they left towards the canal must have parked around the corner and walked up
14:38 18/05/00============================================================
20 may 2000
[18] ENTRY MADE 10:40 20/05/00
10:03 20/05/00
RE RSAC WILL REQUIRE COPY OF ALL PHONE RECORDS OF MERLENE AND HER NEW MALE FRIEND, HER NEW FRIEND TANYA, RE NEUMEYER AND MY VCR TAPES THAT WERE STOLE AT THE SAME TIME AS HIS BUT YET HIS TAPES WERE THE ONLY ONE FOUND, POLICE [Sgt. Hammond] STATED THEY MADE NO PROPERTY RECOVERY LIST AT THE TIME OF RECOVERY OF TAPES,
10:10 20/05/00
MADE ENTRY TO CARD FILE "MBPSD"
10:39 20/05/00============================================================
21 May 2000
[20] ENTRY MADE 13:05 21/05/00
CALL 411 TO GET PHONE # BELL SECURITY AND ADDRESS IF AVAILABLE
12:39 21/05/00
310-2355 GIVEN THIS NUMBER TO CALL BELL SECURITY
12:40 21/05/00============================================================
22 may 2000
10:35 HRS APP.,22 may 2000
S OVER
S LEFT AND SAID HE WOULD BE RIGHT BACK,
POLICE AT DOOR RIGHT AFTER S LEFT ALMOST THOUGHT IT WAS S RETURNING, BUT THE KNOCK WAS WRONG
RSAC COULD SEE POLICE OUT FRONT OF C’S APPARTMENT, SAW RADIO ANTENNA
S CALLED SEVERAL TIMES AS POLICE WERE AT THE DOOR
S AND C BOTH CAME TO DOOR BUT RSAC NEVER OPENED IT, FIRST C AND THEN S, THEY TRIED TO CALL SEVERAL TIMES ALSO BUT WE DID NOT ANSWER,
RSAC COULD HEAR SOMEONE AT BACK FENCE NEAR BACK DOORRSAC learns latter that police had their guns at the ready from s. RSAC learns that police were at the back door area in the neighbors yard hiding behind the fence, and approached s. and asked him if RSAC was inside.
============================================================
23 May 2000
[ ] entry made 21:30 24/05/00
CALLED CHRIS AT 09:40 23/05/00
SHE SAID SHAWN WENT TO GO OUT TO COME OVER AND THE POLICE WERE IN THE DRIVEWAY, CHRIS SAID THEY ASKED HIM A FEW QUESTIONS AND LEFT, CHRIS WOULD NOT DIVULGE WHAT WAS ASKED BUT SAID HE WOULD TELL ME LATER WHEN HE GETS UP, AROUND 1200 OR 1300 HRS.,
SHE SAID SHAWN FEELS THE PHONE IS TAPED
HAD TO HANG UP AND CALL AGAIN AS THE PHONE GOT STATICY, SHE CALLED BACK, SHE SAID WHEN PHONE WENT FUNNY SHE HEARD ANOTHER VOICE CUT IN,
09:44 23/05/00
============================================================
28 May 2000
[2c] mom called at 09:40 28/05/00
said cops were there last night, with a warrant to arrest me, some female was ringing her door and screaming that i lived at moms, mom called cops for her ringing moms door bell, but cops said they came because of this females call to them and not for moms call, mom could not get a file # from police or find any information out as to why they want me, she told cops i could not call and they said this was different, mom said no it’s not, and if he called it would be one more charge you could lay against him,============================================================
29 May 2000
[3c] someone was at the door knocking, Kevin and i sat, knocked twice, after door closed i went to rear window and observed a male in red gm dark black hair, medium, white, mustache? do not know if this was the person at the door for sure, car was parked facing colbourne street, he pulled out a smoke, and lit it and started car, and put his sun glasses on, and drove away, he kept looking this direction, Shawn may have come to the door and this guy may have come out of factory, at the same time, he may have been observing Shawn also, if it was shawn at the door, but i have feelings at this point that it was this male person in red car at door, this event occurred around 18:00 hrs.,
18:44 29/05/00============================================================
30 May 2000
14:22 30/05/00
C OVER AND SAID A UNIFORM COP CAME TO THE DOOR YESTERDAY 29 MAY 2000
PARKED HIS CAR AROUND THE CORNER, THAT MUST BE WHO KNOCKED WHEN I SAW THE GUY IN THE RED CAR, OR MAYBE SOMEONE WAS HERE WHEN I WAS RESTING
14:24 30/05/00============================================================
31 May 2000
INCOMING CALL AT
11:58 31/05/00
MERLENE LEFT VOICE MAIL = WANTED TO KNOW IF HER CLOTHES WERE STILL HERE
770-1293 IS # SHE CALLED FROM
12:00 31/05/00============================================================
31 May 2000
[11c] 31/05/00 rsac received a note from dale Henderson, lawyer to contact him as he had information for rsac, received via john willson
rsac called at 14:50 hrs., and 17:40 hrs., and 17:48 hrs.,
learned that there was a warrant out for rsac’s arrest but he did not know what the charges were
note copied to notepad "31m2000" in Henderson folder 01/06/00
in rsac call to secretary rsac said rsac was afraid of this police service, and that rsac would surrender to the court, had to secure files, also refered to neumeyer and the fact that he called her but she denied knowing him, also that rsac would need the phone call record off all calls received at 34 rawdon street, and had contacted bell about security ; need to start complaint and request for an investigation ; told her that merelene had called here today and left voice mail, and that rsac has copy of voice mail saved, for the court to hear,
calls made at 14:50 and 17:40 and 17:48 hrs., to dale Henderson
stated rsac had heard stories and rsac states rsac did not in any manner assault Marlene Adams in any way
made reference that rsac had contacted the queen in England about the Brantford police service
stated rsac had put merlene’s stuff on porch so as she could come and get it, so as to not have contact, did not want any trouble with her,
said that Marlene had been told not to call here at 34 rawdon street and she did anyway
gave her my cell phone # and base phone #============================================================
01 June 2000 = RSAC calls Dale Henderson, Lawyer.
dale called 01 june 2000 an left voice mail that stated he could only find out that RSAC had a warrant out for his arrest, did not know the particulars,
============================================================
02 June 2000 = [12c] cops at door, rsac observed a female in drive way, could not see the other officer, knocked on glass door, hardly heard them,
10:21 02/06/0002 June 2000 = [2d] John Wilson said Marlene used the same insinuation that she was pregnant with her x from tiger taxi, she has used this in the past also, will be beneficial in court, as it attests to her credibility ; will lie to gain her presence in a location, will lie to seek vengeance if that is the right word.
12:26 02/06/00============================================================
06 June 2000
11:13 08/06/00
Kevin Bonderove attended to 34 Rawdon Street and said he found Marlene sleeping out back of the salvation army, she’s on the street, she allegedly had conversation with staff also, Kevin told her not to call 34 Rawdon Street again, Marlene told Kevin that she had been calling here 34 Rawdon Street the last few days. Kevin said she only charged me because RSAC said RSAC was going to have the matter investigated, re her and Niemeyer.============================================================
27 June 2000
RSAC arrested after police called and advised of his location / Police asked if the door to my room was locked
RSAC replied YES. Police assisted RSAC to secure files, to Police Station. At time of arrest informant advised Police that RSAC was at 34 Rawdon Street smashing the house up with a golf club, a fact latter proven to be wrong [no damage to house], in signed statement from the landlord Charles Trowhill and his friend Peter Poole. after attendance with Police 19 July 2000 [reference bps inc# 20974-00][19 July 2000].27 June 2000 = refer 13 May 2000 / rsac arrested / bonderove calls police and advises that rsac is at 34 rawdon street / rsac hears police call and activity on police scanner / bonderove makes call from calbecks payphone located at Murray and streets / boderove alleges RSAC damaged house with golf club / bonderove’s statement disproven latter in statements by landlord Charles Trowhill and friend Peter Poole that their was no damage to house or contents / RSAC arrested and is able to secure most of briefcases. forgets two, retrieves them 08 August 2000. / Police ask RSAC if he has lockeed the door to his room / RSAC responds he has [refer bps 00-13317].
27 June 2000 = 00-18365 [g.slote,t.j.dinsmore] / 179.00bps.143.01a / 143.00bps.01a / bonderove / mom / harassing phone call / bonderove calls RSAC’s Mother and gives her a hard time / police respond but RSAC’s Mother had left to Doctor / Police did not return / action by Police against bonderove on this matter not known but suspected that nothing arose of it / RSAC advises rcmp of his contact with bonderove and address issues to them for considerations
/ RSAC has concern over bonderove contact and advises rcmp what he has learned /============================================================
19 July 2000
BPS incident # 20974-00
reported by Charles Trowhill / RSAC was not advised until 23 July 2000 of entry to my locked room. RSAC had requested Charles to attend with Police to check on the house. RSAC was incarcerated in the Brantford jail, as a result of arrest 27 June 2000.
19/23 July 2000 = 205.00bps.01 / b&e 34r / fortier / seibert / 99-coi-0261 / 00-20974 /
============================================================
21 June 2000
RSAC observed John Wilson approach the Police / Jail transfer vehicle as it sat on Queen Street, while one of the Crt. Cst. awaited for paper work. RSAC was in the back of the police vehicle at the time being transferred from the Court to the Jail. John Wilson was allegedly being sought by Police to secure statement relevant to RSAC’s present incarceration [bps inc.# 00-13317], however indicated they had trouble / could not locate him. john Wilson advised Police at this encounter he was painting at Stormy’s Variety on market Street just down the street from the Jail. Crt Cst. Venna was present at this encounter.
============================================================
23 July 2000
RSAC advised of B&E to room at 34 Rawdon Street, by Charles Trowhill, RSAC’s landlord, to 34 rawdon Street, over the phone. RSAC phoned Charles from Jail. Charles stated he attended residence with Peter Poole, a friend, of whom RSAC has knowledge of. Charles advised that RSAC’s room had been broken into as well as it looked like the white cabinet in RSAc’s room had been entered. Charles at this time states he did not see RSAC’s computer in said illegally entered room. Police refused to enter the premises is RSAC understanding, to make visual to the illegal entry to the locked room of RSAC.
Some of this property recovered on the front lawn of the Brantford Police Station, RSAC determines upon receipt of property back from police 17 January 2000 was taken in relation to this Break and Enter. Other property related to this Break And Enter has not been recovered yet. Property that had been removed as a result of this Break and Enter to RSAC’s room was found strew about the house 34 Rawdon Street 08 August 2000 by RSAC. Such as computer disc and RSAC observed clothes of his in the room of John Wilson, as well as a fan. In conversations with Justice Malloy 09 August 2000, he stated that the best that John could be charged with in relation to the property, as discussed, was possession of stolen property. RSAC was also there to see Justice Malloy on the matter of the rental agreement he held on the residence 34 Rawdon Street, on 09 August 2000.
These conversations with Justice Malloy were the subject of a Court order to have transcripts made available. That were latter denied to RSAC without a Court order that in conversations with the Att.Generals Office indicate an Obstruction of Justice has occurred. Justice Malloy is the same Justice that denies RSAC bail in September 2000. This matter is further discussed in this letter.============================================================
25 July 2000
BPS attended to Brantford Jail to take additional from RSAC on B&E to locked room 34 Rawdon Street / Cst. # 1898 and Cst. # 2605 attended and took statement from RSAC. RSAC had called Police to Jail to speak to them on the matter of the conversation with Charles Trowhill on 23 July 2000, where RSAC was advised the locked room was entered of RSAC’s.
============================================================
28 July 2000
Vaughn Stewart attends to jail to speak to RSAC. Vaughn states he has my bike at the Church. Peter poole had taken it there [church] at my request. Peter Poole had attended with Police, as RSAC understands to 34 Rawdon Street to get the bike. Refrence BPS Inc.# 00-20974
============================================================
08 August 2000
RSAC released from jail / RSAC attended to 34 Rawdon Street and found the house in a mess [clothing pilled up all over the place, furniture upset, garbage bags all over the place, pop bottles full of urine in the basement where someone had been staying] and secured two brief cases that had been forgotten 27 June 2000 when RSAC was arrested at 34 Rawdon Street
08 August 2000 = rsac released from jail / reference 27 June 2000 arrest / 00-13317 / time served 22 days for assault and time served 20 days for failure to comply with probation order / no contact with Marlene Adams or Kevin bonderove / Justice G.B.Edward presiding Justice / This is a resolution discussion agreement to these charges / RSAC had attended Court that date to speak to Justice Edwards on the Police’s and Jails failure to comply with Justice Edwards order to allow RSAC access to property at Police Station and access to laptop at Jail / RSAC was before Justice General-Lickers on his first appearance this date in Court / RSAC explained situation to Justice General-Lickers who set RSAC’s matters down to a latter time this date to speak to Justice Edwards on the matter of failure to comply with his Court order / as RSAC awaited to be returned to another Court to speak to Justice Edwards he was approached by Dale Henderson a lawyer RSAC has had association with in the past who advised the Crown wanted to make a deal to have me released this date 08 August 2000 / Lawyer Henderson stated he held a memo from the Att.Gen.Office indicting same / RSAC difd view this Memo to a degree / Lawyer Henderson stated he was not supposed to have this memo / RSAC has not to this date been able to secure a copy of this memo / RSAC is in consideration to seek out a writen statement from Lawyer Dale Henderson to attest to this memo’s existence at that time 08 August 2000 / RSAC felt this was the best rout to go so as RSAAC could get access to records to clear himself that were being denied access in violation of a Court Order made 02 August 2000 / RSAC also had concerns to his property at 34 Rawdon Street with the B&E to his locked room / This matter was served notice of Appeal in General Division Court but to date the matter has yet to meet that forum or completion and Appeal is still pending / RSAC had intention to appeal prior to entering a Guilty Plea to the agreed charges / RSAC is aware of case law that will overturn a conviction on a plea of guilty being given / Complications in Appeal Bail Motions also assisted this decision, as RSAC had been denied Bail on the arrest 27 June 2000 [00-13317] / material generated as a result of complaints against Police etc. will be entered to this appeal at that time /
08 August 2000 = rsac attends 34 rawdon / secures briefcase / landlord contacted / house is a mess with furniture overturned, clothing thrown all over, garbage bags full of garbage / pop bottles full of urine in basement / illegal tenants obvious / RSAC has a no contact clause with Police in Brantford unless its a 911 emergency call / all other communications must be in writing / police have complained about this arrangement also in the past / RSAC feels that if RSAC had of called Police 12 May 2001 regarding Marlene Adams RSAC would not have met this complication / arrest 27 June 2000 / RSAC had wanted to call Police to come and get the remaning property of Marlene Adams at 34 Rawdon Street and deliver it to her and to advise her not to return / RSAC had considered her to be trouble / RSAC not sure of what was going on at hhouse 34 Rawdon Street and decided to check into the Salvation Army Hostel and return to observe house from a distance latter that date to make notations / RSAC was not secure in attending further without reconisense of 34 Rawdon Street to determine who all was residing at address /
09 August 2000 = rcmp contact / 261.00rcmp.foi.253bps / j.willson / refused entry / 34r / RCMP contacted and advised that John Willson will not allow RSAC into house at 34 Rawdon Street RCMP advise to contact Brantford Police / RSAC explains he has a no-contact order with Brantford Police, and has concern if he does / RSAC is aware that call will be recorded and will seek out contact records form RCMP if required / RSAC contacts RCMP for various reasons with recording event as one of those reasons /
============================================================
09 August 2000 = rcmp contact / 261.00rcmp.foi.253bps / j.willson / refused entry / 34r / RCMP contacted and advised that John Wilson will not allow RSAC into house at 34 Rawdon Street RCMP advise to contact Brantford Police / RSAC explains he has a no-contact order with Brantford Police, and has concern if he does / RSAC is aware that call will be recorded and will seek out contact records form RCMP if required / RSAC contacts RCMP for various reasons with recording event as one of those reasons /
09 August 2000 = crt house contact / j.willson / merlene adams / j.p.mulloy / henderson llb. / garbowski bps / crown / RSAC attends to Court House to speak to Justice of The Peace on the issue of John Willson not allowing RSAC into house and to Speak to Lawyer Dale Henderson / RSAC had contacted landlord Charles Trowhill who advised RSAc he contacted police on the matter and was advised to attend to 34 Rawdon Street and if required call Police at 911 if any complications arrose from John Wilson who was still at the house 34 Rawdon Street. RSAC observed John Wilson in J.P’s Office with J.P.Mulloy / RSAC decides to wait for John Wilson to leave / RSAC is confronted by Merlene Adams at Court House and RSAC advises Crown to caution her / RSAC also spoke to Cst. Garbowski who advised RSAC to leave area and return after John Wilson and Marlene Adams had left the area / RSAC advises Dale Henderson, Lawyer who confirms that Marlene Adams attempted to confront RSAC outside the front doors of the Court House / lawyer Dale Henderson supplies letter to confirm this event to RSAC on 01 February 2001, dated 23 January 2000, given RSAC # B2001.R039A /
09 August 2000
RSAC attended to house and tried to enter the house, but the screen door was locked / RSAC knocked on the door and was advised by John Willson a tenant, that he was not welcome at said address / RSAC was the legal renter of said residence 34 Rawdon Street by rental agreement in writing. RSAC left and contacted RCMP London Communication Center to advise of continued complications here in Brantford. Attachment to relevant files requested.
RSAC attended to Court building 44 Queen Street, to speak to legal counsel and Justice of the Peace. RSAC observed John Wilson in Justice of the Peaces office. RSAC was confronted by John Wilson and advised to not attend to 34 Rawdon Street as it was his house. RSAC was confronted by Marline Adams at the front door of Court Building. This matter was observed by Lawyer Dale Henderson. RSAC made no contact and left to escape Melene Adams attempts to talk to RSAC. RSAC returned and spoke to the Crowns office on the matter of Marlene Adams and requested they advise her not to confront RSAC further. RSAC then spoke to Cst. Garbouski of the Brantford Police Service on the matter and he advised RSAC to vacate the area and return to speak with Court officials / etc. when John Wilson and Marlene Adams had left the area. I agreed and did same. Cst Garbowski was an arresting officer on 27 June 2000, BPS Inc. # 00-13317. RSAC Returning latter that date to speak to Justic Malloy, who I might add was the Justice who denied RSAC bail on same matters present to this document. Dening bail after three witness could not confirm Mr. Wilsons story,[refer to BPS Inc. # 00-27126, OCCPS # 01-COM-0019], but supported RSAC’s explanation of the events 16-17 August 2000. This has been confirmed in a final report by Sgt. Balazs dated 28 November 2000. Police also had before them RSAC contact with Cst. Butterfield concerning threats made by John Wilson 16-17 August 2000, with refrence to BPS Inc. # 00-25324. RSAC All these facts and witnesses were available to the Police to conduct a proper investigation into these matters. Further witnesses were made available to Police at there request as the situations developed for there requirement / request.
RSAC attended to Landlords house and spoke to him regarding events at 34 Rawdon Street. He contacted legal persons who advised he serve notice to 34 Rawdon Street that he, Charles Trowhill the owner of 34 Rawdon Street , would be in attendance to 34 Rawdon Street to check on property and house and would be entering the house. RSAC and Peter Poole and Charles Trowhill attended to house and and placed note on the door to indicate we would be in attendance to 34 Rawdon Street 10 August 2000.
RSAC advised by Charles Trowhill that he had spoken to police on the matter and they advised that was there instructions and if they had complications from John Wilson that Charles and myself RSACwere to call 911 and they would respond.RSAC attended to Court building 44 Queen Street latter that day, after Charles Trowhill and Peter Poole and RSAC attended to 34 Rawdon Street and placed note on door to advise we would be entering the house 10 August 2000, and spoke to Justice Malloy on the illegal occupancy of rental unit by John Wilson and the observation of my property in John Wilson room that had been in locked cabinet in my room and in my locked room, and his refusal to allow me access to RSAC residence by same person. Justice Malloy felt in this conversation that John Wilson could not be charged with B&E to my locked room or cabinet, but a charge of possession of stolen property could be met.
============================================================
10 August 2000 = RSAC attends to house with Charles trowhill and Peter Poole
10 August 2000
RSAC and Charles Trowhill and Peter Poole attended to 34 Rawdon Street and entered premises and made determination that property that belonged to RSAC had been removed since my attendance 09 August 2000. RSAC requested Charles Trowhill call the Police. Charles Trowhill called Police and Cst. Tollar attended and took report. Refer to Incident # 23607-00. Police attended at 12:35 hrs., 10 August 2000 in car # 0024, Cst.Tollar.
RSAC and Charles Trowhill made addition to locks on door at 34 Rawdon Street after discussing the matter with Cst. Tollar who stated that it was up to us if we wished to change locks make additional to them. Cst. Tollar spoke to witness Wess who observed males at 34 Rawdon Street in the early am hours of 10 August 2000 loading property into a Tiger Taxi. RSAC got the impression that the taxi vacated the area when they were in knowledge that they were being observed.
Cst. Tollar advised of property taken and of markings to property that would make it easily identifiable.
Cst. Tollar refused to enter house to look at crime scene. Cst Tollar was advised that property that had been in my locked room 27 Jun2 2000 when I RSAC was arrested was observed in John Wilsons room, including my clothes, as well as other property that had been in my locked room and in a locked cupboard in my locked room strewn throughout the house in the area that was evident John Willson had been sleeping ie the couch in the living room.
Cst. Tollar was advised of previous police incident # 20974-00 [19 July 2000].Cst. Tollar advised RSAC and Charles Trowhill that we could enter into John Wilsons room and retrieve my property from it. Cst Tollar advised it would be best to have witness to do said.
Note placed on door at this time advising any persons who wished access to the hose 34 Rawdon Street to retrieve any property that belonged to them to contact police or Charles Trowhill. Charles was to call police if any contact was made to do said. No contact was made prior to 30 August 2000 by any persons to enter property to retrieve property from said residence to the best of RSAC knowledge.
RSAC attended to Salvation Army Hostel after Cst Tollar had left and RSAC and Charles Trowhill and Peter Poole changed / made addition to locks on door 34 Rawdon Street and found a message had been received to Tom at The Salvation Army, from BPS regarding my Brief Cases at the station and that I could come today to pick them up before 15:30 hrs., as well as instructions to contact victim services to speak to them regarding the theft of my computers and equipment, from 34 Rawdon Street.
============================================================
12 August 2000 = rsac contacts att.gen.tor. ruth clinahan / 257.00ag257bps / by phone / refer 13 September 2000 / sawkins / reeder / carriere / j.p. lickers / crown angevine / fed.prosecutors office / judge lenz /
============================================================
13 August 2000 = 225.00bps34r13a00 / 00-24127 / att.b&e34r / merlene / farrow / 00-16 / 01-com-0046 /
13 August 2000
RSAC attended to his mothers and on the way home he traveled down Market Street. As RSAC passed a location now know as 157 Market Street, the residence of the driver of the taxi who removed the property from 34 Rawdon Street, with others, RSAC heard someone call out at him. RSAC turned to see male persons and Marlene Adams on the front porch of said referred residence on the front porch. RSAC ignored their comments and proceeded to Salvation Army Hostel for the night. Male persons were unknown to RSAC at the time.
RSAC attended to the Salvation army and as he disembarked from his bike he RSAC was confronted by a male person, who began advising RSAC he could not drive down Market Street or attend to 34 Rawdon Street. RSAC requested who he was and stated there were no such court orders / male person insisted he had legal papers that indicated same ; further requests were made to obtain this male persons name============================================================
14 August 2000
BPS attend to house 34 Rawdon Street and speak to RSAC on attempted B&E to said residence. Cst Farrow and two other officers attend on call from Charles Trowhill after RSAC had called Charles Trowhill. Two police leave after brief discussion and observing damage to window to living room and to basement window, in driveway. Two officers left. They stated that they had attended to assist Cst. Farrow as there was concern for RSAC safety, by police.
Cst. Farrow remained to discuss matters with RSAC.
Reference made to contact with male person at salvation army 13 August 2000 after returning from visiting mom.
This contact with male person caused red light to raise as to requirement to check on house.
Male person had made reference to additional locks being on door and that John willson had placed them on the door. Male was advised that it was Charles Trowhill and RSAC that changed locks on door. Male advised I was the legal tenant to house and held rental lease. He had stated he lived there and had property in basement.
He was advised by rsac to contact Police per not left on door of House at 34 Rawdon Street and / or Charles Trowhill to discuss the matter. Reference to Marlene Adams given to police this date as to her possible attendance [firm on this fact that she was at said address 13 August 2000 with male person refered] at 34 rawdon Street with male person that confronted me at Salvation Army.
It was observed that the note had been removed from the door to the house that advised any persons wishing to discuss the residence 34 Rawdon Street were to contact police and refer to police incident # 23607-00.Cst Farrow was asked if he was related to Marlene Adams as there were indications made.
Cst. Farrow stated he was not related to Marlene Adams. Cst Farrow was the officer who investigated the complaint made by Marlene Adams 13 May 2000, against RSAC.This date RSAC after contact with Cst. Farrow as he was making entry to file contact this date with Cst. Farrow and attempted B&E to 34 Rawdon Street heard female Brantford police over his scanner request dispatch to see if any wants were out on Marlene Adams. Dispatch replied that their were police wanting to discuss a matter with her. It was learned latter that Marlene Adams was detained by police and questioned about the attempted B&E at 34 Rawdon Street 13 August 2000. It can be assumed she was further questioned on the theft of property from 34 Rawdon Street 10 August 2000 in a Tiger taxi. Information received from RSAc sources indicate she was asked about the removal of property 10 August 2000 as well as the Attempted B&E to same address 13 August 2000.
Factors indicate that the property removed from 34 Rawdon Street 10 August 2000 : went from said address in a Tiger Taxi to 157 Market Street
RSAC calls Victim Services, BPS @ 12:41 hrs., 14 August 2000 and spoke to Pat briefly, on the matter of call message received to call re instructions to call per Inc.# 00-23607
RSAC calls BPS Station @ 12:42 hrs 14 August 2000 to speak to Sgt.Hammond re property at police station ie briefcases taken to police station 27 June 2000 when RSAC was arrested that failed to be delivered to Btfd. Jail per Court Order by Justice Edward 03 July 2000 ; refer
Sgt.Hammond not in until 16:00 hrs.,15 August 2000.RSAC calls RCMP, Hamilton Dave Bellamy @ 12:45 hrs.,re 2000-030 of which John Wilson is a witness to events at Court House August 1999 ; voice mail left as to mail address for time being ; advised RCMP that John Wilson is a suspect in matters related to 34 Rawdon Street. Request name of other person spoke to as a result of RCMP contact with John Wilson this file 2000-030 RCMP reference.
RSAC contacts ombudsman re events at Brantford Jail re Laptop illegal access.
Wess from 38 Rawdon Street this date advises RSAC, Charles Trowhill, Peter Poole that he saw Marlene Adams and male person at house 13 August 2000 trying to get into house. Neighbors at 32 Rawdon Street confirm that Marlene and male were at house 13 August 2000 also.
RSAC has desk clerk at Salvation Army hostel call Police and advise that RSAC has two futher witnesses to attempt B&E 13 August 2000 at 34 Rawdon Street, reference BPS Inc.# 00- , Cst.Farrow, 14 August 2000.
============================================================
15 August 2000
RSAC after lunch at Salvation Army Hostel, observes RSAC bike that was missing from 34 Rawdon Street locked to fence. RSAC waits for person to attend to bike. Male {native Indian], attends to bike. RSAC approaches and asks male person about bike. Male person advises he bought it for $10.00. RSAC states it was stolen from 34 Rawdon Street. Male states RSAC can have bike back if he wants it. RSAC states he wants bike back. Male surrenders bike without Police contact. Male person will not divulge who he bought bike from. RSAC decides to seek out males name and seek out his address for direction to BTFD. Police. RSAC considers this male to possibly and probably be innocent of any acts against RSAC property and thefts of RSAC property and only an unknowledgeable receiver of property, at this time. RSAC will seek out the validity of his story and seek out further information per surveillance / observation techniques, ie possibly who he purchased bike from. RSAC gets bike back. Male made offer to give bike back when advised of situation. No Police contact to this matter required yet.
Peter Poole advises RSAC he saw John Wilson last night uptown with bike from 34 rawdon Street that had been in back yard that had been recovered from spring cleanup. John Wilson is stated to have taken this bike to 157 market Street. This address keeps coming up in all conversations related to persons and events attached to violations against 34 Rawdon Street, and property of RSAC. RSAC has no concern over bike removed from back yard 14 August 2000 as it was recovered from spring cleanup and RSAC believes it did belong to John Wilson after observing bikes in back yard at 34 Rawdon Street. It was recovered only for parts. Surveillance required to collect information to be delivered to police re thefts 34 rawdon street.
============================================================
17 August 2000 = RSAC calls Police Station re briefcases at Police Station that were secured 27 June 2000 when RSAC was arrested on accusations by Marlene Adams per BPS Inc.# 00-13317 [13 May 2000].
17 August 2000 = Cst.Butterfield recovers property from 157 Market Street, after it is alleged Marlene contacted Police to advise of its location / refer to notes of Cst.Butterfield
17 August 2000 = Charles Trowhill and Peter Poole attend to 34 Rawdon Street and Charles Trowhill sells fridge to the owner of Tiger Taxi / John Willson present with owner of Tiger Taxi / RSAC at address also / John Wilson threatens RSAC with bodily harm / rsac is unaware that property has been or is about to be recovered at 157 market street, by cst.butterfield.
17 August 2000 = refer 23 August 2000 when rsac has contact with Cst.Butterfield regarding threats by John Wilson 17 August 20001 at 34 Rawdon Street
17 August 2000
RSAC file reference; 230.bps.01jw
BPS file reference;John Wilson and the owner of Tiger taxi attend to 34 Rawdon Street at 13:59 hrs approximately, as the landlord Charles Trowhill had sold Tiger Taxi a fridge located at that address. Charles Trowhill and Peter Poole were at this location at the time. Brantford Police have secured statements from Charles Trowhill and Peter Poole as well as the owner of Tiger Taxi pertinent to this event. However these`statements were not secured until after RSAC filed a complaint against the Brantford Police through the OCCPS., Reference #’s [00-12, bps][01-com-0019, occps][257.00bps253, rsac].
Brantford Police pick up statement at the Salvation Army from RSAC relating to attempt B&E at 34 Rawdon Street, {[Merlene adams suspect][BPS incident reference # 00-24127& 00-20974, ][RSAC file reference # 205.00bps.01]}. This statement also included a plastic bag containing physical evidence relating to my conversation with Cst. Farrow 14 August 2000 pursuant to BPS Inc.# 00-24127.This physical evidence was the note that had been removed from the door that instructed persons to contact police or Charles Trowhill pursuant to BPS Inc.# 00-23607. This physical evidence was recovered by RSAC in the presence of Charles Trowhill and Peter Poole. This physical evidence was picked up with a pair of tweezers by RSAC and placed into the plastic bag and sealed with tape and signed and dated. This evidence was not seen the night / early morning that Cst. Farrow [00-23607] attended to speak to RSAC. RSAC, Charles Trowhill and Peter Poole attended to residence 34 Rawdon Street 14 August 2000 in the day light hours to attend to the house. It must be noted that the hydro had been disconnected at 34 Rawdon Street when RSAC was incarcerated from 27 June 2000 to 08 August 2000, as a result of accusations by Marlene Adams pursuant to BPS Inc.# 00-13317.
police advised RSAC that all matters were to be directed to Cst. Fortier of the Brantford Police and it would probably be directed to the Break and Enter Section, Cst Panco. RSAC spoke to Cst. Panco while incarcerated at the holding cells at the court building at 44 Queen Street.17 August 2000 = RSAC calls Police at 14:49 hrs
17 August 2000 = RSAC calls Police at 16:00 hrs., and is advised to call back
17 August 2000 = RSAC calls Police 19:15 hrs. and advises that statement should be ready for pickup at Salvation Army by 22:00 hrs this date 17 August 2000.
17 August 2000 = RSAC calls Police @ 22:15 hrs. and advises statement and physical evidence [note removed from door 13 August 2000][refer to contact with Cst.Farrow 14 August 2000, BPS Inc.# 00-24127], is ready for pickup. RSAC will leave materials in sealed envelope at front desk of Salvation Army Hostel. RSAC is staying at hostel as house is presently unfit to live in. RSAC is advised by police reception that matters will be directed to Cst.Fortier the original investigating officer to B&E to the locked room of RSAC at 34 Rawdon Street, refrence BPS Inc.# 00-20974, 19 July 2000. RSAC is advised that matters might be transferred to Break and Enter section. RSAC gets impression that Brantford police are attaching all matters to original occurrence, investigated by Cst.Fortier, and that this is an ongoing attachment to Cst.Fortier’s file reference 00-20974. RSAC feels there might be some confusion as police seem not sure as to who is handling the matter(s). There are now 4 [four] Police file references to thefts, Break and Enters to 34 Rawdon Street, of whom John Wilson, Marlene Adams are suspected of being involved in. Police are advised this date by phone that John Wilson threatened RSAC at 34 Rawdon Street this date. Female member is advised this date in phone conversations of threats made by John Wilson at 34 Rawdon Street. Police were going to dispatch member to attend this date to speak to RSAC on these threats, by John Wilson, but this never materialized. This matter was addressed 23 August 2000 in attendance by Cst.Butterfield [refer BPS Inc.# 00-25324] to see RSAC on a letter dated 18 August 2000, sent to the Chief of Police on the threats made by John Wilson 17 August 2000.
============================================================
18 August 2000 = ken Gatly the Desk Clerk at the Salvation Army calls Police and confirms that Police picked up statement and physical evidence left at Salvation Army 17 August 2000 for Police. Ken Gatly started shift at 12 midnight 17 August 2000. Materials picked up by poice were picked up on 17 August 2000, as per notes that date relevant to Attempt B&E at 34 `Rwadon Street 13 August 2000.
============================================================
21 August 2000 = RSAC attends to Police Station at 14:41 hrs., to retrieve briefcases secured by police at RSAC request / requirement at the time of RSAC’S arrest 27 June 2000. Spoke to Bob Philips, property room, and signed property ticket # 338. RSAC leaves Police Station at 14:40 hrs. to base `with property.
============================================================
22 August 2000 = RSAC attends to Court building to speak to Dale Henderson re brief case he has at his office containing some 50 tapes of RSAC’s conversations with RCMP, Btfd Police etc. that RSAC had sent to his office between 13 May 2000 and 27 June 2000 for security reasons. Dale Henderson was unaware what was contained exactly in bag.
22 August 2000 = RSAC has contact with Sgt.Pottruff at Court building, 44 Queen Street.
============================================================
23 August 2000 = Cst.Butterfield leaves card at Salvation Army requesting RSAC contact Cst.Butterfield re: RSAC complaint against John Wilson.
23 August 2000 = RSAC attends to the office of Dale Henderson, lawyer and picks up black briefcase containing tapes.
23 August 2000 = RSAC observes John Wilson leave Tiger Taxi office between 19:35 hrs. and 21:56 hrs. this date. RSAC had been out for his night bike ride.
============================================================
24 August 2000 = 230.00bps01.jw / 00-25324 / butterfield / j.willson / 16, 17 aug 2000] / rsac has contact with Cst.Butterfield reguarding threats by John Willson 17 August 20001 at 34 Rawdon Street / Cst.Btterfield responds to rsac letter dated 18 August 2000, given rsac # b2000rsac356c, to chief of police re: threats by john willson 17 August 2000 against rsac / butterfield arrives at 12:20 hrs., and leaves at 13:02 hrs.,
24 August 2000 = At 13:48 hrs., RSAC calls RCMP hamilton and leaves voice mail.
============================================================
25 August 2000 = RSAC attends to Court, to see about Motion Court, and to Speak to Trial coordinator. Trial coordinator will not be back till 14:00 hrs. RSAC will try to get back this date to speak to him.
============================================================
27 August 2000 = plug end to power supply accer laptop is damaged somehow. RSAC accer laptop down. RSAC has to date 25 February 2001 has not been able to repair computer power supply cord or find replacement. To manual recordings.
27 August 2000 = RSAC finds the word "RAT" written on the top of his bike trailer at the Salvation Army. Police not contacted at this point. RSAC observes native male driver and another male in the walkway adjacent to the driveway of the Salvation Army, after ther fact. RSAC has concerns.
============================================================
28 August 2000 = RSAC attends to Court building 44 Queen Street and speaks to Dale Henderson, Lawyer re bike and events at Salvation Army last night and Tiger Taxi. RSAC also speaks to Crown Kindon re last night at Salvation Army and someone writing "RAT" on the top of RSAC’s bike Trailer. Native Indian observed in driveway area that drives for Tiger Taxi. RSAC can not conferm or deny that this male person is responsible but has suspicion. RSAC has already made note that concerns be directed to this person as he seems to be watching RSAC. RSAC will make notes on observations of this person, for further reference if required.
RSAC observes Police activity at or near 157 Market Street this date. Police had roof lights on. Noted for further reference / research if required. multiply cruisers and officer out of car. RSAC does not have Police Scanner with him this date/time.
RSAC attends to computer store to speak to Tim about accer laptop and the need for a new power supply cord.
RSAC calls RCMP Hamilton for Dave Bellamy re letter received today from RCMP re threats made by police at Court building 44 Queen Street August 1999. RSAC will request review. RSAC advises that property recovered by Btfd. Police re B&E and that factors seem to indicate that Merlene adams at this point called Police to advise of its location. Also made reference to Moms door being burned and that no charges have been laid at this time. requested that RSAC’s concerns be directed to RCMP national Security, Milton, Ontario. call made before noon 28 August 2000.
RSAC has chance meeting with Cst.Butterfield at Salvation Army this date, at approximately 15:30 hrs. Cst. Butterfield advises that John Willson has been cautioned in regards to threats made 17 August 2000, reference BPS Inc.# 00-25324. Advises that if John Willson contacts me RSAC is to call Police and charges will be laid. RSAC has conversation with Cst. Butterfield re his statement to RCMP reguarding threats made at Court building August 1999. Cst.Butterfield was present when these threats were made by Police towards RSAC. Cst. Butterfield denies hearing threats. RSAC was in conversation with Cst.Butterfield and the other officers present the date of those threats to RSAC by Police. reference 2000-030 RCMP files. John Willson was also a witness to these threats and supplied statement to RCMP on the matter.
Cst.Butterfield when the matter was raised, referred to "The thin blue line" in reference to Police covering up matters related to their persons. Cst.Butterfield stated that he did not hear the threats made to RSAC by Police, and that he was not falling into "the thin blue line". RSAC did not believe Cst.Butterfield but did not advise him and decided to seek out answers to this further through the proper channels. refer to RSAC file reference 276.00BPS030RCMP,[RSAC document # BJ2000RSAC095D], OCCPS file reference 00-COI-0366, [given RSAC document # B2000.R023E], of which no response has been received to RSAC on this matter by Police [BPS], to date 25 February 2001. This matter is under review with RCMP, PCC, Ottawa, concerning file 2000-030 RCMP reference.RSAC receives mail this date from RCMP and the Brantford Police Service.
============================================================
29 August 2000 = RSAC attends to Court Building 44 Queen Street. RSAC reviewing papers to be delivered this date to persons in said building is approached by Sgt.Carriere, BPS as he was just preparing to leave from reviewing papers to be served and attempted to be chased from Court building by Sgt.Carriere. RSAC ignores Sgt.Carriere and walks away and speakes to Dale Henderson, lawyer on the matter, outside. RSAC considers filling complaint against Sgt.Carriere as this is a public building and RSAC has a right to attend to conduct building free of harassment, Dale Henderson, Lawyer agrees.
============================================================
30 August 2000 = rsac arrested / 00-26233 / steeves / cotton / grantham / refer / 00-10 / 01-com-0018 / 01-com-0046 /
30 August 2000
RSAC arrested after allegations by Marlene Adams
The Brantford Police Services explanation as to why contact is required to RCMP National Security is not in essence, in their statement attached to BPS file reference # 00-10 / OCCPS file reference # 01-COM-0018.
It is indicated by Police in file reference 00-10 / OCCPS file reference 00-COM-0018, that RSAC made the request for RCMP National Security to be contacted when RSAC was arrested 30 August 2000, on allegations by Marlene Adams. These officers attached to the arrest 30 August 2000 did assist in securing tapes relevant to matters discussed. They were not aware what was contained on these tapes. Some of these were received directly from RCMP Ottawa. Sgt Hammond investigated the complaint against the arresting officers 30 August 2000, and was requested to be removed from investigation as it had been determined that he was in attendance on one occassion to 34 Rawdon Street when concerns were made as to police being their with guns at the ready.
In 1999 RSAC was threatened at the Court House by police ; an investigation was concluded by Hamilton RCMP and forwarded to Ottawa for review. This matter is not concluded. It is believed Police were of the joint Brantford Police / RCMP Hamilton Joint Forces Unit, that made the threats in 1999.
Sgt. Hammond also was involved with an investigation concerning Mr. Neumeyer [BPS Inc. # 98-28123 & 98-28197][RSAC reference F98:09I:26BPS]; RSAC was associated to that investigation and had a difficulty with the fact that no property list was made on recovered property, that had been stolen. RSAC lost VCR tapes as a result of a B&E.
RSAC had contact with Sgt Hammond on these two file references 05 April @ 14:45 hrs., and sent a letter to the Chief of Police 09 April @ 11:50 hrs., by fax, on this same matter but received no response. RSAC had been advised no property list was made on recovered videos, and RSAC could not find out exactly what vcr tapes were recovered. Sgt Hammond here showed an error in judgment in failure to make a property list of recovered property at that time.
It must be noted that RSAC had to attend Court to get a court order to attend to Mr. Neumeyers to search for property, that belonged to RSAC. Brantford Police threatened to have RSAC arrested on that contact with Police [refer to BPS Inc. # & OCCPS file # , RSAC file refrence ], to assist in retrieving his property at Mr. Neumeyers, and stated that Mr. Neumeyer stated that he had no property of RSAC’s at his residence/ days latter this was disproved when RSAC attended with other BPS officers and retrieved property that belonged to RSAC. Please refer to OCCPS file reference # & BPS Inc. #============================================================
06 September 2000 = rsac contacts att.gen.tor. / crown orsini / concerns to rsac / rcmp contact files related / previous defence to drug related rcmp refrence / 16:25 hrs. / collect / female / 00-26233 / 30 aug 200 arrest / 250.00bps.243coi / 01-com-0018 / 00-10 /
06 September 2000 = RSAC sends OCCPS letter given RSAC # BJ2000RSAC006D filling complaint against Cst. Grantham, Steeves, and Cotton pursuant to BPS Inc. # 00-29261, the Arrest of RSAC 30 August 2000 / refer BPS 00-10, OCCPS # 01-com-0018, RSAC 250.00bps.243coi.
============================================================
07 September 2000 = 254.00bps230.253 / 00-27490 / ahern / j.willson / crt. house / spec hill / suplimental / butterfield / 00-25324 /
============================================================
08 September 2000 = RSAC contacts Att.Gen.Tor refrence # M00-07514, Paul M.Taylor replys, dated 26 September 2000 [bj2000.r048k] / Merlene Adams / failure to attend / M00-07514 / 00-26233 / 243.00bps.143b / 250.00bps243.0ag / G00-00496 / 00-29261 /
============================================================
09 September 2000 = rcmp national security contacted / 253.00rcmp243.ns01 / j.willson / merlene adams / 00-29261 / 00-27126 / 20974-00 / 21654-00 / 23607-00 / 24127-00 / 00-12 / 00-10 / 00-16 / 01-com-0018 / 00-coi-0339 / 00-com-0019 / 01-com-0046 /
============================================================
12 September 2000 = rsac denied bail on 30 august arrest / reference BPS Inc.# 00-26223. Crown Attorney Keith Swanson, Justice Malloy. Justice stated that my address was good but RSAC failed to deal with plans of Bail ie: surety, where RSAC would be residing. Commended RSAC on submations. Justice said he felt that the Crown had made out the prima facia of the case. Made reference to Crown Swanson and RSAC’s fathers death and events that period, of which Crown Swanson was involved in.
RSAC calls RCMP, Hamilton collect from Jail and speaks to "TED" and leaves message for Dave Bellamy RCMP concerning John Wilson stating in Court, that he recanted his statement to RCMP concerning threats made by Police at Court building 44 Queen Street October 1999. RSAC requests clarification. RSAC requests that copy of letter of disposition be sent to him at Jail, Brantford, concerning this file 2000-030, RCMP reference. RSAC is told that dave bellamy, RCMP is on Holidays. Requested that Dave Bellamy contact me personally, or send letter to state John Wilson recanted his statement., as he referred he did in Court. RSAC latter receives letter indicating that John Wilson did not recant his statement, but could not confirm fully that in fact it was RCMP officers who made the threat at the Court Building in October 1999. This letter was finally received to RSAC from The Officer in Charge, RCMP, Hamilton, after indicating he would file complaint if question was not responded to by specified date.
RSAC calls Att.Gen.Toronto @ 416-326-2640 collect, and speaks to Ruth Clinahan re concerns with bail Court, and the Crown attending to matters. RSAC advised that concerns would be directed to the Attorney General and the Crown’s head office for the area in Hamilton. RSAC advises of National Security file. In calls made to Att.Gen.Toronto this date RSAC made reference to Justice Malloy and that he advised RSAC at one time that he was friends with Tim Hughes, RCMP member who RSAC has ongoing concerns about and a review attached to this member directly and indirectly with the RCMp PCC in Ottawa. reference 2000-030 RCMP files.
Referred to Break And Enters`at 34 Rawdon Street and that John Wilson came very close to treating RSAC in court this date but stopped himself.Att.Gen.Toronto requested that all this be placed in writing and forwarded to them.RSAC mail received this date from RCMP, Ottawa, re ATIP-31525 and ATIP-31523 / 2000-030 and 2000-168 RCMP Hamilton reference and John Wilson.
RSAC calls RCMP, Ottawa, leaves voice message for B.Lettre on mail received this date.
RSAC calls RCMP Surrey, B.C. twice and leaves voice mail for Superintendant Smith, re ATIP-31525, and ATIP-31523 Ottawa refrence, and threats made by RCMP Hamilton.
Lt Easto, Btfd Jail states he would talk to me latter re my request to access my laptop and red bag. This did not happen this date.============================================================
13 September 2000 = refer to 12 August 2000 = rsac contacts att.gen.tor. ruth clinahan in writing dated 13 September 2000, given RSAC # BJ2000RSAC021D / 257.00ag257bps /
Attended to Court this date on matter related to arrest 30 August 2000, BPS refrence 00-26233. Served disclosure requests to crown, Copy of Criminal record of John Willson, and Merlen Adams requested.
RSAC calls RCMP, Ottawa re: ATIP-31525 and ATIP-31523, 2000-030 file response on the way. Advised RCMP that 2000-030/2000-18 is an RSAC file refrence and not theirs.
RSAC creates b2000rsac020d to OCCPS, given RSAC file # 257.00bps253, latter to receive OCCPS # 00-coi-0339 and 01-com-0019, BPS # 00-12,
============================================================
16 September 2000 = rsac contacts rcmp surrey b.c. by collect phone call / superintendant smith / bonderove location requested / witness / requests "spike" / voice mail left to his office / call made from Brantford Jail.
============================================================
18 Setember 2000
RSAC receives letter dated 15 September 2000 from OCCPS with file refrence 00-COI-0315, given rsac # BJ2000.r028k, conferming receipt of letter dated 06 September 2000 from RSAC. RSAC refers this letter to file 00-10 BPS refrence, RSAC refrence 250.00bps.243coi. This file latter given OCCPS file # 00-COM-0018.
============================================================
19 September 2000 = rsac contacts mike harris by letter, dated 19 September 2000, given RSAC # BJ2000RSAC041D / 263.00gov.ont.02 / j.p mulloy / no responsew to this date 20 February 2000 /
19 September 2000
BPS FILE REFRENCE # 00-10
OCCPS FILE REFRENCE # 01-COM-0018 [00-COI-0315]Sgt. Hammond attended to Brantford Jail.
Sgt. Hammond reminds RSAC that he was the officer who investigated the B&E at Mr. Neumeyers in 1998 [BPS Inc.#'s 98-28123 & 98-28197] and that I had sent the Chief of Police a letter thanking Hammond for his assistance on the matter.
Sgt. The letter of thanks sent was prior to RSAC getting information that VCR tapes had been recovered at Pawn Shop. Sgt.Hammond supplied Informal resolution forms attached to the complaint he was investigating that caused his attendance to the Brantford Jail, to RSAC and stated RSAC was to fill them out and advise Sgt. Hammond when they were ready. Sgt. Hammond stated that the arresting officers were rookies and I should give them a break. Sgt.hammond said to fill them out with what I requested an appology to be addressed to from their service.
RSAC at this meeting advised Sgt.Hammond that he did no feel the officer in question that contained a constant hold on RSAC at the time of the arrest 30 August 2000 was excessive and unnecessary as RSAC was in full cooperation. RSAC also stated that he required a file that contained materials that were relevant to an appeal on matters relevant to Marlene Adams first set of accusations that caused RSAC to be arrested 27 june 2000, that were beneficial to matters presently incarcerated for as a result of RSAC arrest 30 August 2000. These materials would disprove statements made at the first arrest 27 June 2000, as a result of accusations by Marlene Adams, to Police.
Sgt. Hammond indicates in final report that RSAC was upset at the time of this meeting.
RSAC did not request blank form for an informal resolution. Sgt. Hammond brought them to RSAC to attempt to get him to sign them. RSAC felt that his attendance was to speak to RSAC to initiate the matters.
RSAC’s concerns to Sgt.Hammonds attendance at 34 Rawdon Street and possibly being attached to officers seen at that address with their guns at the ready untill a latter date. RSAC felt upon concluding that Sgt.Hammond may have been one of the officers at the address 34 Rawdon Street, felt that it would be best if another officer investigated the Complaint, as matters were addressed to RCMP PCC in their request for review of RSAC file attached to the Threats to him at the Court Building, Brantford. RSAC felt that Sgt.Hammonds name would be attached to that file and properly the matter Sgt.Hammond was investigating should be readdressed to another officer to investigate. In the Semolina Inquiry RSAC has recollection that the Inquiry made similar conclusions, as a degree of bias could be attached to the investigation by the officer, under investigation on another matter, to the present investigation. RSAC did make such a request.
Sgt Hammond in his attendance to the Jail this date, made reference to an Investigation he did when there was a break and enter at 205 Dalhousie Street, the home of Ivan Neumeyer, were RSAC rented a room at the time. Sgt. Hammond failed to create a recovered property list of recovered vcr videos that he [Hammond] attended to the pawn shop with Ivan Neumeyer with to retrieve. RSAC never recovered his vcr tapes as a result of this B&E at 205 Dalhousie Street and Mr. neumeyer stated that he never received my vcr tapes back when vcr tapes were recovered from pawn shop. However Mr Neumeyer had possession of RSAC’s vcr tapes when they were stolen. Stolen vcr tapes were pawned at the pawn shop. however RSAC’s vcr tapes were not recovered it was stated. RSAC has not at this time been able to determine were these tapes would have gone. It seems funny that only vcr tapes belonging to Mr. Neumeyer were recovered and not the ones belonging to RSAC expecially when they were all stolen at the same time, and highly unlikly seperated at the time and pawned at different locations
If RSAC was upset it was because RSAC was incarcerated with out reason. Which is an understandable feeling. Would you not be upset if you were in Jail and the persons stealing your property were having you put there and they enjoyed their freedom.============================================================
23 September 2000
RSAC sends OCCPS letter given RSAC # BJ2000RSAC065D, dated 23 September 2000 concerning OCCPS file 01-COM-0018, BPS # 00-10, BPS Inc. # 00-26233, the arrest of RSAC 30 August 2000. This being done after contact with Sgt.Hammond at the Brantford Jail and discussions on this matter, of RSAC arrest 30 August 2000. RSAC strengthens his original complaint and makes additional complaint to thi matter / refer to file BPS # 00-10 and OCCPS # 01-COI-0018 / BPS Inc.# 00-26233 / RSAC refrence 250.00bps.243coi and 243.00bps.143b /
============================================================
01 October 2000 = 205.00207bps223/227m / 00-coi- / 01-com-0040 / 00-20974 / 00-21651 / 00-23607 / 00-24127-00 / 00-16 / pottruff / 34r / cst.farrow / cst.butterfield / cst.tollar / cst.#1802 / cst.#2539 / cst.# 1898 cst.2605 / letter sent to OCCPS this date to initiate complaint, given RSAC document # BJ2000RSAC035D / BPS Inc. # 00-20974, 00-21651, 00-23607, 00-24127.
01 October 2000 = rsac contacts att.gen.tor refrence # g00-00496, murray segal ass.dep.att.gen.replys 31 october 2000 [b2000.037e] / 271.00ag.ont.01 / merlene adams / failure to attend / m00-07514 / 00-26233 / 243.00bps.143b / 250.00bps243.0ag / 00-29261 / refer to RSAC document # BJ2000RSAC090D, dated 01 October 2000, addressed to Attorney General Jim Flaherty /
02 October 2000 = RSAC receives letter [b2000.r047k], from OCCPS, dated 29 September 2000, with their file reference 00-coi-0039, RSAC assignes this document to file rsac file # 257.00bps253, BPS # 00-12, reply to RSAC letter dated 13 September 2000 [B2000rsac020d].
============================================================
05 October 2000 = RSAC released from jail.
retreived property from Jail. Security tag still on property bag. Seal broken in front of RSAC. Serial Tag # 1052371.
Attended to 34 Rawdon Street, and found that RSAC’s stuff was moved. Some to Wess’s at 38 Rawdon Street. Charles Trowhill told him to cleanup house. Wess had keys to house.
RSAC property missing again. RSAC advised Wess that RSAC would return 06 October 2000. Wess said he would cooperate and said he would sign any required statements regarding events `at 34 Rawdon Street.============================================================
06 October 2000 = RSAC checks back into salvation Army Hostel, as 34 Rawdon Street is a mess and not fit to live in at present condition.
============================================================
07 October 2000 = RSAC has conversation with Wess at 38 Rawdon Street. Wess advises he knows who has RSAC’s plant and can get it back. Wess has computer disc for old computer of RSAC’s, at his house.
============================================================
10 October 2000 = created B2000RSAC003E to Dale Henderson, Lawyer re copy of subpoena sent to Marlene Adams and copy of letter Dale had sent to Legal Aid advising them of conflict of interest, and he could not handle my file further. Henderson was acting as RSAC’s Lawyer at bail Court on matters arrested for 30 August 2000, but could not help me further after John Wilson indicated that Dale Henderson was his Lawyer also. Dale Henderson had to remove himself from RSAC’s case at bail court due to this matter and conducted only part of the Bail hearing with RSAC. RSAC was left without a lawyer. RSAC served this letter to Dale Henderson personally.
============================================================
11 October 2000 = Created B2000RSAC004E to RCMP, Hamilton requesting confirmation in L.L.Marttel’s reply [Given RSAC # B2000.R002E] concerning file 2000-030, that RCMP did not threaten me at Court
0ctober 1999. Learned latter that RCMP, internal investigation could not confirms that threats were made by RCMP members October 1999 and that JOHN WILLSON did not recant his statement but could not confirm that the person who made threats against RSAC was in fact an RCMP member. Letter mailed same date.RSAC attended Church function but had to leave as Marlene Adams showed up.
============================================================
15 October 2000 = RSAC attends to Court building 4 Queen Street to see if transcripts that Justice Edwards had ordered, , of RSAC’s conversation and John Wilson’s conversations with Justice Malloy 09 August 2000 were ready.
Special Cst.All Hill present for some of conversations with female Court clerk on these matters. Female Court clerk advised she had conversations with Justice Edward on the matter and received a call from Toronto on the matter and said that RSAC could not have these transcripts as there was no process issued thus they do not become property of the general public and thus RSAC is not entitled to them. RSAC advised her that a Court order had been made and that interference in this matter with said Court order could be considered to be an attempt to, or an Obstruction of Justice. If someone does not agrees with a Court Order the proper procedure is to file a motion in Court to stop original Court Order, and back room discussions should not be entertained on the matter of compliance to said Court order. Female Court Clerk would not divulge the name of the person in Toronto who she spoke to on the matter. Female Court Clerk advised she would discuss the matter further with Justice Edward. This matter was latter discussed with the Att.Gen.Toronto by RSAC and that office advised that it was an Obstruction of Justice as to the events just described in brief.Spoke to Justice Griifin at the Court building 44 Queen Street, Brantford, on the matters of today and that RSAC will be appealing conviction registered 05 October 2000, of which he represented RSAC on.
RSAC attended to Dale Henderson, Lawyer’s office and advised Dale Henderson’s secretary of these events at Court House this date and requested she brief him. RSAC had attended to Dale Henderson’s office to see if a letter RSAC had requested from Dale Henderson was available yet.
15:50 hrs., 15 October 2000
15 October 2000 = RSAC contact to Att.Gen.Tor. / taped / re obstruction / J.O / Crt.Order / 09 August 2000 / J.P.Mulloy / Justice Edward / two phone calls to Att.Gen.Toronto.
15 October 2000 = RSAC contacts RCMP by phone concerning file 2000-030 and advises that a communication has been sent.
16:20 hrs. 15 October 2000
15 October 2000 = RSAC contacts Att.Gen.Toronto @ 16:20 hrs., again regarding matters related to matter of this communication.
15 october 2000 = RSAC creates letter to J.P Review Counsel concerning Justice Edwards re Judges Order and conversations this daye with female at Court 44 Queen Street. Letter given RSAC # B2000RSAC017E.
15 October 2000 = RSAC creates B2000RSAc016E to Attorney General, Toronto re Judges order and conversations 15 October 2000 at 44 Queen Street, Brantford with Court Clerk and in reference to phone calls made to Att.Gen.Toronto 15 October 2000.
============================================================
16 October 2000 = RSAC creates B2000RSAC018E to Brantford police Service re Judges order and conversations 15 October 2000 at 44 Queen Street, Brantford with Court Clerk and in reference to phone calls made to Att.Gen.Toronto 15 October 2000.
16 October 2000 = RSAC creates B2000RSAC019E [insert B2000RSAC016E], to RCMP National Security, Toronto, re Judges order and conversations 15 October 2000 at 44 Queen Street, Brantford with Court Clerk and in reference to phone calls made to Att.Gen.Toronto 15 October 2000.
20:15 hrs., 16 October 200016 October 2000 = BPS Sgt. Balazs, [BPS 00-16, OCCPS 01-COM-0046] attends to Salvation Army to see RSAC. RSAC not there. Sgt.Balazs leaves his card for RSAC and requests he call.
============================================================
17 October 2000 = RSAC contacts BPS station to speak to Sgt.Balazs. Spoke to female who advised that Sgt.Balazs was on the road. She contacted him and he wishes me to call back at 01:15 hrs., 17 October 2000. This call was made at 00:34 hrs., 17 October 2000.
17 october 2000 = RSAC calls BPS and speaks to Sgt. Balazs, taped. RSAC tape malfunctions. RSAC has only partial tape of conversation with Sgt.Balazs this date. Sgt.Balazs states that they maybe got the wrong date on the allegations by John Wilson, refer BPS Inc. # 00-25342. RSAC states you can’t change the date or facts now to suit your allegations. He is advised of Kevin George Bonderove as a possible witness. RSAC states he is unaware of Bonderoves location.
17 October 2000 = RSAC calls BPS to advise them of Charles Trowhills phone # as per their request. call made at 05:10 hrs. 17 October 2000
17 October 2000 = RSAC leaves voice mail to Jane Stewart MP, Brant, re John Wilson, Marlene Adams and B&E’s at 34 Rawdon Street, Sgt. Balazs.
17 October 2000 = RSAC attends at the office of Dale Henderson, lawyer and picks up copy of letter sent to Legal Aid regarding the conflict of intrest. RSAC advised that Dale Henderson does not have copy of Marlene Adams subpoena, and that if RSAC required copy, it could be obtained at the court house.
17 October 2000 = RSAC requests from The Salvation Army a letter that states that RSAC resided at the Salvation Army 16-17 August 2000 and that RSAC could not have been a room mate of John Wilsons at that time as indicated by John Wilson in his statement to police, refrence to BPS Inc. # 00-27126. RSAC receives this letter requested. This information was available to Police at the time of the aying of charges against RSAC pursuant to BPS Inc.# 00-27126.
============================================================
18 October 2000 = RSAC attends Chrch function. RSAC had to leave as Merlene Adams attended and began hollering at RSAC as he left. RSAC has witness to events.
18 october 2000 = RSAC meets representatives of bank at 34 Rawdon Street to get new keys to locks as they attend to change same. RSAC had received letter from bank to meet them there that date and time to change locks and receive new keys to 34 Rawdon Street
============================================================
19 October 2000 = RSAC attends to Crowns office and speaks to Crown Orsini and receptionist "Carol" concerning Marlene Adams at Church last night, 17 August 2000. RSAC states that RSAC was advised by Crown, that John Wilson and Marlene Adams were to be advised not to confront me. RSAC states this was stated in court on tape. RSAC states that further contacts from them will result in the requirement of Criminal Charges being laid against Marlene Adams and / or John Wilson.
RSAC attends to probation office and speaks with Denis Andre, RSAC’s probation officer. 11:45 hrs 18 October 2000.
============================================================
20 october 2000 = RSAC has contact with Probation Parole Officer Denis Andre, who advises that Marlene Adams attended to his office and spoke to him concerning contact at Church 18 October 2000. RSAC has concern as to how Marlene Adams knew who RSAC’s Probation Officer was. Probation Officer stated that the Court advised her. He would not tell RSAC if Marlene Adams was a client of his. Merlene attended to tell him of the contact at the Church and stated the contact was not as RSAC described. RSAC said that there were witnesses and that if need be he could go do an investigation. RSAC would be happy to supply the names of persons present to support RSAC’s statement. RSAc further advised he resented his credibility being challenged by John Wilson and Marlene Adams
RSAC attended to Court House again to speak to Court Officers regarding the Transcripts ordered by the Judges Order. RSAC was advised that there was no Court Order and that the Transcripts were not going to be made available. refer to previous discussions this matter this document. RSAC requested a letter from the Court or the Judges Chamber to that fact. RSAC advised Court of mailing address. No letter has ever been received to RSAC.
RSAC attended to Crowns office and requested again the get Marlene Adams off my back.
Crown served RSAC documents B2000RSAC042E and B2000RSAC016E============================================================
02 November 2000
RSAC receives hand written letter from Sgt. Hammond dated 28 October 2000, given rsac # b2000.r033e, regarding his complaint to OCCPS [01-COM-0018]
RSAC calls Brantford Police Station @ 09:50 hrs., to find out when Sgt. Hammond will be working next. call made from court house. RSAC advised that Sgt.Hammond will be back on shift 03 November 2000 at 12 midnight or 00:00 hrs.. Message left to Sgt. Hammond that RSAC received his letter and will get back to him.
============================================================
08 November 2000 = RSAC receives interim report from Sgt.Frank Balazs BPS to BPS file # 00-12, OCCPS file # 01-com-0019,
RSAC calls Brantford Police Service and advises he has additional witnesses. RSAC requests to know when Sgt.Balazs would be working next. RSAC tapes this call to BPS.
============================================================
14 November 2000 = rsac contact with Sgt.Pottruff at 34 Rawdon Street @ 09:00 hrs app. / Sgt.Pottruff wants to meet RSAC at beat office this date at 13:00 hrs../
14 November 2000 = RSAC attends to Court for hearing of Motion filled relating to appeal of conviction registered
14 November 2000 = RSAC contact with Sgt.Pottruff at beat office from 13:00 hrs., app. to 16:30 hrs., app.. / Sgt.Pottruff refuses to let RSAC tape record meeting / Sgt.Pottruff states that video surveillance camera is not operational at this time and is not recording / Sgt.Pottruff refuses RSAC to view police reports / statements that he has with him and advises RSAC that he review them wth RSAC. / Sgt.Pottruff refers to property recovered and reads list to RSAC / Sgt.Pottruff wants to settle the matters informally so as he does not have to do a complete investigation into matters / Sgt.Pottruff agreed that RSAC is in belief of Law and Order, non abusive.
14 November 2000
Contact with Sgt. Pottruff at 34 Rawdon Street
Contact with Sgt. Pottruff at Beat office.NOTE SGT. Pottruff has been the subject of complaint by RSAC in the past ; reference BPS # 98-22956, OCCPS # 98-COI-0239, RSAC # B8.24.98P. Sgt. Pottruff is aware of RSAC National Security status. RSAC, RCMP informant history. Sgt. Pottruff had direct contact with RCMP National Security and RSAC on a related matter. RSAC had at one time requested some files relevant to RSAC files be attached to National Security, and this voice communication is preserved on tape by RSAC. This request went to RCMP.
Cst.Pottruff was also an investigating officer against RSAC in accusations made, by then Ins.Ray Fitspatric, who is now the Deputy Chief of Police, Brantford.
Relevant Documents have been enclosed, to files BPS 00-10 & BPS 00-12, OCCPS reference 01-COM-0018 & 01-COM-0019, RSAC reference 250.00bps.243coi & 257.00bps253, in communications sent to OCCPS dated 17 January 2001 given RSAC #’s B2001RSAC046A & B2001RSAC047A.
Discosure, of contents of said files, is not available to your service attached to RCMP, CSIS, and DND. It is only relevant to show of their existance. Your determination, if one is required, is to find that the Police’s explanation as to why contact to RCMP National Security is a stated requirement on computer readouts when RSAC’s name is addressed, is valid in its form, to exactness, as described in a Police report attached to BPS file # 00-10, OCCPS file # 01-COM-0018. on page 05 of said report dated 11 December 2000.
RSAC had requested also that information be available to Police that RSAC was a cooperative, on computer access, by police, to RSAC history.
National security was to address some of my concerns but were not going to expand on my fathers file. My fathers File is in RSAC belief a secure file to the highest degree.
RSAC was a Federal Crown witness for the RCMP in British Columbia, and thus entitled to some degree of responsibility from the RCMP for his concerns, above the normal of any citizen.
It was latter stated to RSAC at a meeting with Sgt. Pottruff on related matters that RSAC was the only one with all the facts. Because RSAC was collecting and gathering information during contact with Marlene Adams and after Break and Enters, to be addressed to Police.
RSAC made indications that if Police did not act on 157 Market Street that RSAC was going to seek out a search warrant himself do do said with Police in attendance, as was the case with RSAC and property located at 205 Dalhousie Street, the home of one Ivan Neumeyer where RSAC has had complications and which an association to matters relevant to Marlene Adams now focused, by Neumeyers and Adams relationship by phone calls received at 34 Rawdon Street, as referred in this document and others.. .NOTE: Sgt. Pottruff protested to taping interview this date. RSAC is not concerned to taped interview as it is the normal, in dealings that RSAC has with RCMP. It insures an accurate accounting of the meeting for reference. Sgt. Pottruff was prepared to call the meeting to a halt if RSAC taped. RSAC was concerned with this as it shows an air of deceit / wish to not have an accurate accounting of this contact, with improper motives attached.
Why were concerns made as to the taping of the investigation / conversation, as it preserves evidence relevant to exactness. Procedure in certain cases warrent the police to video / voice record meetings to ensure evidence is secured in its perfection. IE: interviewing suspects in certain cases.Sgt. Pottruff was persistent and after some four hours of discussion RSAC signed an informal resolution to a complaint against Cst. Butterfield for not notifying RSAC of the location of his property at 157 Market Street, relevant to BPS Inc.# 00-23607 [10 August 2000]. This document latter received RSAC reference # B2000.r072e. It was signed at 15:00 hrs., 14 November 2000 at the substation BPS. with Sgt.Pottruff in attendance. RSAC received copy of this informal resolution form 21 November 2000. @ 0945 hrs..
This informal resolution does not neglagate any matters of RSAC complaint against Cst.Butterfield, Cst Tollar, Cst.Farrow, and states that if any findings to the request for answers are met that disciplinary actions be taken against the officer.RSAC requested to view reports of police, to Sgt. Pottruff, but was`refused to view them. RSAC stated to Sgt. Pottruff that any informal resolution was to be negligated if information was found different to that what was discussed this date with Sgt. Pottruff. RSAC further advised Sgt. pottruff that an application would be brought to all avenues if required to secure copy of said referred reports / statements of Marlene Adams / john Wilson and others related. All information is relevant to any decision RSAC might make on matters, and refusal to allow full disclosure to examination is in error by Sgt. Pottruff. RSAC referred to the fact the the Supreme Court of Canada ruled that the "fruits of an investigation are not the property of the Crown {Police}, but the property of the public to ensure that Justice has been served." This complaint is in a investigatory stage during and before attention is raised to the tribunal [OCCPS] for review.
The public has not the "property" if denial of access is made by Police to make it available to RSAC or others. RSAC’s signature will be negligated if factors find that revelations not received by obtaining copy of statements / reports held by police would have chalenged the opinion of RSAC, at the time of said signature being attached to the informal resolution. RSAC was in the feeling that Sgt. Pottruff would not relent untill signature was received. RSAC felt a degree of undo pressure to sign informal resolution. Concern was one that RSAC made concerns available to Sgt. Pottruff’s conduct in attendance to RSAC while RSAC was engaged at Court dates relevant to obtaining files of the Brantford Police Service, pursuant to matter at hand and others, as well as Motion Courts to initiate Appeal process to matters`at hand.. Records required for matters of appeal on matters that will be sought under the disclosure obligations of the Crown that to date have not been met. This nondisclosure is grounds alone for appeal on matters present, by reference to the Charter. This conduct by Police was directed to The Attorney generals office and was not restricted to my concerns as to Sgt. Pottruff’s appearance on dates that RSAC had court appearances, but to Court Constables conduct / approach at such dates to matters of appeal present to related matters.
A reply was received from the Attorney generals office.
In a related file, to matters in present discussions, attached to Justice G.B.Edward, RSAC can state that in conversations with the Attorney Generals office that it was confirmed that conduct by referred and related to matters present was in fact an "Obstruction of Justice" by Legal Persons referred in part. Voice recordings were made to this fact.============================================================
18 November 2000 = RSAC calls 911 / Cst.Tollar responds to a 911 call with another officer re: John Wilson at door 34 Rawdon Street / RSAC finds this strange in the fact that RSAC’s location was known to few. / Police advised they would step up patrol of area in case he came back / john Wilson had stated he had property at 34 rawdon street / Police asked if any property remained at 34 Rawdon Street that belonged to John Wilson / RSAC stated a computer that John Wilson got from spring cleanup was still there as well as a croquet set / Police wanted to know if I could take it to the landlord / RSAC felt it was not his responsibility to do this / RSAC advised Police other items [clothes] in the house were disposed of, as no contact to retrieve property from house was made in the last 3 months / RSAC wanted to cleanup house / Police stated that John Wilson was there probably to try to cause trouble / RSAC stated that he felt that the property had been abandoned under the landlord tenant law and RSAC was within his rights to dispose of or keep remaining property / John Willson should have taken his own property 09/10 August 2000 and not that of RSAC’s / RSAC left the rest of John Wilsons property at 34 Rawdon Street when he vacated the residence 01 December 2000. / RSAC had a no contact condition with John Wilson / RSAC felt if Police felt that after confirmation with landlord tenant law that if John Wilson was entitled to the little remaining property, that they the police could deliver it to John Wilson / RSAC is not aware of any criminal charges being filed against John Wilson as a result of his attendance to 34 Rawdon Street this date.
============================================================
21 November 2000 = RSAC receives copy of Informal resolution @ 09:45 hrs, dated 14 November 2000 from Sgt. pottruff, bps, at 34 rawdon street, given rsac # b2000:r072e /
21 November 2000 = 326.00bps.01 / rsac creates letter to bps given rsac # b2000rsac085e1 / advising police of witnesses [7], that can conferm ownership of property in question that was`stolen from 34 rawdon street by john willson, merlene adams, and another male, this would disprove statements by merlene adams john willson and trevor robert james pratt / 00-20974 / 00-21651 / 00-23607 / 00-24127-00 / 00-16 / Sgt.Pottruff / 34r / Cst.Farrow / Cst.Butterfield / Cst.Tollar / related / 205.00207bps223/227m / 00-coi- / 01-com-0040 /
21 November 2000
Sgt. Pottruff attended to 34 Rawdon Street and delivered RSAC papers signed 14 nov 2000, by RSAC, reguarding complaint against Cst. Butterfield. Sgt. Poyttruff wants to meet RSAC this date re: Cst. Tollar and my complaint agains same re: B&E at 34 rawdon
Sgt. Pottruff said he was going to attend to crt to see if i could do it there, RSAC was not happy with this but made no refrence to it at the time. RSAC felt this was a distraction, for matters at court with Sgt. Pottruff wanting to attend court to speak to RSAC on this matter concerning Cst. Tollar and the matter should have been addressed another date.RSAC had already concerns to Police contact at Court when it was not necessary. RSAC had addressed the issue with Sgt. Carriere on the conduct of a Special Constable at General Division Court, when RSAC attended to court on matters relevant to appeal process on conviction registered . RSAC had been approached twice by said referred Court Constable and advised that his hearing had been changed to the afternoon sitting. RSAC after being advised the first time by Police Special Constable in the courtroom of this alleged fact felt he would speak to the Court Clerk to confirm. RSAC as he waited to speak to Court Clerk was approached by police and advised again. RSAC by observation and conduct concluded Police were there to pay special attention to RSAC.
RSAC did not appreciate of this conduct and addressed the matter to their superior, Sgt. Carriere.
RSAC found it necessary to contact the Attorney General on the matter of Police conduct at Court. RSAC felt there was a deliberate attempt to disuade RSAC from pursuing matters at Court. RSAC has enclosed a copy of the letter received from the Attorney General, Toronto with this communication, given RSAC # and datedTHE FOLLOWING IS EXCERPT FROM DAILY DIARY NOTES BEFORE TRANSFER TO APPROPRIATE FILE
to crt house 10:30 21-Nov-00
SET TO 14:00 FOR ARGUMENT
LEFT CRT HOUSE TO POLICE SUB OFFICETO BPS SUB OFFICE AND SPOKE TO CST. SAWKINS RE LOCATION OF SGT.POTRUFF / TRIED TO CALL POTTRUFF AT STATION BY PHONE AND ON RADIO / NO SUCESS / POTTRUFF AT CRT HOUSE LOOKING FOR ME / WAS AT MAIN STATION BUT MISSED HIM ON PHONE CALL / RADIO CALL
LEFT TO TEMPORARY JOB PLACE AND MADE APPLICATION / FEMALE SAID TO COME TOMORROW AT 0900 HRS., TO SEE IF THEY HAD ANY WORK
TO SAL.ARMY
AS RSAC HEADED THAT DIRECTION ON DALHOUSIE STREET SGT.POTTRUFF PULLED UP IN MARKED CRUISER ON DALHOUSIE STREET JUST BEFORE CATTELLI BAKERY AND RSAC SPOKE / SIGNED RESOLUTION RE TOLLAR CONTACT RE 10 AUG 2000 REPORTING OF THEFT OF PROPERTY BY JON WILLSON / RSAC WANTED TO WAIT TO SIGN / RSAC ADVISED THAT IF HE FOUND ANY THING THAT WAS NOT REVEALED BY POLICE THE SIGNATURE WOULD BE NEGLIGATED BY RSAC / FIRM / POTTRUFF HAD MATTERIAL TYPED AND RSAC MADE REQUEST FOR ADDITIONALS
AS RSAC WAS TALKING TO POTTRUFF MIKE MCKENNA CAME BYTO SAL. ARMY FOR LUNCH
ARRIVED AT 12:10 HRS 21 NOV 2000
LEFT SAL. ARMYto general division court
heard motions
judge wants service to occops and to police given re bps 00-02 file occps file 00-
judge wants letter from church re attendance for meals to vary probation order / / merlene adams / john willson / rsac attendes to one of tthe churches for "communion" / john willson / merlene adams attend to these locations at times
left at 1615 hrs 21-Nov-00to church
spoke to [female] at church re: letter about my attendance for meals required for crt to have probation order changed
left
to sub office to see if Sgt.Pottruff was there / no
Cst. Butterfield and Cst.Sawkins and another officer at office / RSAC said could they relay a message to Sgt.Pottruff that RSAC has a witness list ready and RSAC was going to go out and id the property recovered and would drop the letter off at that time
called m from church
return to base at
16:50 21-Nov-00Contact Sgt. Pottruff on dalhousie Street
stoped me on dalhousie street near catelli bakery / rsac signed informal resolution re cst tollar / RSAC would supply further witness to the ownership of the property in writing / verbal delivered to pottruff / rsac was attending area for lunch between court============================================================
23 November 2000
bps members rsac contacted with
receptionist
Bob Philip, property room
Sgt.Pottruffleft to bps on park road
at reception rsac requested to see bob philip and gave receptionist B2000RSAC for sgt pottruff/ chief of police
bob came out and got me and i went in to store room and id property / some one had left a green garbage bag on the lawn on day and it contained property belonging to me / dictation machines / 486 parts / printer / etc / no monitor or base to 486 computer ken gately sold me / 2 computers from armories there as well as the computer from all spencer / as well as the monitor kevin gave me one day / some comodore disc were there / box full of wires / told bob philip i could not take it today and as soon as it was cleared i would be intouch to pick it up / needed to talk to pottruff or panco re the matter / said pottruff wanted me to id it first / he called pottruff and panco and paged them but received no response
as rsac was leaving sgt pottruff came to rsac at the bike and we spoke briefly / wanted to know if rsac had reviewed notes / no / rsac advised pottruff of were rsac had obtained property ie armories, Spencer [ rsac told him all Spencer used to live at sal.army and used to work at sunoco paper products and was not sure where he was know as he had quit Sunoco rsac understands ] , peter Poole [commodore] rsac said he would get pottruff the name of the guy in Paris rsac bought commodore stuff from / rsac stated he had purchased 1 commodore from person living across the road from don angevine, crown attorney and other stuff from the guy in paris / asked if ladies could id property / probably not rsac said / but they could advise of computer equipment being stored at rsac’s moms / and could confirm it was delivered to 34 rawdon street by candy king, rsac’s mom and Dan king / pottruff asked if john was in attendance to help rsac retrieve computers from armories = rsac responded no / pottruff wanted to meet rsac at 0900 hrs 24 nov 2000 to pickup any information as to farrow contact on the matter / ok rsac said / rsac would look for info on disc and computer / rsac said it might be on accer and rsac needed a power supply / do you have one rsac asked / pottruff said no / pottruff asked again about what rsac said to farrow / rsac said he was sure there were indicators that her name [merlene adams] was refered to at that contact with cst.farrow, as well as her little male friends [bike] / asked pottruff if he had found out about her detention / nothing in report pottruff stated / check records elsewhere rsac said as rsac knew merlene was detained 14 august 2000 / pottrruff said it may have been for something else / pottruff said detective panco would probably be in touch to have rsac attend to go over the property and id all of it as to where rsac got it / rsac made reference to the fact he got 486 from ken gattly / pottruff asked who he was / rsac told him he worked at sal. army / rsac told pottruff also that he submitted a report as well as physical evidence that connected Marlene Adams to attempt b&e after my contact with farrow /called bps at 22:18 23 nov 2000 and left message for sgt pottruff not to meet rsac Friday 24 nov 2000 at 0900 hrs as rsac did not find notes and had to access accer laptop / rsac would be trying to do that this weekend and would call pottruff Monday with the results of rsac’s attempt / call made from calbecks pay phone / no tape record made of this call /
============================================================
26 November 2000 = RSAC address letter [B2000RSAC089E] to Sgt.Pottruff & Chief of Police BPS, and attaches a 3.5" floppy disc to cover letter. RSAC has no printer capacity at this time due to the theft of computer equipment / 3.5" floppy disc contains rsac document b2000rsac087e / 205.00207bps223/227m / RSAC has no printer at this time to print document so RSAC resorts to only alternative and forwards letter on 3.5" floppy disc.
============================================================
28 November 2000 = RSAC receives letter from Inspector J.Ensleve, Brantford Police, dated 24 November, given RSAC # b2000.r059e, advising to contact Sgt.Hammond concerning this complaint BPS # 00-12, OCCPS # 01-com-0018. This letter states that unless contact is made by 11 December 2000, the file will be closed.
28 November 2000 = RSAC receives interim report from Sgt. Hammond, dated 23 November 2000, given RSAC # b2000.r058e concerning BPS # 00-10, OCCPS file # 00-COI-0315, 01-COM-0018 /
============================================================
07 December 2000
RSAC receives final report from Sgt. Balazs Brantford Police Service dated 28 November 2000 [given rsac # b2000.ro76e], relavant to OCCPs file refrence 00-COM0019, BPS refrence 00-12, RSAC file # 257.00bps253.
============================================================
15 December 2000
RSAC receives final report from Chief of Police dated 05 December 2000 relating to OCCPS file 01-COM-0018, BPS file reference 00-12, RSAC file # 257.00bps253.
15 December 2000
RSAC recieves final report from Sgt. Hammond dated 11 December 2000, given RSAC # b2000.r087e / relating to OCCPS file # 01-COM-0018, BPS file # 00-10 /
============================================================
28 December 2000
RSAC receives final letter from Chief of Police, dated 18 December 2000, given rsac # b2000.r090e, relating to OCCPS file 01-com-0019, BPS file refrence 00-10,
============================================================
02 January 2001
Sgt.Pottruff contacted by RSAC / called from Eaton’s market square Dalhousie street entrance pay phone re property at station / said he wants RSAC to meet Cst.Tollar and go over property at station / call Saturday to set date for next week / still trying to get my address / will not conferm charges will or will not be laid again / rsac feels they will not / rsac considers retrieving property and proceed from that point through appropriate / RSAC askes Sgt.Pottruff if he had contacted any of the witnesses ; Sgt.Pottrufff replies he had not / Sgt.Pottruff had been on leave or holidays just prior to this call /
============================================================
03 January 2001
information received indicates that Bonderove is not living at the Salvation Army.
16:38 hrs., 03 January 2001
RSAC contacts RCMP PCC in Vancouver, by payphone, at 1-800 # re file reference RCMP # 2000-030, RSAC # 99TH:099:RCMP
RSAC is advised file has been transferred to Ottawa Office
RSAC advises of Mailing Address and requests that Ottawa be advised.
no tape of conversation madeRSAC calls BPS from payphone
taped / left voice mail to Sgt.Pottruffs superior and requested that my property be returned. RSAC states he sees no charges breing laid in the matter and police need not hold any longer / RSAC advises he will file paper in court if required to secure property from police if requiredRSAC returns to base at 17:40 hrs., 03 January 2001
============================================================
09 January 2001 = RSAC creates B2001RSAC036a, RSAC file reference 257.00bps253, response to OCCPS file reference # 01-com-0019, BPS # 00-12 and sends to OCCPS.
============================================================
11 January 2001
called BPS / Sgt.Balazs and Sgt.Dinsmore not working / briefed female on matters of discussion today with J.P.General-Lickers / advised that RSAC needed Bonderoves address if they had located him / if they did not wish to release address to RSAC could they please contact J.P. and advise / RSAC has discussed the matter with the J.P. and she agreed to confirm our contact this date and the intentions of my request / female advised RSAC that he should call back tonight as Balazs will be working and then he will be off for 5 days. / working from 00:00 hrs to 08:00 hrs 12 January 2001. /
============================================================
12 January 2001
BPS File refrence 00-16
OCCPS File refrence 00-COM-00spoke to balazs said he did not have address of bonderove / said to contact sawkins to have investigation continued / advised him he may be at the twin gates motel / he said report concluded [internal] / i said should be reopened / additional made as fresh evidence available / at least secure statement / rsac advised police the only thing rsac could do was recon the area at a safe distance to try to obtain information and advise required /
============================================================
17 January 2001 = 017.01bps34r / tag # 37301 / tag # 36213 / 28732-00 / 23607-00 / recovery property by RSAC at BPS station / Butterfield / Sawkins / RSAC receives copy of property Tags # 36213 & / RSAC receives partial notes of Cst. Butterfields attendance to 157 Market Street 17 August 2001 / RSAC learns information from said notes not available at any time in meetings with Sgt.Pottruff concerning complaint 00-16 / 01-com-0046 /
17 January 2000 = final report received to rsac from Sgt.Pottruff, BPS, dated 05 January 20001, given rsac # b2001.r021a / 00-16 / 01-COM-0046 / rsac file # 205.00207bps223/227m /
In this report it refers to Sgt.Wetter of the Break and Enter section, who has never contacted RSAC on this matter, and was the investigating Detective in the matters related to Tim Hughes as discussed in this document. Refer to RSAC file reference 028bps.99th.rcmp, BPS Inc. # . 99-30564 [this matter is still before the Appeals Courts and material is still be awaited from Ottawa on the matter].
Sgt.Wetter is aware of the fact RSAC keeps diary records of activities, contacts, etc., as she testified to seizure of same upon RSAC’s arrest at her request 26 October 1999, in Court. This is the arrest where a police officer asked RSAC why the detectives were investigating this matter and not regular uniform officers and RSAC responded as to his high profile.
In this report Sgt.Pottruff states that PC Farrow was not aware that Marlene Adams was a suspect in the attempt break-in. This is untrue as stated in this letter elsewhere. RSAC advised PC Farrow of the Marlene connection the night of contact with him. He also made PC farrow aware of the previous matter investigated by Cst.Tollar and Cst.Terry Ann Fortier. RSAC made direct reference to police Inc. #’s of previous contacts with police on matters surrounding the thefts of his property to PC Farrow as RSAC had to review a small date book that he carries, that contained these file references of the Brantford police Service. RSAC also advised PC Farrow of the contact at the Salvation Army with a male person that caused alarms to ring, that caused RSAC to attend to 34 Rawdon Street to check on the house.
This male person referred to throughout this document, that contacted RSAC at the Salvation Army that caused RSAC to check house 13 August 2000 may be Trevor Pratt the associate of John Wilson and Marlene Adams, and also involved in the theft of property from 34 Rawdon Street. RSAC has made observations further to this person Trevor Pratt recently that RSAC finds interesting at the least. Will monitored further in observations.17 January 2001 = disposition letter received from Chief of Police BPS, dated 15 January 2001, given rsac # b2001.re024a / 00-16 / 01-COM-0046 / rsac file # 205.00207bps223/227m / In this letter from the Chief of Police it indicates that the matter was assigned to the Break and Enter section, however at no time did the Break and enter Section contact RSAC on these matters, with one exception at the Court house while RSAC was in custody on allegations of John Wilson and Marlene Adams. It might be noted this contact with the Break and Enter Section was on the same date RSAC believes as he was charged with offences alleged against john Wilson, that allegedly took place on a date RSAC had conversation with Cst.Butterfield about regarding threats against RSAC. It states that the matter is still under investigation. Police have RSAC mail box # and to date 03 march 2001 no response has been received at that address, by Police. . This report indicates that at no time did RSAC advise Cst.Farrow of any suspects or witnesses . RSAC certainly made reference to Marlene Adams and to John Willson and of a male person who accosted RSAC at the Salvation Army Hostel 13 August 2000, and made direct reference to John Wilson and Merlene Adams and 157 Market Street with direct reference to 34 Rawdon Street and the additional lock placed on the door and the note on the door, to RSAC.
This contact by this male person at the Salvation army alerted RSAC to check on house at 34 Rawdon Street and that led to contact with Cst.Farrrow, who RSAC has stated in the past believes detained Marlene Adams 14 August 2000 temporarily after speaking to RSAC at 34 Rawdon Street in regards to the attempted Break and Enter 13 August 2000, where it was observed by witness that Merlene tried to enter 3 windows to the house and ripped the note from the door. Police were notified in the day and days to follow about possible witness. In conversations with Cst.Butterfield 23 or 28 august 2000 he made reference to the male person who accosted me at the Salvation Army 13 August 2000 by name. RSAC was never requested for witness to events at the Salvation Army, 13 August 2000, by any officers and RSAC assumed that his word was taken to be truthful. In this report it states that RSAC and John Wilson paid Charles Trowhill $300.00 each towards the rental of the house. Yes this is correct. It is however incorrect that Marlene Adams brought food into the house. Besides what would Charles Trowhill know about the daily activities of this house 34 rawdon Street after he moved out. Infact she still ows me money for cat food that I spent looking after her cats, that had been dropped off at the residence by her x-boyfriend without RSAC knowledge. It states that RSAC has not been able to access a laptop {[and has not to date, but has another ] [not all notes are on this one][failure to other laptop occured before copy of them all][these files are still retrievable upon repair of power supply cord]}, that contains the notes of RSAC, but is sure that I did advise Cst.Farrow of these facts. I never had doubt that the facts were given to Cst.Farrow, regarding the attempted Break And Enter. Cst.Farrow was also advise of the Police involvement 10 August 2000 and that Marlene and John Wilson wre suspects in that theft and Break and Enter. RSAC was convinced 14 August 2000 that Marlene was being addressed to this issue by the fact RSAC heard on police scanner that Marlene had been detained after contact with Cst.Farrow 14 August 2000. It indicates in this report that Trevor Pratt was present when John Wilson gave the computer equipment to Marlene Adams, but Police later state that Marlene never was aware that the computer equipment belonged to RSAC and that RSAC, she heard was looking for stolen computer equipment from 34 Rawdon Street. She advised Cst.Butterfield of this 17 august 2000. However this letter from the Chief of Police indicates she knew as far back as the date when it was removed from 34 Rawdon Street, and delivered in cab to her location at 157 Market Street , and that of her alleged x-boyfriend, Tiger Taxi driver Mike. RSAC is researching all taped conversations with Police to see who he left any additional information to. This information was also surrendered to Police in materials picked up by Police also 17 August 2000, at the Salvation Army. RSAC always believed that Cst.Farrow was given all this information with exception of the children witness 14 August 2000. It states that John Wilson gave her the computer equipment. However information received by RSAC from informants to him that Marlene when asked to leave by Mike her X=boyfriend at 157 Market Street stated that the property was her’s and she would be back for it. She latter returned to 157 Market Street, it is learned and/or understood by RSAC, and RSAC feels this is to try and get things straight with her x-boyfriend, so as the story of the property at 157 Market Street and their story is not jeopardized.
RSAC as the events are unfolding in full knowledge of the persons responsible for the Break and Enter to his room and the left of property from 34 Rawdon Street and is conducting his own investigation, as that in case the Brantford Police Service, did / does not know, is what RCMP informants do. Investigate and also supply information to Police. RSAC advised RCMP Hamilton of events as they were developing to a degree. I never changed my mind on the fact of Cst.Farrow not being advised of persons suspected. Cst. Tollar nor any other officer made reference to any proof of ownership until the issue was raised by Sgt.Pottruff, so how can the Chief of Police state that RSAC never advised or assisted Cst Tollar in proof of ownership. It never came to light until my contact with Sgt.Pottruff as a result of RSAC complaint against officer Tollar, Pottruff and others. RSAC had contact briefly with Officer Panco of the Break and Enter section and no refrence was made by him at that time and that contact was not until after RSAC was arrested 30 August 2000 on allegations of Merlene Adams. RSAC received a communication to contact victim services from BPS 10 august 2000 in regards to the theft of his computer equipment. Thre was no concern at that time of ownership.
This statement by the Chief of Police is a lie and or a error that with all the facts before him will be hard to explain this statement, or were he derived it from. as his own letter contradicts this to RSAC.
It indicates that John Willson helped me recover some of the computer equipment from the garbage. He did not, and computer equipment was received from purchases and from a gift and from the Armories, all of which John Wilson was not a part of. RSAC supplied witness list to Sgt.pottruff to conferm RSAC ownership and statements, but Police never contacted them, all 7 at least, when this list was given to Sgt.Pottruff. Mr. Willson right to any recovered property is limited to that what he recovers and purchases not everyone else’s. Fact! Ownership was proven and can be and Police released all recovered property to RSAC but have yet to recover the rest, and will meet legal action from RSAC for not doing so even after being advised via Cst.Butterfield that all property was not recovered that was removed from 34 Rawdon Streetr when RSAC questioned him briefly as to what he had recovered 0n 0r about 28 August 2000. This RSAC complaint has been met. This is not a frivolous complaint nor a vexatious one. a complaint was laid and Police have had to conduct some sort of investigation to it and others and it will in the end as a result of these complaints prove that the facts as described by Marlene Adams and John Willson not to be accurate, or credible to any degree.
It will further place great concern towards investigations present / prepared to be requested / and those against members of the Judicial Community ie The Court House, with reference to Obstruction comments made by the Attorney Generals Office on matters related. Once the process has met this fact all facts are challenable by RSAC against the Queen / state / Police / ETC..
The Police have been negligent and if the Chief Of Police wants to know what a frivolous and vexatious complaint is, it is one were the victim ends up in jail, while the perpatrators of the crime run free with the seeming cover of the Police behind them, that is full of excusses that can not be sustantiated. Ask the Chief to, put himself in RSAC position and see if he failed to file complaint. RSAC feels not. This internal investigation has at the least been informative and full of revelations. As far as RSAC is concerned the Police’s original investigation was frivolous as was their attempt to explain the events, and a frivolous attempt to make the word of John Willson and Merlene Adams credible.The evidence when reviewed shows that Marlene Adams attempted to Break and Enter 34 Rawdon Street 13 August 2000, and was questioned by Police this date, after the theft of property from 34 Rawdon Street 10 August 2000, and then tried to advise Cst.Butterfield 17 Auguist 2000, that she heard that RSAC was looking for the property and referred to "stickers" on the property as stated by the Chief of Police. She alleges to have resided at 157 market Street were the property was recovered on the 17 august 2000, and taken the night it was stolen 10 auguswt 2000 in a Tiger taxi to 157 market Street, allegedly driven by her x-boyfriend who is the occupant of 157 Market Street.
17 January 2001 = RSAC creates document B2001RSAC047A to OCCPS requesting the matters attached to file reference BPS # 00-10, OCCPS # 01-COM-0018, RSAC # 250.00bps.243coi. RSAC advises that he will make full responds to this file in all matters, in file response attached to file BPS # 00-16, OCCPS # 01-COM-0046, RSAC # 205.00207bps223/227m.
RSAC attaches copy of letter {[bj2000.r032] and [bj2000.r050K]} to letter B2001RSAC047A.
These two inserts {[bj2000.r032] and [bj2000.r050K]}, are from the RCMP, and the Privacy Commissioner of Canada in Ottawa. Information in these documents addresses file referred to with National Security Status. RSAC feels there are more than one at this time and one may be attached to the Tim Hughes matters. RSAC has had resent conversations [4 mths] that indicate that files attached to Tim Hughes is being classified under protection by the Government. Agency in Ottawa is reviewing RSAC request for copy of said file related to Tim Hughes and threats by suspected RCMP Member at the Brantford Court Building. This file request has met reply from RCMP in paliminary sages of request that indicate this file will meet that requirement by the Government. RSAC has a file attached to his name with Canadian Security Intelligence Service [CSIS], related to matters in British Columbia, directly. This contact was initiated by RSAC with CSIS, as far back as 1992-93.============================================================
19 January 2001
RSAC received letter from OCCPS [rsac # b2001.r022a],dated 16 Januarey 2001 confirming receipt of 06 January 2001 letter [from RSAC. Refrence OCCPS # 01-COM-0018, BPS # 00-10, RSAC # 250.00bps243coi.
RSAC is requested to respond by 30 January 2001 in request for review of final report from Police on this file by OCCPS. RSAC responds with B2001RSAC047A, dated 17 January 2001 and advises he will respond to all files in file response to BPS # 00-16, OCCPS # 01-COM-0046, RSAC # 205.00207bps223/227m. RSAC feels that all matters should be reviewed at the same time as the matters are associated.RSAC received letter from OCCPS [rsac # b2001.r023a],dated 16 January 2001 confirming receipt of 09 January 2001 letter [from RSAC][#b2001rsac0 ]. Reference OCCPS # 01-COM-0019, BPS # 00-12, RSAC # 257.00bps253, Inc.# 00-27126.
RSAC is requested to respond by 30 January 2001 in request for review of final report from Police on this file by OCCPS. . RSAC responds with B2001RSAC046A, dated 17 January 2001 and advises he will respond to all files in file response to BPS # 00-16, OCCPS # 01-COM-0046, RSAC # 205.00207bps223/227m. RSAC feels that all matters should be reviewed at the same time as the matters are associated.============================================================
30 January 2001 = RSAC requests OCCPPs to review 00-16 / 01-COM-0046, in letter dated 30 January 2001, given RSAC # B2001RSAC050A
============================================================
01 February 2001 = RSAC receives letter after attending to office of same, from Lawyer Dale Henderson, dated 23 January 2001, given RSAC # B2001.R039A on his recollections of events 09 August 2000 concerning the conduct of Merlene Adams, at the Court House, Brantford towards RSAC. This letter supports the facts as described by RSAC.
============================================================
06 February 2000 = RSAC receives letter from OCCPS, dated 02 February 2001, given rsac # b2001.r041a, from sheldon prior / response to 30 January 2001 letter requesting review of final report of Sgt.Pottruff regarding BPS file 00-16 / Inc.#’s 00-20974 / 00-21651 / 00-23607 / 00-24127 /
26 February 2001 = RSAC receives letter from Ontario judicial Council, dated, 16 February 2001, given RSAC # B2001.r0 , concerning Justice Edward. This letter states that RSAC’s fourth allegation may have been met and that per Law, a loss of jurisdiction occurred, during my incarceration between 30 August 2000 and 05 October 2000. RSAC will be requesting clarification, further information to this letters conclusion. It does however indicate RSAC’s appeal rights to the matters that RSAC plead guilty to 05 September 2000. This conviction was obtained thru RSAC’s arrest 30 August 2000, with reference to BPS 00-26233, OCCPS file reference 01-COM-0018, and 01-COM-0046 / rsac file reference # 273.00bps253ojc24 /
Excerpt from refered letter is as follows;
‘The complaint was of the view that if your fourth allegation is true that Justice Edward denied your request for a 2-day remand and lost jurisdiction by a remand of more than 3 days (and the Ontario Judicial Council makes no finding), you have the remedy of appealing the decission that was made and, without evidence of judicial misconduct, the matters are outside the jurisdiction of the Ontario judicial Council.’
This letter is just an example of errors that have plagued this case from the beginning and that carried through into the trial process. Errors so erroneous that Appeals will meet requirements.
============================================================
15 FEBRUARY 2001
Called accer computers to try and locate part required for accer notebook laptop. Trying to find part required by RSAC.
computer [accer] contains vital files to rsac contact this file.. rsac unable to locate part. / on call list / possible solder new conectors in. / rsac researching cost /Called OCCPS and spoke to Sheldon Prior and requested extension to submit report / reply to this file 00-16. Sheldon Prior advised he would expect file reply by 28 February 2001. Requested to know what RSAC was sending / RSAc replied att.gen. letter / rsac has considered copy of taped conversation att.gen.
============================================================
19 February 2001
called bps at
19:56 19/02/2001
23 min left on cell
female spoken to / transfer to records
female spoken to in records / requested Inc. # to RSAC contact with Cst. Butterfield 23 August 2000 / female responed that Inc # was 00-25324
female requested RSAC name / RSAC confirmed / additional give to time of event contact /
call took 2.52 min to complete / cell============================================================
04 March 2001
P. attends house, states that Marlene was at Charle Trowhills house the x-landlord of RSAC, at 34 Rawdon Street. P. stated that John Willson was talking to him, just recently. P asked when RSAC was going to take them to court {Marlene and John}. RSAC found this interesting at the least.
============================================================
06 March 2001
RSAC contacts BPS to speak to Sgt.Pottruff to advise of possible location of property of RSAC’s that has/had not been recovered relevant to 34 Rawdon Street thefts.
RSAC is advised Sgt.Pottruff not working at this time / RSAC requests that Sgt.Pottruff contact him on his cell /
RSAC had made observation of suspected property this date 06 March 2001, at an unreleased address/business at this time, to this file document.
call made from church phone
no tape record at RSAC end
call made around 17:30 hrs., 06 March 2001
to date @ 13:28 hrs., 07 March 2001 no response has been received from Sgt.Pottruff.============================================================
07 March 2001
RSAC at home all day and received no call on cell to call Sgt.Pottruff as per RSAC phone message left for Sgt.Pottruff 06 March 2001. RSAC will try to contact him 08 March 2001 if call not received.
============================================================
SUMMARY
refrence BPS # 00-12 / OCCPS # 01-COM-0018
In statement by John Wilson to Police [BPS Inc.# 00-27126], John Wilson stated RSAC threatened him and assaulted him 16-17 August 2001 while he was a room mate of rsac’s ; documents supplied will state that rsac resided at the Salvation Army Hostel on those dates ; thus John Wilsons statement is incorrect in this detail alone ; John Wilson states that Kevin George Bonderove was at the house 34 Rawdon Street at the time of this alleged threat and assault 16-17 August 2000 ; however this is incorrect also as on 10 August 2000 Charles Trowhill and RSAC and Peter Poole placed additional lock on the door at 34 Rawdon Street with knowledge of Cst Tollar, as this matter of adding locks to keep John Wilson out as well as other illegal tenants ; refer to BPS Inc.# 00-23607 ; RSAC had had conversation with Cst. Butterfield 23 August 2000 at the Salvation Army Hostel this date regarding 17 August 2000 contact with John Wilson. Refer to BPS Inc.# 00-25342 after RSAC had sent Police a letter dated 18 August 2000. RSAC had contact with a female member of said Police service 18 August 2000 and advised of threats by John Wilson 17 August 2000. Cst. Butterfield came to see RSAC 23 August 2000 to take report and get names of witnesses to events 34 Rawdon Street 17 August 2000. Thus with the information before said service Cst.J.Sawkins and Cst.K.Reeder and Sgt Carriere were negligent to investigate complaint of John Wilson when given after RSAC was arrested at the Court Building 44 Queen Street. If these officers had of checked on John Wilsons story they would have learned that the facts did not support the statements of John Wilson. In Court RSAC’s witness testified to the events of 17 August 2000 and are enclosed in essence in the final report by Sgt.Frank Balazs [refrence BPS # 00-12 / OCCPS # 01-COM-0018], dated 28 November 2000. These statements in Court and in this report supported by Police records will only strengthen RSAC’s statement of events 17 August 2000, that John Wilson threatened RSAC, not the other way around. The complaint against these officers has been met as described in original complaint letter dated 13 September 2000, given RSAC # BJ2000RSAC020D.
It must be noted that Police have since the completion of that final report had opportunity to speak to Kevin Bonderove on the matter of his location 16-17 August 2000, but replied that the final report had been submitted and the investigation was completed. RSAC feels this is not the case and statement should have been secured from Kevin Bonderove and should still be. This "spike" should be maintained until such time as statement from kevin Bonderove is obtained. A copy shopuld then be delivered to RSAC as per on going disclosure / discovery rules per case law and thre Criminal Code of Canada per Section 650. New facts are present and available to Police that would clear the situation and clear RSAC’s name to these allegations. RSAC spent time in custody as a result of this false statement by John Wilson. This matter will not rest and RSAC will make these facts available to Appeal Court Judge(s), and to the Attorney General, that were available at the time of any plea being entered by RSAC but not addressed to the Justice at the time of plea being entered, but outside of RSAC’s reach by failure to comply in the past with Court orders by the Police and the Jail, and the disclosure of all files relevant by Police and the Crown Attorney, Brantford. It must be reminded that RSAC may have had input into this "spike" being engaged with his contact with Surrey RCMP on the matter of Kevin Bonderove, as well as indicators that a material witness warrant be executed if required to secure Kevin Bonderove’s statement. RSAC is uncertain what instructions Sgt Carriere gave to these officers in this matter and it must be noted that Crown Attorney Keith Swanson had some input into this matter with Police. Mr.. Swanson and RSAC have had differences in Court, and Keith Swanson was the Crown in a matter in 1988 that RSAC has without reservation determined was related to the death of his father in British Columbia. The matter of that Court appearance by RSAC is under review and will be brought back into Court at the appropriate time. Sgt. Carriere has been subject to complaints in the past [1997], by RSAC to the old Police Complaint Commissioner, that file # is N/A. Sgt Carriere is the Sgt. of the Special Cst. at the Court Buildings, Brantford, of whom many complaints have been directed against, but are not bound by the Police Services Act. File refrences can be given by RSAC if required / requested.Refer to in part to
Kennedy v. Tomlinson et al.
( 1959 ), 126 C.C.C. 175, 20 D.L.R. ( 2d ) 273 (Ont.C.A.)
It was held that there is a "prodigious difference" between a case in which a policeman acts on his own initiative and one where he acts upon the complaint of a citizen. In the latter situation he is under a duty to make inquiry first.Finally and in repition to this matter of BPS Inc.# 00-27126, BPS # 00-12, OCCPS # 01-com-0018, the matter of complaint against these officers, Cst.J.Sawkins, Cst.K.Reeder and Sgt.T.Carriere have been met in whole or in part.
It must be noted and agreed that their is a degree of animosity between myself and said Police Service, as communications in reguards to it have been directed to various agencies within the Country of Canada. Their attracts upon RSAC have been present. Their is in the opinion of RSAC a certain degree of prejudice towards him, as a result of these complaints. It is noted that RSAC has an Assault Poilce charge on his record, which is probably a factor to be considered. However they are aware of my respect for law. Sgt. Carriere’s hasty decission caused a complicated situation for RSAC and it is proven RSAC believes, that the account of the Events of 16-17 August 2000 are in the presence of his statements to events and not that of John Wilsons accounting. If it is asked why would John Willson fabricate this story at this time ; it can be considered that John Wilson has an extensive psychiatric history which with his record could account for his actions alone, and it can be considered that he wished to attempt to take the matters away from his direction ; ie the thefts of property and RSAC was preventing and did prevent to degree, the loss of property, which might be reminded contained personal files and records. These items of copy of some files were not packed 08 August 2000, when RSAC was in attendance to the house 34 Rawdon Street, but were packed the day of conversation with Cst.Tollar, 10 August 2000, as if they [john, Marlene, other] were coming back from their first stop in the Tiger Taxi, but may have not come back, after being observed by the neighbor who was returning from walking his dog, loading the cab at 34 Rawdon Street. This attendance may have caused concern for uncover of their act. The story does not match the facts ; if property was was theirs why did they not come back for the rest and contact Charles Trowhill, or the Police. Because it was not theirs, and they had no claim.
SUMMARY;
reference BPS # 00-16 / OCCPS # 01-COM-0046
It must be noted that Sgt.Pottruff, the investigator in this matter was subject to a complaint by RSAC through OCCPS with refrence to
It must be noted that on RSAC contact with Cst.Butterfield RSAC after being advised he was the officer that recovered RSAC property at 157 Market Street, advised Cst.Butterfield that he had not recovered all the property in question taken in relation to Cst.Tollar contct with RSAC. RSAC advised Cst.Butterfield that a Lg. fan given to him by his mother [medical condition] was still missing as well as an art folder. These items were detailed to Cst.Tollar at contact with RSAC. Even though RSAC signed an informal againts these officers for their professional conduct, it will not excuse their inability to meet an professional conclusion. Facts before the Police will indicate that not all the property was recovered with information received. The complaint stands on these matters and has in RSAC opinion been met. The Brantford Police Service and or it agents were negligent in the performance of their duties with all the facts that were before them did not and have not recovered all the articles that were described in detail to Cst.Tollar and were available to all police after the fact. All facts may not have been present such as a witness list that would aid in identification of property for RSAC to police in their question raised to that point after contact with John Wilson on the matter. Property should have been recovered by police as per RSAC complaint to Cst.Tollar. If a question was raised after to ownership then it should have been investigated. RSAC supplied Sgt.Pottruff a list of witnesses that would collaborate with RSAC on the ownership of property but did not contact them. RSAC feels that their was no actual dispute over ownership.It was a question raised to RSAC as John Wilson raised the issue in his alibi statement. It must be noted property recovered on the front lawn of the Brantford Police Station and from 157 Market Street has been returned to RSAC. Request to have the remainder of property returned recovered have not been met.
Facts did not add up to the statement of John Wilson and that of Marlene Adams and others in that police were given all the facts of the case, Merlene Adams was mentioned to Cst.Farrow on RSAC contact, Marlene Adams was detained briefly after the contact that RSAC had with Cst.Farrow, which was before the date of recovery of property by Cst.Butterfield, thus Marlene Adams statement, that she had heard that RSAC had been in the Taxi office making inquiry into stolen property can not be believed, as she was already a suspect in the theft of property by police, as a result of RSAC contact with Cst.Tollar, ie Tiger Taxi [cst.tollar advised of taxi involvement by witness]. Cst Tollar would have checked into this information and or directed information to the Break and Enter Squad.
As stated, she is next suspect in attempt B&E at 34 Rawdon Street and was temporarily detained by an officer who was advised by RSAC of the Cst.Tollar contact, the same night of RSAC contact with Cst.Farrow regarding the Attempt Break & Enter at 34 Rawdon Street
The RSAC complaint stands and has been met. RSAC heard a female officer request dispatch to see if they had anything on Marlene Adams. A reply from dispatch stated that their was an officer that wished to speak to her. RSAC has not received confirmation to this fact from Police, and Sgt.Pottruff stated that their was nothing in the report / RSAC requested he check dispatch records / tapes. RSAC stated to Sgt. Pottruff that he had witness that will confirm this statement, that had heard the same from sources. RSAC has a Police Scanner and had it on the night after he spoke to Cst.Farrow , on the matter of Marlene Adams Attempting to Break & Enter 34 Rawdon Street, typing a report of the events into file.
RSAC is firm that on the 14th of August 2000 Marlene Adams was stopped and temporarily detained and questioned about events at 34 rawdon Street, by Police, and released, only to state, to Police on the 17th of August 2000 that she had heard this information of the theft of property through the Taxi Office, as RSAC was supposed to have been to said office making inquiry. RSAC was not in the Taxi Office at any time.
Each statement of Marlene Adams and John Wilson can not be met with any degree of creditability and inability by police to contact RSAC witness can only attest to the police belief in statement of RSAC in their final conclusion [which they had all the time]. It must be noted these same person are signing statement against RSAC to have him detained in custody and to then steal his property and address statements to their thefts that can not be substantiated to any degree. some thing the Police must have come to agree with as property the police did recover at the direction of Merlin Adams and recovered on the front law of the Police Station, as stated by Police, was returned to RSAC. RSAC believes beyond doubt that conclusion was before the police all the time but they failed in their actions.
Sgt.Pottruff was also advised of these facts set before you but failed to act also and thus after conclusion that police were not going to file charges against John Wilson and Marlene Adams and Police were not contacting witnesses RSAC requested his property back that had been recovered thus far, and proceed with this matter further through the complaint process already in progress., an eventual.SUMMARY;
reference BPS # 00-10 / OCCPS # 01-COM-0019
This file is some what more complex and must be attached to both of these other complaints, and these persons attached, know as Merlne Adams and John Wilson.
In statments given to Police in two other complaints discussed to degree in this document it can only be seen that the credibility of Merlene Adams and John Willson is questionable at the least, and will be discussed more in conclusion rhetoric at the conclusion of this document. A Jusice of the Peace in short and in RSAC words, felt that the matter was a waste of the Court time and that of RSAC’s, and directed the Crown to find resolve and quickly. RSAC is attempting to secure a document from lawyer Justin Griffin, whom assisted RSAC in reaching a speedy release from jail with full appeal rights being prepared to be executed. To assist in confirming events as held before Justice Edward.
It should be in fairness to have all facts relevant, RSAC did direct concerns to the Ontario Judicial Council against Justice Edward, that in reply indictes RSAC’s right to appeal the decision(s) of Justice Edward. A copy of that letter has been enclosed.
In statments of Merlen Adams, that are attached to this file directly, she indicates fear of RSAC, but yet attends to the residence of RSAC’s Mother’s, with many witness to attest to these facts, and causes a disturbance and makes indications she is working for the Police, and knows that RSAC is in their. RSAC was not.! A action one would not consider normal to one that has fear, in the degree, Marlene states she has/ had. Police were called to this matter and it was not by Marlene Adams, but by RSAC’s Mother. She also try’s to confront RSAC out front of the Court House and at a Church function of whom a witness, a lawyer confirms. Confirmation also is to the fact that Police were aware of these facts, as well as the Crowns office.
Market Street is a Main Downtown Street in the City of Brantford. One that is not located in a area outside of RSAC’s normal routine. It is located in the area of the Court House, Welfare office, UIC office, Banks, Bars and a street that the Jail is located on and were Dale Henderson, Lawyer has occupancy for his office. It is also an artery out of the area to the North end of Brantford were RSAC’s Mother resides.
The Credibility of statements by Marlene Adams and John Wilson must be considered and the reference to it by a Justice of the Peace must be addressed in this file. With direct association to the other two complaints this recorded document.
The matters addressed in this complaint must also reviewed with that of the original complaint of Marlene Adams on 13 May 2000 against RSAC. Their is a file reference of 00-COI- 00and BPS Inc.# 00-13317 attached to that date of 13 May 2000. Her statements are not met, nor credible.
In remarks by Kevin Bonderove it is indicted that Marlene Adams made accusations against RSAC as a result of RSAC going to contact RCMP on matters. and it must be reminded that Kevin Bonderove a Witness available to Police was not secured to obtain statements after the final report was sent on complaint that contained a "spike" out for his location, and that RSAC went to Police directly to advise them he had seen Mr Bonderove at the welfare office, and that someone should address the issue presently [secure statement]. RSAC even spoke to Police at the Court building and who were available at that location, to be dispatched to speak to Mr.Bonderove, to secure an address from him, or detain untill a statement was secured, as the case may be, after RSAC had spoken to Police at the station on the issue of Mr.Bonderoves present location. In latter conversations with police ie Sgt.Balazs it was stated that the final report was sent on the matter to OCCPS by Sgt.Balazs, thus showing their attitude towards the entire issue. This statement of Mr.Bonderove had direct input to these matters and was not sought by Police. To date, 28 February, 2001, RSAC is unaware if Police, after several calls to Police, to see if they had found Mr. Bonderove, in the past, and at a time when he was visible in the city, did eventually locate and secure a statement from Mr. Bonderove. A statement that is still relevant to these matters before you, and should be requested by this Tribunal. Thus the matter might want to be returned to the Police until they secure a statement from Mr.Bonderove or make explanation as to why they failed to do so when the opportunity arose. Actions and attitude here alone in the fact that the report was done, and sent to OCCPS ,by Police, negligated the need to secure said required statement. This alone constitutes negligence in the performance of their duties. A statement relevant to criminal matters is overlooked, that is / was able to challenge the statements of John Wilson is insignificant to Police.
This is the same attitude that RSAC met when requesting that a statement be secured from a Josh Ghent an old boyfriend of Marlene Adams who would state that RSAC was never a boyfriend of Marlene as she stated, in material relevant to BPS Inc.# 00-13317. In Court Marlene Adams stated she was suicidal, when asked of her psychiatric history. This indication can attest to behavior of Marlene AdamsOne can see the statements of John Wilson and Marlene Adams to be uncredible, when supported by their actions and records.
In matters related to a contact with Sgt.Pottruff it was referred that RSAC was approached at an event and advised that Merlene Adams was given some money and told to move from town as she was allegedly causing to many people problems. This information was not confermed by RSAC but was addressed to police in the event it was a true fact.. It might prove interesting if that was the case.
In these accusations by Marlene Adams on 30 August 2000, she states that RSAC road past her house in the early am hours and
CONCLUSION;
A serious error in judgment by police has caused this matter to be before you, and the detention of RSAC and the loss of property. The main persons attached to these actions against RSAC are Marlene Adams and John Wilson. Both persons have questionable credibility. The matter was not properly investigated from first contact by police, as a result of Marlene Adams, by Cst.Farrow. Police failed to secure evidence ie statement from Kevin Bonderove when availability to act came to them. It is a fact that all property was not recovered and that police were made aware of this and that they failed to act to secure the remainder. They failed to as facts before us show investigate the accusations of John Wilson, when RSAC had already filed complaint against John Wilson with witness to support his statement to Police, and filed charges against RSAC that led to in all probability and actuality an unnecessary and illegal detention of RSAC. They failed to allow RSAC to secure some records required at Court at the arrest on the second set of accusation by Marlene Adams while she was being investigated for B&E and attempted B&E and theft and possession of stolen property that belonged to RSAC. Accusations that in the second sense by Marlene Adams were attached to accusations that John Wilson had made against RSAC that were found to be untrue ie RSAC did not threaten John Wilson on the 16-17 August 2000, but in fact John Wilson threatened RSAC. These dates RSAC found interesting in the fact that RSAC was confronted with threats by John Wilson on the date that police recovered stolen property at 157 Market Street were John Wilson had taken it, and RSAC did not know of these facts of the recovery of the property at 157 Market street untill around the 28th of August 2000. One might want to consider that John Wilson may have known and probably did know of the recovery of the property on these dates as referred to as 16-17 August 2000 at the time of his attendance to 34 Rawdon street to pick up a fridge with the owner of Tiger Taxi, where he states he was a resident with RSAC but yet had been locked out of the residence 10 August 2000 by RSAC and Charles Trowhill with reference to Cst.Tollar. John Wilson was named in statements by Marlene Adams , to Cst.Butterfield, as having brought it to 157 Market Street, but resided across the road almost, and did not take it there on the 09-10 August 2000 prior to RSAC contact with Cst.Tollar. It must be noted that Merlene is alleged to be residing at 157 Market Street which is questionable and that this residence known as 157 market Street is the residence of Mike a Driver of Tiger Taxi and the X-boyfriend of Marlene Adams were Marlene had a charge account for her taxi usage. A Taxi Company who would deliver and pick up Marlene at 34 Rawdon Street in her attendances at that location. RSAC has never been in the Office of Tiger Taxi looking for his computers as referred to by Marlene Adams and would not have attended to said office of said taxi company at that time due to the Police investigation and would have only kept them under observation and reported any activity to police that may have been beneficial to police in their investigation into the Break and Enter and theft of RSAC property.
RSAC is a recognized informant to the RCMP.
It is a well know fact in areas of the City of Brantford. In a communication to RCMP in the past, RSAC has received communications from same, that indicate "that not all officers at the detachment would have been aware of your status, thus you should of made them aware.. …’ RSAC can supply copy of that letter if required / requested. It does however address my time in British Columbia, but Brantford Police area aware of contacts with RCMP, RSAC has had.
If RSAC is still in cooperation with RCMP, that answer is no, other than advising of matters directly afecting RSAC, with this communication also.It might be interesting to consider this ; There is something that struck me funny in the relationship between Merlene Adams and Mr.Neumeyer, if their in fact is one. John Wilson stated "RSAC placed his name on everything that was his and considered his, it is similar to comments made one occasion by Mr.Neumeyer.
RSAC is in the position of marking his property with marks that make it easily identifiable.
And to only his own property. Community Watch and Police promote this kind of actions.Finally this Commission may wish to address the issue of response further from Police and allow further material to be made available, to this Commission from Police and RSAC, by requesting review of the matter and confirmation, by the Chief of Police, to any and all matters before you. Material is still being formulated / requested by RSAC, as it will be required to be addressed at appeals, by RSAC, to matters of Criminal in origin. It could be also made available, to this commission, and may have bearing on it’s decision(s). The Commission may wish to order the release of all records, held by Brantford Police, related to these complaints, so as RSAC may review them and make further input., ie Polce reports listed in Final reports attached to Complaints directed through this Commission. as well as reports discussed in RSAC conversations with RSAC. Contained in these reports further information maybe contained that would assist in reaching conclussion(s).
RSAC can state that he will seek them out [reports], in matters attached to Criminal Proceedings, in Appeals to convictions registered against RSAC, as a result of accusations, by John Wilson and Marlene Adams, directly attached to these proceedings before this Tribunal / Commission.============================================================
This document is late coming but RSAC advised OCCPS of his delay and requested further time. RSAC made reference to an wrist injury, that was causing some delay as well as the size of the response and materials contained with said response. RSAC apologizes and requests that you refresh your memory to the fact that materials were late in being obtained from police in this matter.
RSAC feels that this matter should be directed back to the Chief of Police for review .
RSAC is preparing further materials relevant to this matter at present as well.RSAC will state that he never had any contact with Marlene Adams as per her statement given to Police 30 August 2001. RSAC will not state that he did not observe Marlene Adams this date 30 August 2001 and had before and has since without contact. RSAC has recorded observations made in
visual sightings. This matter is still before the Appeal Courts. This date 30 August RSAC would have been at the breakfast at the Salvation Army @ 08:00 hrs., thus the allegations of Marlene Adams this date that RSAC was chasing her on her front porch in the early hours must be challenged for its strength, with all factors present. Marlene Adams states that RSAC was at her residence at between the hours of 06:30 and 07:00 hrs.,30 August 2001.
RSAC will state that he was at breakfast at 08:00 hrs 30 August 2001 at the Salvation Army where he was staying at the time. RSAC was not a roommate of John Wilson at this time either as John Wilson it is understood banned from the Salvation Army as a residence.
RSAC can advise that he was unaware that Marlene was allegedly residing at this address and attempts to supoena her disability file for this information met opposition in Court at the first round but will be requested again for matters of Appeals, in higher Courts. RSAC believed she resided at 22 Charles Street as per her disability records the home of her mothers. RSAC would also be in requirement of rental receipts of Marlene Adams to 157 Market Street. Marlene stated she at one time resided at Ontario Street but RSAC feels her disability cheque went to 22 Charles Street, and may still.
Merlene Adams has a reputation of not having permanent address and travels around from residence to residence at times but retains her mothers address for the purpose of her disability cheque that RSAC has information is in trust in her mothers name. During attendance to 34 Rawdon Street she advised she was homeless at first. She latter returned to her mothers about the same time as her Disability Cheque was coming into force, as is understood. It is further understood her mother had been handling the affairs of her disability all along. Marlene is alleged to be legally blind.
Why did Marlene not call the Police in the AM hours this date 30 August 2000, when there seems to be no additional witness to these alleged events at / between 06:30 and 07:00 hrs., but claims latter that matters took place, latter that date at night, and alleges she has witness.It is latter learned that Marlene was before the Courts on other matters relating to an alleged assault at Mr.Mugs coffee shop on Clarence Street were a window was broken.
This after the fact of her allegations 30 August 2000. This information came to light while RSAC was in custody on Marlene Adams allegations of 30 August 2000. It was discussed in brief with a legal council, but he could not confirm matters at a latter date, only that he had heard.
RSAC had concern over this non-disclosure by Crown to RSAC of assault charges being laid against Marlene Adams on a unrelated RSAC matter but it was required as part of disclosure.RSAC will state that on one occasion Marlene called 34 Rawdon Street prior to 12 may 2000 and was looking for someone to come and talk to her as she wanted to get into a fight with another female at a local pool hall / bar. Her boyfriend at the time Josh Ghent also called RSAC to ask him to come talk to her.
Marlene was asked to leave 34 Rawdon Street around this time that these calls were received.
RSAC advised Sgt.Pottruff on one occasion when he attended to speak to John Wilson that he should have uniforms to keep an eye on Marlene Adams and her friends, as RSAC felt there was trouble brewing between some of her friends.
Sgt.Pottruff advised he would do same, and thanked RSAC for the information. This contact with Sgt.Pottruff on these matters was prior to 12 May 2000, where she alleges RSAC grabbed her arm, after Marlene came to knowledge that he was contacting RCMP on matters related to her. John Wilson was aware of RSAC intentions and with all probability had told Marlene prior.
John had also at this time concerns that Police had caused him his job at the SPCA. The RCMP were looking to talk to John Wilson at this time regarding the threats he heard at the Court House in 1999. RSAC had said he would ask RCMP if they had attended and had they caused concerns that caused John’s Job. RCMP were aware where John was working. RSAC had to contact them on another matter and stated he would speak of the matter re John at that time, to them about the SPCA.
During the time period issus of concern were addressed to RSAC from a female in the neighborhood that John Wilson was a child molester, and that she had received a phone call from the Children Aid Society advising her as she has a child. RSAC was requested to see if they would do that and contact her. RSAC advised she could contact them back to confirm, but RSAC would make inquiry for her, and did.
This led RSAC to the Christopher Law and the Community Safety Act of 1997. RSAC gained copy of the Christopher Law, but was unable to secure the other alleged law.
RSAC made contact with RCMP Ottawa on the matter.
RSAC advised John that the Female had concerns and was concerned to his attendance at residence.Case law held within the Criminal Code of Canada refers Without the authority of his client, council cannot, even with permission from the Court, proceed in his absence; R.v.Page,[1969] 1 C.C.C.90,64 W.W.R.637(B.C.C.A.).
Justice Edwards had informal resolution discussions with the Crown and RSAC’s lawyer in a Court session and denied RSAC the right to be there, which is an Error of law and lays grounds for Appeal. Further "Errors in Law" to those plagued throughout this case.
Matters of Appeal in Court are not directly related to these matters but are associated and evidence generated to this file will address the Appeal Courts.
This refrence only at this time shows the errors in their entirety and in context with the Attorney Generals Office comment that an Obstruction of Justice was met only makes these errors reviewable further as to authenticity of error of judgments, and the entire matter before you. It must also be considered at this level of review / investigative procedures.
Any part of a hearing includes the investgory stage by police.
At RSAC’s bail hearing John Wilson refused to answer questions on the stand and the Justice [Mulloy] refused to exercise his authority to order John Wilson to comply or face incarceration. John Wilson caused RSAC to contact Police and file a complaint as to the conduct of John Willson in Court, and on one occasion police had to attend to John Wilson in the Court room to regain control of the Court hearing. refrence file BPS 00-27490, RSAC file reference # 254.00bps230.253.This is an unedited document and RSAC regrets any spelling mistakes.
Additional’ s are being prepared in the event they are required.
All informal ’s signed by RSAC to Sgt.Pottruff are reversible.
If no negligence is instituted against any specific officer, of said service, Brantford, it is evident that some degree has been met, by said service, in the handling of these matters. And a finding to such should be handed down by this tribunal, with recommendations.
I ask that this matter be reviewed and RSAC requests be considered this matter in any decisions made.
RSAC awaits your response to this matter.
THANK YOU;
RESPECTFULLY;
R.SHAWN A.CANTLON[RSAC]
cc: OCCPS
RSAC
DND, OTTAWA
ATTORNEY GENERAL, TORONTO
RCMP, NATIONAL SECURITY
COURT
AS REQUIREDinserts: yes
b2001rsac044a
b2001rsac045a
b2001rsac
b2001rsac
b2000rsac87e
b2001rsac084a
bj2000:r012c
statement dorty frey
statement betty bernard
bj2000rsac123a
bj2000rsac125a
bj2000:r029kNOTE: all audio communications with RSAC are subject to recording at RSAC sources without considerations, at any time, and exspecially with file refrences, noted.
************************************************************
DOCUMENT HISTORY
****************
CREATED 08:18 07-Feb-01
INSERTION / EDIT / PRINT
B2000RSAC0 / 205.00207BPS223/227M
61,698 bytes at 19:44 hrs., 20 Feb. 2001.
search records on computer for all files containing names pottruff, merlene, willson, sawkins, balazs, winters, poole, trowhill, reeder, etc
081,792 bytes at 11:40 hrs., 23 Feb 2001.
098,560 bytes at 08:37 hrs., 25 Feb 2001
109,952 bytes at 11:03 hrs., 25 feb 2001
111,616 bytes at 12:08 hrs., 25 feb 2001
113,280 bytes at 12:43 hrs,. 25 feb 2001
118,114 bytes at 14:08 hrs., 25 feb 2001
143,630 BYTES AT 22:34 HRS., 25 fEB 2001
make copy file / searchs to laptop and file / pottruff, merlene, willson, trowhill, poole, wess, helmetk, text.
144,384 BYTES AT 06:29 HRS., 26 FEB 2001
159,872 BYTES AT 05:21 HRS., 28 FEB 2001
start file print 07 march 2001
additionals made 07 march 2001
208,640 bytes at 14:17 hrs 07 march 2001
print final 22:29 07 march 2001
END
***********************************************************
DOCUMENT ACCESS RECORD
**********************
B2000RSAC0 / 205.00207BPS223/227M
*******************************************
08:18 07-Feb-01 to creation
Pingback: w2.3.12a « Arthur2rcasc's Blog