Do the RCMP get their man if he is white collar? Nope.

Index of forum topics, talk to us.

Postby admin » Sun Dec 02, 2007 11:41 am

TORONTO STAR
Why white-collar crime team fizzled

COLIN MCCONNELL/TORONTO STAR FILE PHOTO
The media were out in force when IMET raided downtown offices in February, 2005.

THE SERIES

YESTERDAY: How regulators have failed to crack down on stock market miscreants while developing an international reputation for inaction and ineffectiveness. http://www.thestar.com/Business/article/281645

TODAY: How a big-budget police squad set up to take on corporate crime degenerated into a bureaucratic mess with few results. http://www.thestar.com/Business/article/281772

TOMORROW: An interview with the head of securities watchdog, Ontario Securities Commission chairman David Wilson.

COMING UP: What’s needed to fix the mess.
Launched four years ago to clean up markets,
police squad is now best known for its failures
December 02, 2007
Madhavi Acharya-Tom Yew
Business reporter

It was designed for show, an in-your-face warning in the heart of Canada's financial centre.

Two dozen police, followed by a swarm of reporters and television crews, swept into the Bank of Nova Scotia at King and Bay armed with a search warrant. The bank itself was not under suspicion. It had been caught up in a probe surrounding another company, Royal Group Technologies Ltd.

It was the first operation of IMET – the Integrated Market Enforcement Team – set up 14 months earlier to tackle white collar crime in Canada. The idea was to make headlines.

"They're sending a message to investors ... `We're going to clean up the markets and you can depend on us,'" Richard Powers, professor at the University of Toronto's Rotman School of Management, said at the time.

Yet after four years of operation, only five charges have been laid – one in Vancouver and four in Toronto. In the Vancouver case, broker Kevin Steele was jailed six years for bilking investors out of $10.3 million.

The four Toronto cases – accounting fraud, stock market manipulation, theft and fraud over $5,000 – are still working their way through the courts. IMET's investigation into Royal Group is continuing. To date, no charges have been filed.

Today when the enforcement team makes the news, it's usually because of its dismal track record. Instead of reaping glory, the vaunted police squad is becoming a public whipping boy in the debate about Canada's perceived tendency to let white-collar crime go unpunished.

Even the man in charge admits to shortcomings.

"There's a lot of stakeholders unhappy and I think justifiably so," said John Sliter, the head of IMET in Ottawa.

But he's quick to deflect blame: "Yes, justice is taking a long time, but I don't want to put the full responsibility for that on [IMET's] shoulders. In that sense, it's the Canadian system."

Interviews with former officers and other observers show IMET started with much hope, but soon felt the burden of a weighty RCMP bureaucracy and territorial bickering.

Former team leaders in Toronto and Vancouver talk of their frustration and "disappointment across all boundaries." Investigators complain of legal roadblocks in increasingly complicated cases, leading to delays in investigations and charges being laid.

The federal government commissioned a report last May to look into IMET's failings. It's recommendations are expected to be released this week.

The Integrated Market Enforcement Team was formed in 2003, when stock markets and regulators around the world were still smarting from the effects of U.S. scandals like Enron and WorldCom.

Canada's own high-profile debacles – Bre-X Minerals Ltd. and YBM Magnex Ltd.– were still fresh, and the federal government wanted to set investors' minds at ease. For the first time, an elite team of regulators, police and legal experts was being brought together to investigate and prosecute big stock market crimes.

"Helping protect Canadian capital markets, that's what this announcement is all about," Canada's solicitor-general, Wayne Eaton, told reporters at the time.

Ottawa dedicated $120 million over five years to set up nine units across Canada, in Vancouver, Calgary, Toronto and Montreal.

The Toronto units were to be led by Detective Inspector Craig Hannaford. A veteran white-collar crime officer, Hannaford headed up the RCMP's probe of Livent, the Toronto theatre company that imploded under charges that Garth Drabinsky and other former principals had falsified corporate statements. A trial is expected to begin in the spring.

Setting up the teams took upwards of a year, a complex process that involved getting secure sites and staff. Territorial issues emerged early on.

Prosecutors from the federal department of justice were deemed essential to help guide the complex investigations.

According to an internal planning document, obtained by Canadian Press in March, 2006, federal lawyers were needed to give "advice and assistance regarding aspects such as wiretap applications, search warrants and disclosure advice to the IMETS during the course of investigations."

The justice department had been given $17 million to make the lawyers available, but it initially failed to do so.

"We are at a point in our implementation where we are in dire need of legal advisers to work alongside of our investigators. They were to form an integral part of our integrated teams," Sliter wrote to the department almost a year after the launch. Delays, as well as the lingering feeling that neither provincial nor federal prosecutors were willing to step up, hurt morale, said Bill Majcher, former head of IMET's Vancouver team.

"For the better part of the time I was there, we didn't have either the provincial or federal Crown (prosecutor) willing to take responsibility for dealing with us. We were already running, and then things start falling apart ..." Today, lawyers from the department are assigned to IMET teams in Toronto, Vancouver, Calgary and Montreal.

Despite the program's well-funded start, it could be difficult to get beyond established RCMP procedures when it came to hiring and pay, former insiders say.

In Toronto, Hannaford wanted a stock market expert on the team, a career Bay Streeter who knew the big players, the market mechanics, and what was ordinary trading activity and what was not – credentials, he knew, would command a six-figure salary. The government's standard checklist for qualifications, however, put the pay scale in the middle five digits.

"We just couldn't get the classification process in the government to recognize that this person had to be paid fairly well," Hannaford said.

Another frustration was the RCMP's habit of pulling officers off projects when it was short-staffed in other areas. Need more security for visiting world leaders? Get an officer from IMET. A big drug or immigration case needs more manpower? IMET.

IMET officers also complain that the Canadian legal system is too easily bogged down by procedural sideshows such as stringent disclosure requirements – the prosecutor's legal responsibility to give the defence access to all evidence it has gathered during an investigation.

In a complicated stock market fraud or investment scam, disclosure can amount to hundreds of thousands of documents that have to be gathered, sorted, organized, and copied so they can be given over to the defendant and his lawyers as soon as charges are laid in a case.

By some estimates, 30 per cent of the cost of an investigation goes to cataloguing, tracking, and duplicating information to make sure copies will be available for the defence.

Even so, prosecutors may only rely on 100 documents or so to present their case; the defence, about the same when putting alternate theories forward. "The rest is just sort of filler," says Majcher, "but if somehow one box of nothing didn't get stored properly, in many cases that's the basis for having a case tossed."

Another hurdle, they say, is the issue of compelling witnesses to speak to investigators.

In the U.S., prosecutors can issue subpoenas, forcing witnesses to provide testimony before a grand jury once charges are laid.

Under Canadian law, members of the public are under no obligation to speak to law enforcement officers. When trying to piece together a securities fraud case, the accountants, consultants, and other office staff who may have information invariably consult their lawyers, then tell investigators they don't want to give a statement.

If officers can convince a witness to talk to them, it's strictly voluntary. "It's basically, we're totally open to their schedule and their lawyer's schedule," Hannaford said.

To add insult to injury, under the Mutual Legal Assistance Treaty, authorities from other countries who come to Canada to conduct investigations can legally compel witnesses to provide statements. "So you have a funny situation where foreign law enforcement have more power to collect evidence from witnesses in Canada than our own domestic police," Hannaford said.

All this leads to investigations dragging on, and on. Add historically light sentences into the mix, and it's a recipe for plummeting morale.

In the meantime, white collar crime in Canada festers – along with a growing reputation for being soft on stock market and financial crime. Majcher saw the devastating effect Canada's disclosure law can have on international investigations first-hand in 2002 when he went undercover as part of a joint RCMP-FBI sting that nabbed two corrupt Canadian lawyers.

The sting included Jack Purdy, a Canadian stock promoter who was charged, but later acquitted of money laundering.

Even though the charges were filed in Florida, Purdy's lawyer was able to convince a judge that the RCMP should be forced to turn over all its documents in the case, including those that actually came from the FBI.

"The defence lawyer says he's a Canadian citizen and protected by the Charter,'" Majcher recalled. " `He's entitled to everything in that (RCMP) file, including FBI intelligence reports, their operational plans, and other notes.'"

The judge agreed, and the FBI officers involved were completely furious, threatening to cut Canadian law enforcement out of subsequent investigations.

Majcher says that now he's on the investment side, he's a managing director with Hong Kong-based investment bank Baron Group, he sees the impact on Canada's reputation in a new light.

"I remember meeting a fellow in New York. He said, `Bill, what's your area code. I said 604. He said, `Oh, that's one of the area codes that I don't answer.'"
admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 2854
Joined: Fri May 06, 2005 9:05 am
Location: Canada

Postby admin » Thu Oct 04, 2007 2:45 pm

Does this apply to the SFSC, OSC, MFDA SRO and ICAA SRO investigators?



Police liable for inadequate work, Supreme Court rules
Hamilton man's suit loses but sets precedent for negligence in police investigations
KIRK MAKIN

Globe and Mail Update

October 4, 2007 at 10:53 AM EDT

Police investigators can be sued if they conduct an investigation negligently, the Supreme Court of Canada said Thursday in a ruling that will send shudders through police ranks.



”Police officers owe a duty of care to suspects,” Chief Justice Beverley McLachlin said for a 6-3 majority. ”Their conduct during an investigation should be measured against the standard of how a reasonable officer in like circumstances would have acted.

”Police officers may be accountable for harm resulting to a suspect if they fail to meet this standard,” she said, writing on behalf of Mr. Justice Ian Binnie, Mr. Justice Louis LeBel, Madam Justice Marie Deschamps, Mr. Justice Morris Fish and Madam Justice Rosalie Abella.

The court nonetheless dealt a personal loss to a Hamilton man – Jason George Hill – who had argued that he was negligently arrested, resulting in his spending 20 months in jail for a string of robberies that he did not commit.

Mr. Hill was ultimately exonerated when the real robber was found and convicted. He sued investigators, specifically citing an inept police lineup procedure, but the court ruled against his suit.

Mr. Hill's lawyers – Sean Dewart and Louis Sokolov – were exultant about the legal implications of Thursday's ruling but disappointed that Mr. Hill's lawsuit was thrown out.

"This is a bitter day for Jason Hill," Mr. Sokolov said. "The court acknowledges that he was wronged by the justice system, and yet excused the police from liability because their conduct in this case met the very low standards that prevailed more than a decade ago.

"On a happier note, this is a very good day for police accountability in Canada. The Supreme Court stated in resounding language that police are no different from the rest of us, and can be sued if they do their jobs negligently."

Mr. Dewart said that a couple of provinces – notably, Quebec – have permitted lawsuits for negligent investigation for several years. Others, such as Alberta and New Brunswick, have been adamantly opposed to allowing them, lest they compromise police investigations.

Mr. Dewart said that this is an empty argument. Police are far from the only professionals who have to meet an acceptable set of standards, he said, yet the others do not cease doing their jobs for fear of litigation.

"Is there a slippery slope for neurosurgeons, who don't do surgery because they might be sued?" he said.

The lawyers said that as a result of the decision, municipalities and their insurers will likely begin to press for higher police training standards, which will benefit society as a whole.

Notwithstanding Mr. Hill's loss, the ruling constitutes a major victory for the wrongful conviction movement. The court majority said that police owe a duty of care to the people they investigate, given the consequences that can result from faulty techniques.

”The relationship is clearly personal, close and direct,” the majority said. ”A suspect has a critical personal interest in the conduct of an investigation. No other tort provides an adequate remedy for negligent police investigations.”

The dissenting judges took issue on this point, insisting that opening police up to civil liability for their investigations is both unfair and harmful to the public interest.

”A private duty of care owed by the police to suspects would necessarily conflict with an officer's overarching public duty to investigate crime and apprehend offenders,” Madam Justice Louise Charron wrote in dissent. ”The recognition of this tort would have significant consequences for other legal obligations and would detrimentally affect the legal system and society more generally.”

She said that individuals who are acquitted may actually have committed the crime but that police and prosecutors simply could not prove it beyond a reasonable doubt.

”A person who committed an offence may benefit from a botched-up investigation because a negligent investigation will often be the effective cause of an acquittal,” Judge Charron wrote on behalf of Mr. Justice Michel Bastarache and Mr. Justice Marshall Rothstein. ”Whichever approach is adopted, there may be unforeseen and undesirable ramifications in the criminal context.

The majority, however, scoffed at the idea that recognizing a tort of negligent investigation would make police apprehensive about conducting a full investigation or charging suspects without an airtight case against them.

”The record does not establish that recognizing the tort will change the behaviour of the police, cause officers to become unduly defensive or lead to a flood of litigation,” Chief Justice McLachlin said. ”Police officers may make minor errors or errors in judgment without breaching the standard.”

Hamilton police believed they had ended a spate of daring robberies when they clamped handcuffs on Mr. Hill, the man they believed to be the Plastic Bag Bandit.

Having had Mr. Hill identified from photo lineups by so many witnesses that they felt they could make the charges stick, investigators issues a press releasing boasting of having ”bagged” the Plastic Bag Bandit.

The robberies, however, continued.

Worse still, a man who would eventually turn out to be the real Plastic Bag Bandit – Francisco Sotomayer – emerged after a tipster contacted the police. It took two more years before all the charges against Mr. Hill collapsed, but he was ultimately exonerated.

After two years behind bars and two trials, Mr. Hill sued the police for conducting a negligent investigation. His lawyers allege that Mr. Hill had been flattened by a legal bulldozer powered by evidence of the most thin and unreliable variety.

Mr. Hill's lawsuit was thrown out at trial when the judge ruled that police had used valid investigative methods and made decisions that were justifiable. The Ontario Court of Appeal upheld the existence of investigative negligence as a civil cause of action, but voted 3-2 to uphold the trial ruling against Mr. Hill.

Mr. Sokolov and Mr. Dewart claim that the ruling effectively gutted the usefulness of investigative negligence as a civil cause of action.

Police lawyers – backed by the federal Crown – argued in the Supreme Court hearing that police cannot make tough investigative judgment calls if they can easily be found civilly liable for their errors. They warned the court not to throw open the floodgates of litigation to everyone who ends up being acquitted of a crime.

”Studies have demonstrated that fear of lawsuits on the part of police renders them more timid in carrying out their duties,” a police legal brief said.

Mr. Dewart and Mr. Sokolov countered that police must be held accountable when, blinded by tunnel vision or ambition, they use discredited or unreliable investigative techniques.

”It is not the case that the defendants merely overlooked something, but rather that they obstinately blinkered themselves to a large number of things,” they said in a brief to the Supreme Court.

The robberies that spawned the case came in quick succession in late 1994 and early 1995. As the case against Mr. Sotomayer strengthened, the charges against Mr. Hill were dropped one by one.

Besides suing for investigative negligence, Mr. Hill included a far more conventional cause of action – malicious prosecution, which requires the plaintiff to prove actual malice by investigators. An investigative-negligence suit, in contrast, could succeed simply by showing that police were reckless, employed bad practices or blinded themselves to exculpatory evidence.

Mr. Dewart and Mr. Sokolov targeted the photo lineups in particular, noting that the only person depicted who was not Caucasian was Mr. Hill, an aboriginal. Coupled with widespread publicity stating that the bandit was of mixed race or Hispanic, they said, there was a strong chance of Mr. Hill's being erroneously picked out by eyewitnesses.

They also argued that a lead officer in the case ignored information that pointed toward Mr. Sotomayer as the real bandit.


http://scc.lexum.umontreal.ca/en/2007/2 ... scc41.html

Citation:Hill v. Hamilton-Wentworth Regional Police Services Board, 2007 SCC 41
Date:October 4, 2007
Docket: 31227
admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 2854
Joined: Fri May 06, 2005 9:05 am
Location: Canada

Postby admin » Thu Oct 04, 2007 2:40 pm

Does this apply to the SFSC, OSC, MFDA SRO and ICAA SRO investigators?



Police liable for inadequate work, Supreme Court rules
Hamilton man's suit loses but sets precedent for negligence in police investigations
KIRK MAKIN

Globe and Mail Update

October 4, 2007 at 10:53 AM EDT

Police investigators can be sued if they conduct an investigation negligently, the Supreme Court of Canada said Thursday in a ruling that will send shudders through police ranks.



”Police officers owe a duty of care to suspects,” Chief Justice Beverley McLachlin said for a 6-3 majority. ”Their conduct during an investigation should be measured against the standard of how a reasonable officer in like circumstances would have acted.

”Police officers may be accountable for harm resulting to a suspect if they fail to meet this standard,” she said, writing on behalf of Mr. Justice Ian Binnie, Mr. Justice Louis LeBel, Madam Justice Marie Deschamps, Mr. Justice Morris Fish and Madam Justice Rosalie Abella.

The court nonetheless dealt a personal loss to a Hamilton man – Jason George Hill – who had argued that he was negligently arrested, resulting in his spending 20 months in jail for a string of robberies that he did not commit.

Mr. Hill was ultimately exonerated when the real robber was found and convicted. He sued investigators, specifically citing an inept police lineup procedure, but the court ruled against his suit.

Mr. Hill's lawyers – Sean Dewart and Louis Sokolov – were exultant about the legal implications of Thursday's ruling but disappointed that Mr. Hill's lawsuit was thrown out.

"This is a bitter day for Jason Hill," Mr. Sokolov said. "The court acknowledges that he was wronged by the justice system, and yet excused the police from liability because their conduct in this case met the very low standards that prevailed more than a decade ago.

"On a happier note, this is a very good day for police accountability in Canada. The Supreme Court stated in resounding language that police are no different from the rest of us, and can be sued if they do their jobs negligently."

Mr. Dewart said that a couple of provinces – notably, Quebec – have permitted lawsuits for negligent investigation for several years. Others, such as Alberta and New Brunswick, have been adamantly opposed to allowing them, lest they compromise police investigations.

Mr. Dewart said that this is an empty argument. Police are far from the only professionals who have to meet an acceptable set of standards, he said, yet the others do not cease doing their jobs for fear of litigation.

"Is there a slippery slope for neurosurgeons, who don't do surgery because they might be sued?" he said.

The lawyers said that as a result of the decision, municipalities and their insurers will likely begin to press for higher police training standards, which will benefit society as a whole.

Notwithstanding Mr. Hill's loss, the ruling constitutes a major victory for the wrongful conviction movement. The court majority said that police owe a duty of care to the people they investigate, given the consequences that can result from faulty techniques.

”The relationship is clearly personal, close and direct,” the majority said. ”A suspect has a critical personal interest in the conduct of an investigation. No other tort provides an adequate remedy for negligent police investigations.”

The dissenting judges took issue on this point, insisting that opening police up to civil liability for their investigations is both unfair and harmful to the public interest.

”A private duty of care owed by the police to suspects would necessarily conflict with an officer's overarching public duty to investigate crime and apprehend offenders,” Madam Justice Louise Charron wrote in dissent. ”The recognition of this tort would have significant consequences for other legal obligations and would detrimentally affect the legal system and society more generally.”

She said that individuals who are acquitted may actually have committed the crime but that police and prosecutors simply could not prove it beyond a reasonable doubt.

”A person who committed an offence may benefit from a botched-up investigation because a negligent investigation will often be the effective cause of an acquittal,” Judge Charron wrote on behalf of Mr. Justice Michel Bastarache and Mr. Justice Marshall Rothstein. ”Whichever approach is adopted, there may be unforeseen and undesirable ramifications in the criminal context.

The majority, however, scoffed at the idea that recognizing a tort of negligent investigation would make police apprehensive about conducting a full investigation or charging suspects without an airtight case against them.

”The record does not establish that recognizing the tort will change the behaviour of the police, cause officers to become unduly defensive or lead to a flood of litigation,” Chief Justice McLachlin said. ”Police officers may make minor errors or errors in judgment without breaching the standard.”

Hamilton police believed they had ended a spate of daring robberies when they clamped handcuffs on Mr. Hill, the man they believed to be the Plastic Bag Bandit.

Having had Mr. Hill identified from photo lineups by so many witnesses that they felt they could make the charges stick, investigators issues a press releasing boasting of having ”bagged” the Plastic Bag Bandit.

The robberies, however, continued.

Worse still, a man who would eventually turn out to be the real Plastic Bag Bandit – Francisco Sotomayer – emerged after a tipster contacted the police. It took two more years before all the charges against Mr. Hill collapsed, but he was ultimately exonerated.

After two years behind bars and two trials, Mr. Hill sued the police for conducting a negligent investigation. His lawyers allege that Mr. Hill had been flattened by a legal bulldozer powered by evidence of the most thin and unreliable variety.

Mr. Hill's lawsuit was thrown out at trial when the judge ruled that police had used valid investigative methods and made decisions that were justifiable. The Ontario Court of Appeal upheld the existence of investigative negligence as a civil cause of action, but voted 3-2 to uphold the trial ruling against Mr. Hill.

Mr. Sokolov and Mr. Dewart claim that the ruling effectively gutted the usefulness of investigative negligence as a civil cause of action.

Police lawyers – backed by the federal Crown – argued in the Supreme Court hearing that police cannot make tough investigative judgment calls if they can easily be found civilly liable for their errors. They warned the court not to throw open the floodgates of litigation to everyone who ends up being acquitted of a crime.

”Studies have demonstrated that fear of lawsuits on the part of police renders them more timid in carrying out their duties,” a police legal brief said.

Mr. Dewart and Mr. Sokolov countered that police must be held accountable when, blinded by tunnel vision or ambition, they use discredited or unreliable investigative techniques.

”It is not the case that the defendants merely overlooked something, but rather that they obstinately blinkered themselves to a large number of things,” they said in a brief to the Supreme Court.

The robberies that spawned the case came in quick succession in late 1994 and early 1995. As the case against Mr. Sotomayer strengthened, the charges against Mr. Hill were dropped one by one.

Besides suing for investigative negligence, Mr. Hill included a far more conventional cause of action – malicious prosecution, which requires the plaintiff to prove actual malice by investigators. An investigative-negligence suit, in contrast, could succeed simply by showing that police were reckless, employed bad practices or blinded themselves to exculpatory evidence.

Mr. Dewart and Mr. Sokolov targeted the photo lineups in particular, noting that the only person depicted who was not Caucasian was Mr. Hill, an aboriginal. Coupled with widespread publicity stating that the bandit was of mixed race or Hispanic, they said, there was a strong chance of Mr. Hill's being erroneously picked out by eyewitnesses.

They also argued that a lead officer in the case ignored information that pointed toward Mr. Sotomayer as the real bandit.


http://scc.lexum.umontreal.ca/en/2007/2 ... scc41.html

Citation:Hill v. Hamilton-Wentworth Regional Police Services Board, 2007 SCC 41
Date:October 4, 2007
Docket: 31227
admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 2854
Joined: Fri May 06, 2005 9:05 am
Location: Canada

Postby admin » Mon Sep 24, 2007 3:26 pm

A GOOD COUNTRY FOR CROOKS
Welcome to La-La land.

John Gray
September 24, 2007
Canadian Business Magazine


They were top cops on the RCMP's elite IMET squads. Now Bill Majcher and Craig Hannaford are blowing the whistle on a justice system that is losing the war on white-collar crime






CANADA ISN’T HAVING MUCH LUCK CLEANING UP ITS IMAGE AS A COUNTRY THAT IS SOFT ON WHITE - COLLAR CRIME.



While Conrad Black faces up to 15 years in prison after his recent conviction in a Chicago courtroom. Canadian authorities are still licking their wounds after the recent acquittal of former Bre-X chief geologist John Felderhof on civil charges of insider trading.

It wasn't supposed to be this way. Four years ago, the RCMP launched its Integrated Market Enforcement Teams, or IMETs, elite squads of investigators who were supposed to work together to crack down on white-collar crime. The results have been disappointing, to say the least. While the U.S. Justice Department has racked up more than 1,200 convictions against high-level executives and scammers in the past five years, the IMETs have managed just two-against the same person.

Canadian Business senior writer John Gray talked with Craig Hannaford and Bill Majcher - two IMET officer who recently left the force - about the problems cops face in getting their man, and what can be done about them. Both have spent their careers trying to protect investors from fraudsters. Hannaford, now a private consultant in Toronto, oversaw the investigation into the collapse of Livent Inc. Majcher is best known for his work in the Bermuda Short sting, a joint RCMP-FBI undercover operation that nabbed corrupt Canadian lawyers Martin Chambers and Simon Rosenfeld in 2002, Majcher is now managing director at the Baron Group, a Hong Kong-based investment bank.

Their message:

When it comes to white-collar crime, it's worse than you think.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Canadian Business: How would you describe the state of Canada's justice system when it comes to dealing with white-collar crime?

Bill Majcher: The system is pretty much non-existent. You can fix something that is hemorrhaging, but if the body is already lifeless, you have to start fresh. We need politicians to admit that the system is broken from the top to the bottom. Canadians have to understand that we have a two-tiered justice system, where people with money can play the system. Show one a person who has gotten any sort of satisfaction from going to the authorities after being victimized by a white-collar fraud...who got their money back in a timely fashion and didn't go through a lot of grief. I can't think of a single person like that.

Craig Hannaford: This is not a quick fix. File delays in these cases are just terrible. There is no reason why it should take 10 years to get a resolution in the Bre-X case. Can someone please tell me why Livent has dragged on for so long? Charges in that case were laid in 2002. Here we are, five years later, and there is still no resolution.

Does Canada deserve its reputation as a haven for white-collar crime?

Majcher: Canada is seen as a haven for criminals. We have strong trust laws, a strong and stable banking system, strong privacy legislation and weak enforcement. But don't take my word for it. When I was undercover in the Martin Chambers case, he told me I should move my [fake] criminal operations to Canada. There is far less risk, and you don't spend time in a U.S. prison. When I asked him how much safer it was, he said it was 20 times safer. Simon Rosenfeld [a Canadian lawyer convicted of money laundering in 2005] said it was 100 times safer. Rosenfeld called Canada "la-la land."

Canada is seen as a soft touch. In a global criminal or terrorist organization, it's very useful to have a Canadian nexus. Then the whole network has the protection of the Canadian charter. If you can show that the Canadian police are involved in an international investigation, you can serve a disclosure application and the Canadian police can be compelled to disclose all the investigation information - even the information given by other law enforcement or intelligence agencies. Canada is absolutely an Achilles heel for international criminal and terrorist investigations.

That’s making it harder for Canadian police to work with investigators from other jurisdictions because they view us as a big sieve of information.

I worked with the FBI on the Bermuda Short case, and they brought charges against Jack Purdy [a Canadian stock promoter who was charged with money laundering, but later acquitted in a U.S. court]. Purdy was never charged with anything in Canada, but his lawyer demanded that the RCMP give up all its documents in that case. The court ordered us to turn over all our documents, including the FBI's operation plan on the case - which the FBI never gives out.

The FBI was livid. One FBI guy said that maybe they have to start treating Canada like a Third World country: if they need our help on a case, they will tell the RCMP to go to the U.S. embassy to read the file. You can't take notes or take it with you so the courts can't force you to disclose it later and maybe compromise other investigations.

How do you think that reputation is affecting Canada?

Majcher: I’m in the investment industry now and I see how this hurts Canada. I have talked with money managers and investors, who have told me they will not invest in Canada. One millionaire I met recently, who has extensive private holdings in Canada, says he won't invest in Canadian public companies because there is no recourse if anything goes wrong. Canadians believe this Pablum we are fed that we have a trade surplus and our economy is doing great, but it’s doing so well because the world wants our raw materials. Where is the investment in research and development, biotech, manufacturing and other things that make a diversified economy? What happens when the commodity boom starts to bust?

Money is the greatest coward in the world. There are money managers out there looking at Canada and wondering about Bre-X or Livent. They are wondering why did that Canadian bank pay US$2 - billion penalty in the Enron case to the U.S. while Canada still did nothing? They look at Conrad Black convicted in the U.S.. They wonder about Nortel.

What tools do the police lack that would help improve our track record on white-collar crime?

Majcher: One thing that would certainly help would be administrative subpoenas that would compel witnesses to talk. I think Canadians would be scandalized to learn that foreign police have more power over Canadian citizens than the RCMP in that regard. Under the Mutual Legal Assistance Treaty [MLAT], U.S. law enforcement can force Canadians to give sworn testimony in an investigation, but we don’t have that power.

Hannaford: The inability to compel witnesses to give us a sworn statement is a big problem. I served some of those orders under the MLAT and dragged people into a court reporter’s office where they were sworn-in and forced to give a deposition on a U.S. criminal investigation. I didn’t have tools like that, and it would really frost me. It’s not right. There is no comparable power in Canada for white-collar crime – there is for terrorism investigations, that’s a recent addition to the Criminal Code. We would go to an accountant or other professional that we thought had knowledge of a crime and they would say, “I won’t talk to you because I have client confidentiality.” Or we would go to a high-level executive and their in-house counsel would tell them not to talk to us because they are worried that what they told we would get out and hurt them in a civil suit.


"FOREIGN POLICE HAVE MORE POWER OVER CANADIAN CITIZENS THAN THE RCMP"



Under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, doesn’t everyone have the right to remain silent?

Hannaford: The Charter is for people who are accused of a crime, not witnesses. There is no Charter implication here.

Could you charge uncooperative witnesses with obstruction of justice?

Hannaford: No, it would he nice, but it doesn't work that way.

Majcher: This is what is so frustrating. We would go to a stock promotion that is really just an illegal share distribution and try to talk to the seed investors - the victims - and they would say, “Oh, you have to talk to my lawyer”. So we are stymied right out of the gates.

Does the fact that most fraud investigations are so complicated and involve so many documents make them harder to complete?

Hannaford: In a lot of cases, we now have disclosure paralysis. Most times a fraud case comes down to a few key documents, but you still have thousands of other documents that have to be processed. Now, that has some investigative value, but it’s primarily done so that at the end of the day we can provide an electronic copy of every bit of paper to a defence lawyer and head off a challenge that the big, bad police have suppressed evidence. A lot of the IMET budget went to build a disclosure system, an electronic major case management system that would computerize all that stuff.

How does Canada's lackluster record of obtaining white-collar crime convictions affect the morale of cops and regulators?

Hannaford: This is hard on morale. Look at the Bre-X case. The OSC worked very hard; they stuck with it for yeas and still lost. What type of reverberations do you think that has within the OSC? Are they going to want to go through that again only to achieve the same results? Maybe they’re thinking: would it be better to spend my time and resources focusing on the regulatory process? You know, levy some fines, suspend some bad guys from the industry and stay away from the big stuff?



Majcher: There is some defeatism. It's easy for investigators to lose heart. From the police point of view, we are taught and trained to gather the evidence, not question the court decisions. But as citizens and as human beings, you want to see some fulfillment and satisfaction for what you do. And when you don't see it, you become disillusioned. You can’t keep the same level of enthusiasm for a system that you know is broken and is not serving the people it is supposed to serve. It’s very disheartening. We know what the bad guys are doing, but we don’t have the tools or resources to go out and get them.

There has been a real loss of talent and experience in law enforcement in the area of conspiracies. All while-collar frauds are essentially a conspiracy, and conspiracy laws and investigations are unique animals. A lot of good people have retired or left the force, and they have not been replaced. And it's hard to recruit the hunters we need in this business. If you are a bright young guy, a job in Canadian securities market enforcement is great for you ... if you have masochistic tendencies.

Does that reputation make it harder to convince witnesses to co-operate with police in their investigations?

Majcher: People in the market are losing confidence. I talk with people involved in corporate compliance with major financial firms. If they find a major fraud they are reluctant to go to the police. They know its going to take years, they will have to keep documents on file and there isn't even a strong probability that it will go to trial.

A few years ago, I met Eliot Spitzer [then New York Stale attorney general and crusading antifraud prosecutor]. I walked right up to him, shook his hand and told him it was a pleasure to meet Canada s top securities regulator. Just ask people on Bay Street who they are afraid of. It's not the cops, it’s not the OSC. It's the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission because they have real teeth.

Conrad Black faces up to 35 years in prison for his conviction in the U.S. Those kinds of sentences are unheard of in Canada. What effect does that have on Canada's ability to crack down on white-collar crime?

Majcher: Sentences for white-collar crime in Canada are a joke. A non-violent fraudster is going to get a sentence of three or four years ... maybe. Even then, under our system he will usually serve only one-sixth of that sentence. That means he will serve five or six months in a minimum-security Canadian prison that doesn't even have bars. Look at Michael Milton (the only man convicted of fraud by IMET). He was sent to jail this year and could he paroled as early as next year. The guy has 105 criminal convictions. What do you think the chances are that he will be going for 106? The sentences handed down in the U.S. have the power to motivate people to co-operate. If you come clean early, show some remorse and provide evidence, it will go a long way to reduce your sentence.

Canadians, by and large, are not calling for tougher jail sentences, they are not calling for the government to build more prisons. Canadians and the political establishment have accepted that we have these levels of crime, and we seem to be prepared to let it go higher because we are not taking the steps to combat it. There is an acceptance level that is ingrained in the Canadian psyche now.

Hannaford: Getting a criminal conviction still sends a message. The police used to have a saying: "The worst thing we could do to some of these fraudsters is give then a criminal record so they can't cross the border and go down to Florida and enjoy their luxury condos."



"WE KNOW WHAT THE BAD GUYS ARE DOING, BUT DON'T HAVE THE TOOLS TO GO GET THEM"




Why do you think that IMET had such disappointing results?

Hannaford: The IMET model still holds promise, but the police are products of the law. We can only do what the law allows and can only use the tools that we are given. If we had the right tools, then it would be easier to get the job done. The police don't have power over the courts, and they can only do what the law allows them to do. There were some bureaucratic difficulties with IMET. We tried to hire people with some street knowledge of the financial industry but were hampered by our stalling and classification issues.

Majcher: The IMET concept is sound. But even in IMET it became form over substance. We wanted to hire a lawyer to consult with us on a proactive investigation and were told to put the contract out to tender. Can you imagine, putting out a tender to work on a secret investigation. Some fault lies on the shoulders of the people like us in the RCMP, but a big part of it was issues that were outside our control, such as the law and prosecutions. The RCMP can do a million-dollar investigation, but if you get a 10¢ prosecution, what kind of result are you going to get?

The first search warrant that we did was on a company that said it found oil, but it took them 25 press releases to say they actually found salt water. The company went to court to get the warrant tossed and our exhibits back. We notify the lawyers at the Department of Justice a month before the hearing. The day before the court case, they send an environmental lawyer to argue the case. He was a good guy, but he practises environmental law. He doesn't know anything about securities, and he's going up against a top-notch securities lawyer. Of course, the judge tossed the warrant. We ended up doing a search warrant on ourselves to get our exhibits back.

There has been a big push by the federal government to form a national securities regulator. Do you think that will solve the problem?

Majcher: A national securities regulator would be a nice first step, but no one should fool themselves into thinking that will solve all our problems. What a national regulator will do is bring a more streamlined system where there are some more enforcement synergies. It will also help our image for foreign investors, but the underlying issue will still exist. There is no effective deterrence because there is no punishment that fits these crimes, and we just don't have the mechanisms to bring people to justice in a timely and efficient manner.

Hannaford: A national securities regulator is not going to solve this. There are serious structural problems throughout the system. You can't just throw money or bodies at this problem and expect it to go away. I'm not particularly hopeful. We don't seem to have the political will. Politicians get up and say we can solve this with a national securities commission, but the problems are not going to go away. We have the same issues with the courts, the same issues with disclosure, the same issues with sentences and parole. If you don't deal with all of those problems from beginning to end, we will wind up in the same spot-with a national securities regulator that everyone is angry with because it can't seem to do the job. With a national securities regulator, we are still playing the same game, just the teams have changed.
Canadian Business Magazine

(advocate comment, well done CB mag. A great example of a national media willing to do more than puff journalism. Please keep it up until Canadians are protected from financial fraud and abuse. You may well be the only one on the job)
admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 2854
Joined: Fri May 06, 2005 9:05 am
Location: Canada

Postby admin » Mon Sep 24, 2007 3:23 pm

I do not agree with Doug Hyndman's blast of the police for ebing lax on white collar crime. He is finger pointing, and he is trying to lay blame elsewhere. His Securities commission is evidenced to have as large a role as any player in deflecting and deferring how canadians are protected. The securities commissions have for years delegated enforcement of the securities act of each province down to "self regulatory" agencies, which it turns out are little more than trade and lobby groups posing as rent-a-cops for their various members.

More on that later, but for now, see the next post which does a good job of explaining the shortcomings in the RCMP IMET program that has cost Canadians over $100 mil and found only one man so far. Not a pretty sight.
admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 2854
Joined: Fri May 06, 2005 9:05 am
Location: Canada

Postby admin » Thu Sep 20, 2007 7:37 pm

Thursday » September
20 » 2007
B.C. Securities chair blasts RCMP's white-collar
offensive
Wednesday, September 19, 2007
The RCMP offensive designed to combat white-collar crime in Canada has "achieved
almost nothing," the chairman of the British Columbia Securities Commission said
today.
In a speech aimed at critics of Canadian securities enforcement, Doug Hyndman
dismissed claims that the country's 13 securities regulators are to blame for a lack
of white-collar criminal convictions in this country.
Rather, the justice system doesn't take these crimes seriously, something that a
much-talked-about national regulator would not change, he told the Economic Club
of Toronto.
And there have been almost no tangible results from a $100-million Federal
government investment in the Mountie's Integrated Market Enforcement Teams
(IMET), Mr. Hyndman said.
"The major problem we face is that Canada relies too heavily on regulatory
enforcement to deal with serious fraud," he said. "We need to mobilize our criminal
justice system to attack securities fraud.
"Although the commitment [to IMET's] was welcome, the results have been
disappointing. Despite spending about $100-million on this program, the federal
government has achieved almost nothing...Our focus should be on changing the
dynamics in the criminal justice system, not on blaming provincial regulation."
Mr. Hyndman argued that critics often fail to understand regulators don't have the
authority to send people to jail, something he called "the job of police, prosecutors
and courts."
Because the police lack expertise in white-collar crime, Canada might benefit from a
"civilian agency," similar to the FBI, that could specialize in investigating complex
crimes, he added.
Regulators are mainly restricted to imposing financial sanctions although they can
charge people with securities act violations, which allow for relatively short jail
terms. Former Bre-X Minerals Ltd. geologist John Felderhof was facing that prospect
before the was acquitted of insider trading this summer.
When it comes to punishing securities law violations with financial penalties and
other sanctions available to regulators, Canadian watchdogs have done a
"comparable" job to that of the United States Securities & Exchange Commission,
Mr. Hyndman said.
Meanwhile, the BCSC chairman argued in favour of the passport system being
adopted across the country, except in Ontario, which is calling for a single national
regulator.
The new model, which allows companies to register with only their provincial
regulator rather than all 13 jurisdictions, is a step in the right direction, Mr.
Hyndman said, warning that single-regulator proponents have embarked on a
campaign of misinformation.
Peter Brieger
CanWest News Service

http://www.canada.com/components/print. ... 778ac686ee 9/20/2007
Specifically, Mr. Hyndman disputed claims that Canada is the only major G7 country
without a single securities regulator.
Also, he noted that industry players often complain that the pace of securities
reform is too fast, not too slow, as critics suggest.
Mr. Hyndman challenged claims that the provincial regulatory system puts Canada
at a competitive disadvantage, warning that no one really knows how the single
regulator system would work.
"We often hear that foreigners think Canadian securities regulation is weak and
ineffective," he said. "Why do you suppose that is so? Maybe it has something to do
with Canadians running off to New York and London to criticize our system, spinning
the same misinformation abroad that they do at home.
"It's fine to propose and argue for structural or other changes to make our system
better... But it's irresponsible to promote an alternative by using misinformation to
denigrate our regulatory system."
Financial Post

http://www.canada.com/components/print. ... 778ac686ee 9/20/2007
admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 2854
Joined: Fri May 06, 2005 9:05 am
Location: Canada

Doug Hyndman for six figure salary, or for Canadians?

Postby admin » Thu Sep 20, 2007 7:34 pm

Doug Hyndman Cannot Shift Blame for Canada's Broken
White Collar Crime Enforcement onto the RCMP IMET Police
The National Post, Toronto Star and www.Advisor.ca published the attached articles on the attached speech made by Doug Hyndman, Chairman of the B.C. Securities Commission, to the Economics Club of Toronto on September 19, 2007.
Doug Hyndman is simply blowing smoke when he says the Canadian securities regulators cannot be blamed for Canadian white collar securities fraudsters not be prosecuted and sent to jail.

He wants us to believe that Canada's malfunctioning white collar securities crime enforcement is the fault of the Canadian RCMP IMET and other police forces.

This is not so on two counts:
(a) the provincial securities regulators have the authority to lay quasi criminal charges and seek court approval for jail sentences to be applied for violations of provincial securities laws; and,

(b) the provincial securities commissions are directly integrated with the RCMP Integrated Market Enforcement Teams and the Joint Securities Intelligence Unit. The RCMP IMET does not have direct intake of criminal securities complaints from the investing public, taking referrals for criminal securities investigations only from their participating agencies, the investment industry SRO's (IDA, MFDA, MRS) and the provincial securities commissions.
On point (a):
the Ontario and B.C Securities Acts clearly state securities commission powers to seek court approvals for jail sentences.:
Ontario Securities Act:

122. (1) Every person or company that,
(a) makes a statement in any material, evidence or information submitted to the Commission, a Director, any person acting under the authority of the Commission or the Executive Director or any person appointed to make an investigation or examination under this Act that, in a material respect and at the time and in the light of the circumstances under which it is made, is misleading or untrue or does not state a fact that is required to be stated or that is necessary to make the statement not misleading;

(b) makes a statement in any application, release, report, preliminary prospectus, prospectus, return, financial statement, information circular, take-over bid circular, issuer bid circular or other document required to be filed or furnished under Ontario securities law that, in a material respect and at the time and in the light of the circumstances under which it is made, is misleading or untrue or does not state a fact that is required to be stated or that is necessary to make the statement not misleading; or

(c) contravenes Ontario securities law,

is guilty of an offence and on conviction is liable to a fine of not more than $5 million or to imprisonment for a term of not more than five years less a day, or to both.

British Columbia Securities Act:
155 (1) A person who does any of the following commits an offence:



(a) fails to file, provide, deliver or send a record that

(i) is required to be filed, provided, delivered or sent under this Act or the regulations, or

(ii) is required to be filed, provided, delivered or sent under this Act or the regulations within the time required under this Act or the regulations;

(b) contravenes any of section 29 (6), 34, 39 (6), 49 to 57, 57.1, 58, 59, 61, 70 (1), 85 (b), 86 to 87.1, 100 to 112, 121, 122, 124, 125, 127, 128, 143 (7), 148, 153 (3) or 168.1 (1) of this Act;



(c) fails to comply with a decision made under this Act;



(d) contravenes any of the provisions of the regulations that are specified by regulation for the purpose of this paragraph;



(e) contravenes any of the provisions of the commission rules that are specified by regulation for the purpose of this paragraph.


(2) A person that commits an offence under this Act is liable to a fine of not more than $3 million, or to imprisonment for not more than 3 years, or both.

On point (b):

of the Provincial Securities Commissions being directly integrated and controlling the RCMP IMET and Joint Intelligence Units:


§ All the provincial securities commissions are participating partners with the Royal Canadian Mounted Police Integrated Market Enforcement Teams Unit (RCMP IMET), which is a division of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police.




This is a picture of the RCMP Integrated Market Enforcement Team (IMET) reception area in Toronto. Notice the OSC, MFDA, IDA, MRS logos in the window. RCMP IMET has stated that they will not accept criminal complaints directly from the public, only from private industry SROs, or the provincial securities commissions.


§ May 18, 2005: Senate Committee on Banking, Trade and Commerce testimony from RCMP Chief Supt. German said: "The commissioner has been personally involved with the IMET initiative from the beginning. Once we knew that the federal government was interested in pursuing this initiative, he was prepared to risk manage the setup of the program, which is what we did. …The securities commissions are not only cooperating; they have seconded people to be on our IMET teams. In fact, the Ontario Securities Commission was the first place we went when we put the IMET strategy together, and they embraced it. "



§ June 13, 2003: David Brown, Chairman of the OSC at the time, said in his speech to National Press Club, "I'm very pleased with the details of the program announced just last week by Justice Minister Martin Cauchon, to strengthen enforcement action and legislation against serious capital market fraud. The Government of Canada will spend up to $120 million over the next five years to create nine investigative units strategically located across the country… I am pleased at the collaboration that is already well established between OSC enforcement staff, federal officials and the RCMP - this partnership will now only grow."



§ The RCMP Website http://www.rcmp-grc.gc.ca/fio/imets-faq_e.htm says: "Due to the IMET program’s very focused and dedicated investigative resources, there is not one specific office where the public can file complaints/request investigations. Instead, those complaints that are more demanding of a team approach to any subsequent investigation are referred to the IMET's for consideration by key stakeholder agencies."



§ May 9, 2005: Letter from Craig Hannaford, RCMP IMET says: "Unless the matters you are concerned about are referred to the RCMP IMET through one of our participating agencies (OSC, IDA, MFDA, MRS) it will not be considered for investigation."



§ Monday, April 16, 2007: Former RCMP Commissioner Guiliano Zaccardelli gave the following sworn testimony to the House of Commons Public Accounts Committee in response to a question from MP Judy Sgro on whether he knew David Brown: "I have met him. I know him by his reputation as Chairman of the OSC. We handled a lot of crime investigation files, where we worked with the OSC. I do not recall whether we personally sat down to discuss these files, although we may have."



§ The RCMP, OSC, Market Regulation Services Inc. and the former Investment Dealers Association also have an alliance in the Joint Securities Intelligence Units (JSIU's) that were created in 2001. RCMP Website "http://www.rcmp-grc.gc.ca/fio/accountability_e.htm - Intelligence" says: "The Integrated Market Enforcement Teams contribute to the securities enforcement community through Joint Intelligence Units (JIUs). We are another spoke in the intelligence wheel comprised of the Investment Dealers `Association of Canada (IDA), the various provincial securities commissions and the Market Regulation Services Inc. (RS). "



§ November 1, 2004: From David Brown's Speech - Dialogue with the OSC, "Four years ago, the OSC took a big step forward. We decided to get ahead of fraud, rather than simply clean up the mess afterwards. We set up an intelligence unit. And we entered into a strategic alliance with the RCMP, putting together a Joint Securities Fraud Unit. The Unit's mandate? To detect and disrupt criminal activity in the capital markets. The Unit targets criminal activity, especially organized crime activity in the stock market. And it works cooperatively with the securities industry. Working together, we can connect the dots."



§ September 25, 2006: David Wilson, the current OSC Chairman, said in his speech to the Joint Securities Intelligence Unit Conference, "The OSC’s partners in the JSIU are represented here on stage with me by RCMP Commissioner Guiliano Zaccardelli and Investment Dealers Association President Joe Oliver."



The heads of the partner organizations in the Joint Securities Intelligence Unit, (from left) former RCMP Commissioner Giuliano Zaccardelli, OSC Chair David Wilson (ex-Scotiabank) and former Investment Dealers Association President Joe Oliver.

§ Two men in Canada have excessive control on what white collar securities crime investigations are done, who is charged and how the system works - the Chairman of the OSC and the Commissioner of the RCMP.



(i) The current Chairman of the OSC, David Wilson, supervises both the OSC's investigations and adjudications. The dual role of the OSC Chair position is considered to be the cause of the malfunctioning of the OSC in the 2004 Osborne Report.


(ii) David Wilson is also Chairman of the Canadian Securities Administrators Policy Coordination Committee, the Canadian Public Accountability Board Council of Governors and the Federal-Provincial Justice Ministers Securities Enforcement Working Group





How do we fix the mess in white collar crime enforcement:

(1) The RCMP IMET Unit must have its own system for intake of criminal securities complaints from the public and internal whistleblowers, where the intake process is integrated with the provincial and municipal police forces, acting as equal partners. The investment industry SRO's and the provincial securities commissions must be removed as the only sources for referral of securities criminal cases to the RCMP.

(2) the RCMP IMET must conduct its securities criminal investigations and prosecutions independently of the investment industry SRO's and the provincial securities commissions, collaborating only with international police agencies, and the provincial and municipal police forces of Canada.

(3) Both Federal and Provincial Governments need to ensure there is adequate budgets and expert resourcing for the RCMP IMET and the collaborating provincial and municipal police white collar crime units, who need to be brought in as full partners with the RCMP. There needs to be a new Pan Canadian White Collar Crime Police Committee comprising senior police representatives to manage the protocols for distributing the securities criminal complaint intake and investigations to the various participating police forces across Canada.

(4) Stop the provincial securities commission chairmen and their political bosses from presenting false information to the general public about their role in white collar crime policing.

(5) Proper civilian oversight put in place over the RCMP. David Brown, former OSC Chairman and current Chairman of the RCMP Restructuring Committee, says in his June 15, 2007 RCMP investigative report:

7.3.3 The Need for Oversight:

The management function of this complex enterprise clearly could have benefited from the oversight of a body performing the functions of a board of directors." It is highly unlikely this proposed Board of Directors would be a civilian oversight agency with sound statutory tools and resources to do its job. Brown's Board of Directors will not look like any of Canada's municipal and provincial police civilian oversight agencies, but be like the provincial securities commissions stacked with corporate lawyers, executives and other friends of the financial industry.

(6) The whole investment industry self regulatory and provincial securities commission enforcement system is totally lacking in civilian oversight and accountability to the public too. There is no evidence that the investment industry SRO's (IDA,MFDA,MRS) and provincial securities commissions have any right to shift the blame for Canada's malfunctioning white collar crime enforcement system onto the RCMP and the other white collar fraud police units in Canada.



Everyone involved needs to face the truth about the rampant white collar crime in Canada and that every level of investor protection enforcement and white collar crime policing is malfunctioning. If you wish additional information, please do not hesitate to call me.


Diane Urquhart
Independent Consulting Analyst
Mississauga, Ontario

E-mail: urquhart@rogers.com
admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 2854
Joined: Fri May 06, 2005 9:05 am
Location: Canada

Postby admin » Tue Sep 11, 2007 4:00 pm

Canada lax on fraudsters, Teachers CEO says
LORI MCLEOD

Globe and Mail Update

Tuesday, September 11, 2007 at 12:17 PM EDT

TORONTO — Canada is failing everyday investors through a lack of enforcement against white collar crime, says Claude Lamoureux, chief executive officer of Ontario Teachers Pension Plan.

Speaking at a financial reporting conference Tuesday, Mr. Lamoureux, who will retire from his position at Teachers in December, said the country has a poor track record of bringing corporate fraudsters to justice.

“Legislators are blind to the issue because it is a crime that doesn't leave any blood, just the widows and orphans,” Mr. Lamoureux said in response to a question asked following his speech at a conference hosted by the Canadian Institute of Chartered Accountants.

Since it was launched four years ago, for example, the RCMP's capital markets fraud investigation team has managed just two convictions, both against career fraud artist Michael Mitton.

Meanwhile, the enforcement team's investigations into high-profile cases such as Royal Group Technologies Ltd., Nortel Networks Corp. and Portus Alternative Asset Mangement Inc. have failed to yield any convictions.

This compares with well over 1,000 convictions by the U.S. Fraud Task Force in the past five years, including those of former media baron Conrad Black of obstruction of justice and mail fraud in July.

“Politicians announce these things to great fanfare. The unfortunate thing is that there's no follow up,” Mr. Lamoureux said in an interview after his speech.

Many Canadian politicians are simply “out of their league” when they come up against complicated white-collar crimes, he added.

Teachers sued Nortel over its financial disclosure in U.S. civil court, one of two cases which resulted in a total settlement of $2.45-billion (U.S.) for investors last year. Nortel did not admit any wrongdoing when it made the settlement. It's ironic the Canadian pension plan had to go to the U.S. to get justice for Canadian shareholders, Mr. Lamoureux said.

“We've become essentially a country, a province, of health care and education. Mainly health care, because older people vote. That's the focus and the rest is irrelevant,” he said.

Mr. Lamoureux, who has been in the financial services industry for more than 40 years, will retire from Teachers Dec. 1.

He will continue to work with the Canadian Coalition for Good Governance, an organization he founded with Montreal-based money manager Stephen Jarislowsky in 2002. The group represents Canadian institutional investors, and pushes for positive change at public companies.

“What we now want to create is an advisory group of former CEOs and people who have been on boards and who have a lot of experience, and can help the coalition,” Mr. Lamoureux said. The coalition is also working with institutional investors around the world regarding improving global governance practices.

After taking a break from December to March, Mr. Lamoureux said he will resume his efforts to improve corporate governance in Canada. He has been “talking to lots of people,” about future projects, and his endeavours could include joining the boards of directors of some Canadian companies.
admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 2854
Joined: Fri May 06, 2005 9:05 am
Location: Canada

Postby admin » Mon Jul 09, 2007 12:56 pm

Fixing the RCMP -- lessons from Nortel

Can the new man at the top fix the dysfunctional force?
Without experience, it seems highly unlikely.

James Bagnall
The Ottawa Citizen


Saturday, July 07, 2007


Prime Minister Stephen Harper clearly has a lot of faith in William Elliott, his new commissioner of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police.

But does one person -- especially an outsider with no experience at the RCMP -- really have what it takes to quickly reform a "horribly broken" organization?

As it happens, there is a private-sector outfit with a huge Ottawa presence that offers clear insight into the situation facing Elliott. Three years ago, Nortel Networks -- which is only slightly bigger than the RCMP in terms of employees -- sacked 10 of its most senior executives for cooking the company's books.

That move proved just the beginning of a tortuous process to restore the company's good name. For 18 months, Nortel was run on an interim basis by Bill Owens, a board member with limited history in the telecommunications equipment business -- the company's primary focus.

Owens spent most of his tenure getting up to speed on Nortel's dozens of business units and myriad technologies. He then made investment decisions that had to be reversed because they made little sense economically.

Most notable of these business blunders was his move to supply an India-based wireless contract at a huge loss.

Elliott, the RCMP's top gun, has a similar lack of experience in his new field. Trained as a lawyer, Elliott has spent decades in senior civil jobs in the departments of Transport, Coast Guard, Security and Intelligence and Public Safety.

Elliott obviously knows his way around the public service. But will this background be sufficient to swiftly tackle a dysfunctional RCMP organization with 26,000 employees?

It seems unlikely. Consider the challenge faced by Bill Owens' successor as CEO at Nortel -- Mike Zafirovski. A former senior executive at Motorola, one of high-tech's more storied franchises, Zafirovski is a supremely talented workaholic with a rock-solid reputation for getting things done.

Not only that, his stint at Motorola gave him plenty of exposure to Nortel's key technologies. In the 20 months since his hiring as CEO, Zafirovski has replaced more than half the company's senior executives, closed or sold off a couple of unprofitable business units, resolved a major class-action lawsuit and finally put Nortel on a (barely) profitable footing.

Nevertheless, Zafirovski has readily acknowledged this turnaround is more difficult than he expected. There were times, he told the Wall Street Journal, when he was forced to make too many decisions, too quickly. Doubt would creep in. Was he really doing the right thing, he would ask himself. Occasionally, the sheer physical pace took its toll in the form of near-exhaustion.

Now, after thousands of hours devoted to reviving Nortel's fortunes, Zafirovski knows the job isn't nearly complete. He is thinking in terms of years, not months.

In fact, the hard part lies ahead of him. It's one thing to address the obvious shortcomings of a prior regime, it's quite another to create a new culture strong enough to take hold at every level of the organization.

It's no secret that Zafirovski has been frustrated by the relatively bureaucratic pace of decision-making within Nortel's middle ranks. Investors, too, seem disappointed by the company's progress to date. Since Zafirovski's appointment as CEO, Nortel's share price has declined 30 per cent compared with a 30-per-cent increase over the same period for the main index on the TSX stock exchange.

To understand why Zafirovski is still confident about Nortel's future, you have to consult his bible, Good to Great, by management guru Jim Collins.

The essential message in Collins' writing is that executives who want to create a truly great organization -- whether in business or government -- must start by hiring a top-notch team. Only then should they figure out what the game plan should be.

"If you have the right people," Collins writes, "the problem of how to motivate and manage people largely goes away. They will be self-motivated."

Zafirovski, accordingly, has surrounded himself with people who do not merely parrot his views. Most of his new executives were successful in their own right. Some required considerable persuasion to join him in a very risky enterprise to try to transform a broken Canadian icon into a winner again.

Zafirovski's willingness to encourage dissent at the top contrasts sharply with the practice of former RCMP commissioner Giuliano Zaccardelli. David Brown, the special investigator who last month reported on the RCMP's leadership crisis, described Zaccardelli's style as showing "little regard or apparent respect for those with whom he was dealing."

Indeed, RCMP employees who tried to alert Zaccardelli to serious irregularities in the management of the agency's pension plan were dismissed or demoted for their bravery.

Elliott can move quickly to set a different tone at the top. But he will need lots of help from the managers who report to him. The case of Nortel suggests that in any organization this large -- and this traumatized by autocratic personalities -- it will take many years before a culture sets in where doing the right thing, the risky thing, comes naturally.

jbagnall@thecitizen.canwest.com

© The Ottawa Citizen 2007
admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 2854
Joined: Fri May 06, 2005 9:05 am
Location: Canada

Postby admin » Sat Jun 16, 2007 10:00 pm

RCMP 'horribly broken': report
PENSION FUND FALLOUT

Meagan Fitzpatrick
CanWest News Service


Saturday, June 16, 2007


OTTAWA - Former RCMP commissioner Giuliano Zaccardelli was an "autocratic" leader who set a tone that showed little respect for his employees, discouraged them from challenging authority and exacerbated what should have been a minor problem, according to a report on the RCMP that recommends an "urgent review" of the organization.

Lawyer David Brown, appointed by the government two months ago to investigate the RCMP's pension fund scandal, said yesterday that the culture and management structure at the RCMP is "horribly broken," and he recommended that a task force overhaul it by Dec. 14 of this year.

"This is of the utmost urgency and importance," he said at a news conference to discuss his report. "Unless these issues are dealt with conclusively, we risk the erosion of public confidence in the RCMP. We also risk further destroying the confidence of rank-and-file members in their own leadership."

Mr. Brown yesterday described the former top Mountie as "completely unapproachable to all but the brave or foolhardy."

The task force should consist of RCMP members, senior public servants and private-sector experts in policing and corporate governance, and whatever it recommends should be implemented, Mr. Brown said.

The investigator, who emphasized that he had full co-operation from all parties during his probe, said a public inquiry into the pension fund fiasco is not required, as called for by some opposition MPs. Mr. Brown insisted an inquiry would uncover "nothing new of value" and would only waste time and money that should be spent getting the RCMP back on track.

Mr. Brown's investigation was initiated in April after a group of senior RCMP officers and an employee stunned MPs on a parliamentary committee with allegations that senior management, including Mr. Zaccardelli, tried to cover up the mismanagement of the force's pension and insurance plans.

Some witnesses testified they had tried to raise concerns with their superiors and were punished, while others reported the RCMP's own investigations into the matter were delayed, meddled with and stopped.

The RCMP had launched an internal audit in 2003 when it emerged there was a possible misuse of funds. That audit led to an Ottawa police criminal investigation in 2004, which found no criminal wrongdoing, but prompted Auditor-General Sheila Fraser to take a look at the matter.

It was her report, published in November, that the House of Commons public accounts committee was studying when it heard the explosive testimony.

In his report, Mr. Brown concluded whistle-blowers were punished for trying to right wrongs, while those responsible for the problems were not.

"Each of the individuals who exposed these problems faced career damage over the period in question while those responsible for mismanagement were allowed soft landings," Mr. Brown told reporters. The whistle-blowers should be recognized publicly, be given notations of commendation in their files and resume their careers without penalty, he recommended.

He then criticized Mr. Zaccardelli, saying the former commissioner's leadership style allowed what should have been a "simple bump in the road" -- the problems with the pension fund -- to turn into a "debacle."

"Commissioner Zaccardelli expressed himself in ways that showed little regard or apparent respect for those with whom he was dealing. He allowed a culture to exist, and grow, that displeasing the commissioner was career-limiting. He reinforced that culture by reminding people often, 'I am the commissioner,' " Mr. Brown said.

Mr. Zaccardelli, who resigned in December because of an unrelated controversy to do with his handling of the Maher Arar affair, enjoyed the status and privileges of his job and did not discourage his senior managers from employing a similar leadership style, Mr. Brown concluded.

The former commissioner exercised "absolute power" and there was no one to oversee his management style and call it into question, the report said.

In addition to Mr. Zaccardelli, the investigator said Paul Gauvin, the RCMP's chief financial officer at the time, should take some accountability for the mess that was created out of the pension fund management. So far, both men have refused to accept responsibility for what took place under their watch or the impact it has had on the force, Mr. Brown wrote.

Public Safety Minister Stockwell Day, who is responsible for the RCMP, praised Mr. Brown's report as providing "guidance and advice as we take steps to restore the confidence of both the public and members of the RCMP."

---

RCMP MISSTEPS

1995 Brian Mulroney alleged to be part of a scheme involving secret commissions and kickbacks in deals for the purchase of airplanes and helicopters during his time as prime minister. The RCMP dropped charges eight years later, citing lack of evidence. Mr. Mulroney settles for $2-million in legal costs.

1999: In the front of a news crew, members of the RCMP raid home of B.C. premier Glen Clark on the suspicion he took free home renovations in turn for influencing a casino licence. Mr. Clark resigns. Charges are dropped.

2005 RCMP raids family business office of Ontario minister of finance Greg Sorbara, hoping to find evidence of conflict of interest. Mr. Sorbara resigns and later returns to office after suspicion is lifted. Federal finance minister Ralph Goodale is investigated as a result of a leak that concerned income trusts that came from his office. Charges are dropped.

2006 RCMP Commissioner Giuliano Zaccardelli apologizes to Maher Arar and his family during a Commons committee. A Syrian-Canadian, Mr. Arar was deported from the U.S. based on erroneous reports from the RCMP and tortured in Syrian custody.

© National Post 2007
admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 2854
Joined: Fri May 06, 2005 9:05 am
Location: Canada

http://www.rcmpwatch.com/

Postby admin » Wed Jun 13, 2007 12:43 am

http://www.rcmpwatch.com/

site for RCMP news, followings
admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 2854
Joined: Fri May 06, 2005 9:05 am
Location: Canada

Postby admin » Tue Jun 12, 2007 7:02 pm

Restoring the Mounties' good name

Edmonton Sun - Alberta, Canada
By LORRIE GOLDSTEIN

Watching what is happening to the RCMP is like watching an old friend die the death of a thousand cuts.
A pension scandal.

A nepotism scandal.

The Maher Arar scandal.

The RCMP's role in the sponsorship scandal.

Failures in the 1985 Air India bombing.

Allegations of corruption, cover up, improper spending.

And last week, as reported by Sun Media's Kathleen Harris, a discipline scandal -- officers receiving light reprimands and a few days of docked pay for serious offences.

Every large organization, indeed every large policing organization, has to deal with corruption, mismanagement and incompetence by some.

This does not mean the organization itself is corrupt.

But when, as is the case with the RCMP, the controversies often include the role played by senior management, questions arise about the culture of the institution.

Given the water torture of allegation after allegation, one is tempted to say the force should be put out of its misery. But that would be a disservice to the 23,400 men and women who work for the RCMP, the vast majority of whom deserve our respect and have helped to make the RCMP an iconic symbol of Canada.

Founded in 1873, the RCMP is not only our national police force, it is the face of policing in towns and regions across Canada without their own municipal or provincial forces.

From the beginning, its officers have laid down their lives to keep their fellow Canadians safe. They continue to do so today.

There is no magic bullet to restore the RCMP's lustre. But for that to be accomplished, two things must happen.

Ottawa needs to name a new, no-nonsense commissioner quickly and give him or her a mandate to clean house. And there must be a public inquiry so Canadians will know all the dirty laundry has been aired.

It will be difficult. But we owe it to the majority of Mounties who do their job the way it should be done. And because the RCMP is such an intrinsic part of who we are as a nation, we owe it to ourselves.
admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 2854
Joined: Fri May 06, 2005 9:05 am
Location: Canada

Postby admin » Sat Jun 09, 2007 9:08 pm

And people have yet to focus on malfeasance surrounding what the RCMP has NOT done what it should do - some of them are even more serious in their implications....especially in white-collar crime (including elder abuse/financial euthanasia), money laundering, the drug and weapons trade....guess who will be right in the middle of the worst of these abuses when they come into focus --- think "upcoming election" guys! See a sample below the RCMP story.....


New scandals face RCMP

Chris Wattie/Reuters
Giuliano Zaccardelli, former RCMP chief.



RCMP activities
2007 — Justice John Major looks into RCMP actions prior to the 1985 Air India bombing that killed 329 people.

2004 — Justice Dennis O'Connor concludes the RCMP passed erroneous information to the U.S., labelling Maher Arar an Islamic extremist.

2004 — Justice Richard Miller investigates complaints about RCMP investigations of alleged sexual abuse at a New Brunswick youth training centre.

1998 — Retired judge Ted Hughes delves into more than 50 complaints about the handling of protests at the 1997 APEC conference in Vancouver.

1981 — McDonald Commission on RCMP wrongdoing reveals the RCMP had broken laws for two decades.

1977 — The Keable inquiry revisits police activities in Quebec following the 1970 October Crisis; 17 Mounties are charged with 44 offences.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Compiled by Star Library


It is a sad state of affairs when members and former members of our national police force must fear retribution for stepping forward Lawyer William Gilmour
Crimes, coverup of government corruption among allegations to be detailed by lawyer for Mounties

May 29, 2007
Tonda MacCharles
Ottawa Bureau

OTTAWA–The RCMP is about to be struck with a new wave of allegations of wrongdoing, including a cover-up of government corruption and criminal acts by senior members of the national police force.

The Star has learned that at least six, and as many as 12 current and former Mounties, are anxious to come forward with allegations against the force never before made public.

They want to be subpoenaed by a House of Commons committee to give them some legal and job protection and if called will testify about:

"Subversion of an investigation into corruption and nepotism" in purchasing and contracting practices, and "the falsification of signatures to pay out money, on the part of government officials" in the New Brunswick government.
Allegations that superior officers committed criminal acts against other RCMP members, including electronic surveillance and alteration of documents "to achieve improper goals"
Misuse and misdirection of public policing funds to finance the vendettas of managers against targeted members
The deliberate cover-up of evidence against former RCMP officer Staff Sgt. Clifford McCann and others implicated in the abuse of young boys at the now-defunct Kingsclear Youth Training Centre in New Brunswick. This is also the subject of an investigation by the RCMP's civilian complaints body that has been dragging on for nearly two years.
Interference by superior officers in the political campaigns of RCMP members who sought election to government, including "spying on constituency meetings."
Harassment of RCMP members based on their sexual orientation.
Regular use of punitive transfers by RCMP management.
Psychological "warfare" by certain superior officers against lower ranking members.
The allegations are contained in a letter from Toronto lawyer William Gilmour, himself a former Mountie, to an unnamed Conservative MP. The Star obtained a copy of the letter.

It comes at a time when the RCMP is already in turmoil. It has been without a permanent commissioner since Giuliano Zaccardelli resigned last December after he gave conflicting testimony to a Commons committee over the story of Maher Arar, who was deported to Syria and tortured there.

And the Commons public accounts committee has been holding hearings since Feb. 21 into allegations that money in the RCMP pension fund was misused. Stockwell Day, minister in charge of the RCMP, last month named lawyer David Browne to investigate the pension abuses.

The force is also under scrutiny in two other judge-led inquiries: the Air India probe by John Major, and Frank Iacobucci's review of the cases of three Muslim Canadians who ended up tortured in Syrian or Egyptian jails.

The new round of would-be whistle-blowers includes Mounties whose concerns have never been made public before. All are or were regular uniformed members, including two commissioned officers (of inspector rank or higher).

"My clients are of the view that a public inquiry is required to delve into all of the things that presently plague the morale of the men and women serving our national police service," wrote Gilmour, who described the force's internal complaints system in an interview as "broken. It doesn't work."

While most of them do not yet want to be identified, the Star has learned that one of them seeking to bring forward new evidence is Const. Peter Merrifield of the RCMP's Toronto North detachment.

Merrifield's predicament drew brief public attention after his unsuccessful bid to run for the federal Conservative nomination in Barrie in 2004 cost him a plum counter-terrorism job as part of the elite threat-assessment unit.

He now works in the force's customs unit. He is a supporter of a move within the RCMP to unionize rank-and-file members.

He was unwilling to speak to a reporter about the problems he's witnessed, citing the RCMP Act and the force's ability to press internal Code of Conduct charges against members who speak out. But he is willing to volunteer testimony if summoned.

So far Day has resisted calls to broaden the inquiry, saying Prime Minister Stephen Harper intends to name a new RCMP commissioner in June, and the government awaits recommendations on RCMP pension abuses on June 15.

==============

Sent this to PM, Toews, Day, Flaherty - heard from Toew's assistant they are looking into it - right :-) I asked the feds to step in because of the blatant conflict of interest on the part of the AL AG - staying cases is routine - but when they are against agencies of your own government; when you just approved a QC for the new ASC Chair; and when the ASC and the Chair have been justifiably under the gun --- this is too much.

The fact that the Feds won't step in or have another jurisdiction become involved is troubling as well, no?

Jason is off to get a Mareva injunction and to see the Yanks - sad. But the guy who ran Northside - Jimmie Sikora - is back in business. I have the URLs and other info on him. He is in Columbia, but has a storefront in Vegas and in Thunder Bay. His stock (Tao Minerals) is trading on line - classic pump and dump - see the bloomberg trsde info - what does it look like to you - and trading online - isn't is possibly internet fraud? The site looks expensive - like Bre-X.

The boy has ambitions - over 50 million shares issued to date, trading up to a couple of bucks I think - now nada. Sikora was in AL recently - the RCMP let him go and didn't tell the Yanks he was coming - why - when they knew he was being investigated there as he should be here - considering he was named by Ritter in his plea bargain - along with others. RevCan; IRS/US Treasury Dept/FBI all want him for tax evasion - we should want him for alleged money laundering, criminal tax evasion, fraud, and using the Bre-X template for Bandera and TAO; but the same people don't want to move on these and similar cases.

The AG out there stayed a case that should not have been stayed and an apparently personal vendetta by the head of commercial crime in Edmonton against two private citizens helped the AG stop this case from going forward. The Alberta AG covered for the Min of Fin, ASC/ASX, a former member of the Bar --- "direction to Justice to STAY Criminal Charges against the ASC/ASX and others. The matter was scheduled to be heard in Provincial Court and the complainants didn't even know about the stay till they showed up for the second hearing.

Now the RCMP and the AG are saying the complainants are not co-operating - while they refuse to get a sybpoena or IMET Special Order and get what they need from the former lawyer and ASC listing officer who would sign like canaries??? Who has the badge???

Why did the RCMP let Sikora walze right out of the country when I took the trouble to phone them to let him know he was here. If they were too busy giving out tickets, the could have told RevCan, and they would have hauled him in for a multi-million dollar chat.

And try getting info on Bre-X from the RCMP (Calgary) or Feloitte (the trustees) who proised everyone they would keep them in the loop - remmeber their special web page. Now they refuse to talk with anyone....and they have money in hand and frozen by Mareva? What's up with that?

For additional information:

Jason Cowan
Edmonton, AL
Tel. 780 486-5532
Fax. 780 487-0118



Bre-X Class Action Toll free: (800) 229-5323

Case Summary



27. The Trustee also obtained a Mareva injunction against John Felderhof, Ingrid Felderhof and their companies in the Cayman Islands.

28. A Mareva injunction restrains a person from spending any money or moving assets out of a jurisdiction without a court order.

Bre-X's Bankruptcy

29. All Bre-X shareholders are to register with Deloitte & Touche, the Trustee in Bankruptcy of Bre-X. This is important so that all shareholders receive information from Deloitte & Touche and so that Deloitte & Touche can ensure the accuracy of their catalogue of losses. Their website is: http://deloitte.bre-x.axia.com/.

============================

That being the case - why could Felderhof sit so confidently in a Toronto courtroom? Do those injunctions have a statute of limitations - why aren't his assets frozen - I understand they are international in scope? Y/N?

I ask because it may be that the same ASX listing officer handled Northside (and other) listings. The Alberta AG stayed the Northside criminal case - before it was a case...possible conflict of interest???

The new head of the under-seige ASC - despite what happened just after his appointment - was recently awarded his QC. Now we have the Alberta AG doing this - staying criminal charges aid against the ASC and others when a second information had not yet been placed before a Judge - at a scheduled hearing last week.

So we have a provincial AG staying a criminal charge laid against a provincial agency (in the same province) before a provincial Judge even has a chance to rule on whether there is cause??? The RCMP and the Crown had agreed previously not to proceed - that is why the citizens involved involked their right to file with a JP in the first place!

In law, if they prove cause through argument and evidence in open court, a Judge can rule that the matter proceed. Said Judge can also find - in whole or in part that there is not sufficient evidence against some or all of the accused and dismiss.

The Northside case required two separate informations and two hearings - a JP allowed both to go forward to hearings. The first was heard; the second was not - charges were stayed - not dismissed by a provincial Crown - or adjourned by the Judge - as alleged - but stayed by the AG (normally their right) but in this case - questionable - in the minds of many. Why not wait for a preliminary ruling before moving to stay the matter?

Interestingly, Jason had written the Judge between the two Hearings asking if there were a real or possible perception of conflict of interest in having the matter handled by a provincial Crown Attorney....if such were to be the eventual determination, i.e. that the case would proceed, the same argument (motion) might have been appropriate against the Judge.

There is some question as to whether or not a Provincial Court Judge and Crown should turn such a delicate matter over to another jurisdiction (perhaps even federal)? Nobody expected the Alberta AG to jump in so early - not only is it bad politics, it may well be questionable in law???

I requested the federal authorities review the matter - on principle - forthwith.

In the meantime, it is a concern that the stock exchanges in Canada and the US will not disclose information about the paper trail on Bre-X.

I would assume they would have some record of the original ASX listing officer. But they will not cooperate. Bre-X was listed as an exploration company - per its Prospectus. I gather that was never updated after it moved on other exchanges.

For reasons I cannot disclose, if Bre-X and Northside and (possibly other similar problematic companies) were listed by the same officer, it could have a bearing on the OSC trial against Felderhof in Toronto, and might well impact any review of the possible conflict, as well as the underlying criminal allegations in the Northside case.

This whole thing is beginning to appear quite unfortunate! Lots of attention to acts of commission, but wait til some enterprising reporter - if there are any - turns their attention to the acts of ommission - oh my - Adscam and the pension will look like small potatoes - talk with anyone who has dealt with the RCMP in the last decade and you will have that many cases of their dropping the ball --- to the point of often running the plaintiffs off. As for a few good cops trying to do their jobs, we know their fate. It's a bitch right now that the public doesn't care, but one of these little cases - maybe the elder abuse - or Black getting a walk - will be enough to wake the zombies. Then things will rweally get hot for some of our folks in red and their bosses in the chauffeur-driven limos. One can always hope....a bunch od surley seniors is a fair sized "block vote".



I suspect this site hears from a Canadian or two - and more than one American who had the misfortune to meet the wrong Canuck: http://www.consumer.gov:80/sentinel/



Cross-Border Complaint Count by Calendar Year



Consumer Sentinel Leading Partners & Data Contributors

Federal Trade CommissionDepartment of Defensewww.econsumer.govwww.consumer.gov/sentinelwww.consumer.gov/ militarywww.consumer.gov/ idtheft

Consumer Sentinel is a secure automated consumer complaint database developed by the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), in cooperation with its law enforcement partners, to collect and make available investigative information about consumer fraud and deception. Currently, the Consumer Sentinel database includes over 3.5 millioncomplaints received by the FTC and other data contributors. The collected investigative information is accessible to federal, state, and local law enforcement agencies in the United States, Canada, and Australia through a secure, password-protected Web site. Between January 1999 and December 2006, more than 150 organizations contributed data to Consumer Sentinel. More information on this joint project is available at www.consumer.gov/sentinel.



During calendar year 2006, Consumer Sentinel received over 428,000 fraud-related complaints, of which 22% were cross-border fraud-related. The following are a series of statistical reports from the Consumer Sentinel database presenting information about cross-border fraud-relatedcomplaints.

Company location is based on addresses reported by the complaining consumers and, thus, likely understates the number of cross-border complaints. In some instances the company address provided by the consumer actually may be a mail drop in the consumer’s country rather than the physical location of the company in a foreign country, and in other cases, the consumer does not know whether the location is in the U.S. or abroad. Please also note that we continue to add data provided by various organizations, which may contain complaint data from previous months. This may retroactively change some totals and percentages on our graphs and charts.

Internet Crime Complaint CenterNational Association of Attorneys GeneralFederal Trade CommissionPage 2 of 13Released March 28, 2007

Executive Summary

Cross-Border Fraud Complaints

January –December 2006

•The Commission received over 95,000 cross-border fraud complaints during calendar year 2006. Cross-border fraud complaints comprised 22% of all fraud complaints received during calendar year 2006, 16% and 20% for CY-2004 and CY-2005, respectively.

•Internet-related complaints comprised 55% (52,656) of the total cross-border fraud complaints (95,249) received during calendar year 2006....(see the TAO site and the Bloomberg report on its "performance"! This is the guy we let walk????

•26% (24,573) of all cross-border fraud complaints (95,249) were from U.S. consumers complaining about Canadian companies and 60% (57,137) of all cross-border fraud complaints were from U.S. consumers complaining about other foreign companies.

•U.S. consumers reported fraud losses of over $93 million againstcompanies located in Canada, and losses of over $141 million against companies located in other foreign countries.

U.S. Consumers Against Companies Located in Canada1U.S. Consumers Against Companies Located in Other Foreign Countries22

Federal Trade CommissionPage 11 of 13Released March 28, 2007

Top Products or Services for Econsumer Complaints1 January 1 –December 31, 20061Percentages are based on the 13,123 econsumer complaints received from January 1 to December 31, 2006.

Trade CommissionPage 12 of 13Released March 28, 2007Internet Auction11%Others5%Clothing3%Banks3%Internet Access/Portal Services3%Computers: Equipment/Software7%Lotteries9%Prizes/

2Percentages are based on the total number of econsumer complaints reported in each time period: CY-2004 = 7,222; CY-2005 = 10,179; and CY-2006 = 13,123.

One complaint may have multiple law violations.Percentages are based on the total number of econsumerlaw violations reported in each time period: CY-2004 = 9,884; CY-2005 = 13,699; and CY-2006 = 17,811. One complaint may have multiple law violations.Number of complaints reporting each econsumer law violation in each time period. The total number of law violations are more than the number of complaints reported in each time period because one complaint may have multiple law violations. The total number of econsumer complaints reported in each time period are: CY-2004 = 7,222; CY-2005 = 10,179; and CY-2006 = 13,123.Federal Trade CommissionPage 13 of 13Released March 28, 2007

Econsumer.gov was created in April 2001 to gather and sharecross-border e-commerce complaints in order to respond to the challenges of multinational Internet fraud, and enhance consumer confidence in e-commerce. The multilingual public Web site provides general information about consumer protection in all countries that belong to the International Consumer Protection and Enforcement Network, contact information for consumer protection authorities in those countries, and an online complaint form. Incoming complaints are shared through the government Web site with participating consumer protection law enforcers from 19 nations.

Military Sentinel, which was established in September 2002,is a project of the Federal Trade Commission and the Department of Defense to identify and target consumer protection issues that affect members of the United States Armed Forces and their families. Military Sentinelalso provides a gateway to consumer education materials covering a wide range of consumer protection issues, such as auto leasing, identity theft, and work-at-home scams. Members of the United States Armed Forces can enter complaints directly into Consumer Sentinel. Through Consumer Sentinel, the secure password-protected government Web site, this information is used by law enforcement agencies, members of the JAG staff, and others in the Departmentof Defense to help protect armed services members and their families from consumer protection-related problems.

The Identity Theft Data Clearinghouse was launched in November 1999 and is the sole national repository of consumer complaints about identity theft. The Clearinghouse provides specific investigative material for law enforcement and broader reports that provide insight to both private and public sector partners on ways to reduce the incidence of identity theft.

The type of complaints provided by the organization is indicated in parentheses.

Web Complaints (Fraud); ID THEFT" (IDT); Commodity Futures Trading Commission; Identity Theft

For the purposes of this report, a fraud complaint is "cross-border"if: (1) a U.S. consumer complained about a company located in Canada or another foreign country; (2) a Canadian consumer complained about a company located in the U.S. or another foreign country; or (3) a consumer from a foreign country complained. In the Introductory section - note which major Police Agency is missing.....and you wonder why they are beefing up border security and tightening agreements around what we can put on their stock markets - no business trusts thank you! http://www.consumer.gov/sentinel/pubs/p ... 0FINAL.pdf

============

Jim Roache

Ottawa, ON
admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 2854
Joined: Fri May 06, 2005 9:05 am
Location: Canada

Postby admin » Wed Jun 06, 2007 8:52 am

Judge in Basi-Virk Case Rips RCMP, Special Prosecutor Vive Le Canada - Canada BC Supreme Court Justice Elizabeth Bennett delivered a scathing and far-reaching decision Monday that not only embarrassed the RCMP and special prosecutor ...

Judge rips RCMP, Special Prosecutor in Basi-Virk disclosure decision
By Bill Tieleman(Bill Tieleman)
BC Supreme Court Justice Elizabeth Bennett Monday ripped the RCMP and Special Prosecutor in the case against three provincial government aides facing serious criminal charges, saying there was a "substantial failure to respect the ...
http://billtieleman.blogspot.com/2007/0 ... or-in.html
Bill Tieleman
http://billtieleman.blogspot.com/

http://www.vivelecanada.ca/article.php/ ... 5011403675
See all stories on this topic:
http://news.google.com/news?hl=en&ncl=h ... 5011403675

Are the RCMP this inept or stupid like a fox? Screw up - let the connected bad boys off the hook??? Dump the paper trail or make sure not to find it in the first place. Shades of the Judge Wong ASC/ASX, Alberta Minister of Finance and Minister of Justice say - except so far - no letter from the AG lying about it all (including a claim that the case was "adjourned"....the Trosin-Cowan case.

=========

RCMP deals involved Sens tickets, cosy lunches - Edmonton Journal (subscription) - Edmonton, Alberta, Canada Kim Casey disclosed she gave Ottawa Senators tickets to the director of the RCMP branch that managed the pension fund's insurance plan on five or six
...
http://www.canada.com/edmontonjournal/n ... 84e0313211
See all stories on this topic:
http://news.google.com/news?hl=en&ncl=h ... 84e0313211

RCMP Pension Fund Scandal - OUCH!!
By leftdog(leftdog)
Members of Parliament on a Commons committee heard testimony of shady dealings between some RCMP staff and a computer firm that received lucrative contracts in the pension fund scandal. The accounting firm, KPMG, found that a company ...
http://buckdogpolitics.blogspot.com/200 ... -ouch.html
Buckdog
http://buckdogpolitics.blogspot.com/

RCMP??? Must be a typo??? With a one year statute of limitations on police malfeasance - who cares? Nobody cared about Adscam.

==============

6/5/2007: Canada: Kelowna RCMP investigate teen's sudden death
An RCMP spokesman says it will likely be a few weeks before police know what caused the sudden death of a 15-year-old Okanagan boy on Saturday afternoon. RCMP Sgt. Terry McLachlan said the youth was found unconscious in a Kelowna home ...
http://digital.timescolonist.com/epaper ... D&feed=rss
Times Colonist
http://digital.timescolonist.com/epaper ... t&cid=1213

Hope it's not the same crew who investigated a certain death in Saskatoon one Xmas Eve and have been somewhat "sensitive" about the whole affair ever since and events surrounding it ever since. See a recent edition of CanBiz for additional details - you won't ever hear them in court or from the RCMP, SC or SROs.

===============

Zaccardelli just 'a face in the crowd' at Mountie convention
By RCMP Watch
Ian Bailey, Globe and Mail The former face of the RCMP was just a face in the crowd of delegates attending a national gathering of retired Mounties on the weekend. From all accounts, that relative anonymity suited retired commissioner ...
http://www.rcmpwatch.com/zaccardelli-ju ... onvention/
RCMP Watch
http://www.rcmpwatch.com/
They stand in their bright red tunics, proudly representing all Canadians. But, sadly, something is wrong with the institution to which these men and women belong: the Royal Canadian Mounted Police. Day after day, stories are slipping into newspapers and news- casts that suggest the RCMP has been infected by scandalous behavior. In many cases, the allegations have come from credible sources: members or former members of the force. I guess most of those reading this are not credible sources - don't know about you, but nobody - sure as hell - is listening to me!

Most alarming is the fact that the public simply doesn't give a damn - now that's scary! And they have the right friends in the right places - this guy won't even answer complaints - nor will his AG!!!???

RCMP, rural communities make Alberta strong: Stelmach
Edmonton Journal (subscription) - Edmonton,Alberta,Canada
TOFIELD - As long as he's premier, the RCMP will remain the provincial
police force of Alberta, Ed Stelmach promised Saturday. The RCMP is the
"fabric that ...
http://www.canada.com/edmontonjournal/n ... f7&k=62236
See all stories on this topic:
http://news.google.com/news?hl=en&ncl=h ... 6k%3D62236

I'm with this good ole boy from Alberta - we have serious problems. Whether it's the cops afraid of the establishment or the reverse or even both - the result is the same.

We are marching closer to a totalitarian state every day - and nobody seems to care???


Jim Roache
admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 2854
Joined: Fri May 06, 2005 9:05 am
Location: Canada

Postby admin » Thu May 17, 2007 10:34 am

Today's Globe, Thursday, May 17, 2007, front page shows the RCMP charging a Finance Canada bureaucrat who made a whopping $7000 profit from allegedly trading on inside knowledge of the tax treatment by Ralph Goodale's govt on income trusts.

He allegedly made his trade the morning of the announcement after sitting in on a meeting the previous day. Good catch guys.

Just as an afterthought, did anyone happen to look into the millions upon millions of dollars of spikes in volume in these shares and dividend paying shares traded by members of the Investment Dealers Associaiton?

Mr. Goodale was also in meetings with this organization on the morning of his announcement to the public, and this is the same day of the volume spikes. Obviously the Finance Canada bureacrat was not responsible for millions and millions in spiked trading volumes that day.

Did the RCMP just happen to miss out on the major culprit and satisfy itself on prosecuting a flea instead?
admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 2854
Joined: Fri May 06, 2005 9:05 am
Location: Canada

PreviousNext

Return to Click here to view forums

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests

cron