Friday, April 14, 2017

Judge crushes police probe



The Winking Judge strikes again. The Times Colonist is reporting that "The B.C. Supreme Court has thrown out an investigation into Twitter messages Victoria Police Chief Frank Elsner sent to the wife of one of his subordinates, a move B.C.’s police watchdog says could undermine its oversight powers." No kidding. The judge claimed ordering an external investigation was an abuse of process. Are you kidding? How? The public want the police to be publically accountable just like the courts. The public want external investigations not private ones behind closed doors.

A few doors down from the Vancouver Supreme courthouse is a pub called the Winking Judge. One has to wonder what the implications of that name really are. Why would a judge wink? It implies a corrupt judicial system which seems to be confirmed by J.J. McCullough. That is why the Canadian Judicial Review Board has become necessary.

This is the Frankie goes to Hollywood case where Victoria Police Chief Frank Elsner is alleged to have sent inappropriate Twitter messages to the wife of one of his officers, then is accused of making false statements and deleting data arising from the original investigation." It is another cover up of the profesional missconduct of the Friends of Craig Callen.

Frank Elsner is from Sudbury where he "associated with criminals and partied with drug users, bikers, and hookers. He set up elaborate drug deals, disappeared for weeks on end, was involved in a hitman operation, and had multiple aliases." This is an example of an undercover cop who goes undercover not because he hates crime because he covets that life. I do not. There is nothing in that life that appeals to me and I think married cops that go undercover to infiltrate the bikers gangs because they covet that lifestyle are trash.

1 comment:

  1. When a police chief sends inappropriate e-mails to another officer's spouse, that chief needs to go. An inquiry is necessary because with a chief like that the public has a right to know what else was/is going on in the police force. it becomes a question of judgement on the part of the most senior officer in a police department. If he/she doesn't have good judgement in the area of personal relations where else in their life is there a lack of judgement. If its in their working life, the public not only needs to know, they have a right to know and this Judge does not have the right to tell, us, the taxpayers, we don't have the right to know. abuse of process my ass. its an abuse of the taxpayer and the right to know who and what is running our police departments. is this the tip of the ice berg or just a one off. We have the right to know.

    ReplyDelete