RCMP and Crown prosecutors illegally distribute Senator Mike Duffy’s email password to the public

In the Duffy case, the RCMP and Crown prosecutor committed a criminal offence under section 402.2(2)

A cynic might say that the corruption trial of suspended Senator Mike Duffy has produced no surprises, but that does not do justice to most ordinary Canadians who, despite all the standard jokes about politicians, expect and demand that laws, rules and standards should apply equally to all; including to those in positions of power and authority such as police, lawyers and Crown prosecutors.

As Ezra Levant points out in the above video, the Royal Canadian Mounted Police and Crown prosecutors released to the public, an unredacted version of Senator Duffy’s personal diary; including intimate communications with his wife, personal medical details and some of Senator Duffy’s Identity Information (as defined in the Criminal Code), including his email password.

Notwithstanding how disgusting it is that Canada’s national police agency and Crown prosecutors should have engaged in an act that is so obviously designed to embarrass and punish Mr. Duffy and his close family members, the release of Mr. Duffy’s email password is a criminal act, specifically prohibited by law in Canada. The fact that the reckless distribution happened in court documents is no excuse in law. Some would say the abuse of the court process makes the act even more reprehensible.

Best v Ranking civil lawsuit alleges prosecuting lawyers recklessly distributed to the public tens of thousands of documents containing Identity Information

As terrible as the actions of the police and the Crown are in the Duffy case, the amount of Identity Information illegally distributed pales in comparison with another case currently before the Ontario Superior Court.

In the Donald Best vs Gerald Ranking civil case, the plaintiff Donald Best alleges that defendants Gerald Ranking, Paul Schabas, Lorne Silver and others deliberately released and recklessly distributed to the public tens of thousands of unredacted privileged legal documents containing vast amounts of Identity Information and other personal and confidential information for Mr. Best, his family members and dozens of other persons who had nothing to do with the case before the courts.

In his March 31, 2015 affidavit asking the court to issue an injunction against the defendants, Mr. Best alleges:

“The defendants previously placed into the public domain, and recklessly distributed, tens of thousands of documents containing Identity Information and other private, confidential information for me, my family members and my company’s witnesses; and also for dozens and dozens of persons and entities who have nothing to do with me or my case.

As just one egregious example of thousands, defendants unlawfully took from the Orillia, Ontario law office of my company’s lawyers, the medical file of my lawyer’s dying mother, including end-of-life ‘do not resuscitate’ instructions to medical staff. The defendants and their ‘John Doe’ co-conspirators recklessly distributed this to members of the public, published it on the internet, and then filed it as ‘evidence’ with the court without notifying the judge. The defendants and their co-conspirators are still recklessly distributing this medical file in 2015. The defendants refuse to stop.”

Further, Mr. Best states:  Read more

Investigative Solutions Network Inc. files defence in Best vs Ranking lawsuit

(Above: ISN CEO Ron Wretham interviewed by CBC’s Peter Mansbridge about the mystery tunnel recently discovered near the York University campus and the Rexall Centre; a tennis venue for Toronto’s 2015 Pan Am Games.)

Investigative Solutions Network Inc. is the first defendant to file a statement of defence in the Best vs Ranking et al lawsuit currently before Ontario Superior Court in Barrie, Ontario.

The February 12, 2015 statement of defence says in part:

“The defendant ISN is an Ontario corporation based in Pickering that is a full-service private investigations and training organization. The company provides investigative, security, training and screening services. The operating mind of ISN is Ron Wretham (“Wretham”).

In the Statement of Claim, the Plaintiff has lumped the defendant ISN into a group of defendants referred to as the “Van Allen Defendants.” At the time of the matters at issue in this action, the defendant Jim Van Allen (“Van Allen”) was employed as an Ontario Provincial Police officer. Van Allen has subsequently retired from the OPP. Van Allen is now a consultant to ISN in the capacity of an executive trainer and as a threat and risk assessment analyst.

At some time in the latter part of 2009, the defendant Van Allen, while an OPP officer, contacted Wretham of the defendant ISN to inquire if he knew the address of the Plaintiff. Van Allen was not a consultant to ISN at the time. Van Allen was familiar with Wretham as Wretham was a retired Toronto Police officer. Van Allen was aware that the Plaintiff was a former Toronto Police officer. Wretham did not know the address of the Plaintiff, so he referred Van Allen to the defendant Toronto Police Association (“TPA”). As a former member of the TPA, Wretham believed that the TPA kept address information on its former members including the Plaintiff.”

ISN’s full statement of defence is available as a PDF download here (471kb) and on our Court Evidence page.