Friday, January 15, 2016

Legal Opinion in Entrapment Case Released



The legal opinion in the John Nuttall entrapment case has been released. The Vancouver Province is reporting that "Late in an undercover RCMP operation, a senior prosecutor advised police to stop paying money to a Surrey couple who have been convicted in the B.C. legislature terrorism case."

A memo written by lead prosecutor Martha Devlin stated “Due to the unique circumstances of the target (no money, no friends, on welfare, somewhat vulnerable), without the assistance of the RCMP, he cannot do a thing." Exactly. Without their help, this crime could NEVER have been committed. She then states “I’d recommend that the police not give the target money ...”

Notice the term target not suspect. This is not a suspect in a crime. It is a mark in a con they targeted. The Vancouver Province goes on to report that "After getting Devlin’s legal advice, police stopped the payments, but although the undercover police stopped giving the couple cash, they continued to pay for groceries, cigarettes and coffee." Then there was the persistent threat: "Mr Big has spent a lot of money on you. You better come up with a plan."

A handwritten note about the case from Devlin had the words “high as a kite” circled on the top of the note. No kidding. That's exactly what we said. In some of the videos of the suspect it was obvious he was high on drugs just talking nonsense. Martha Devlin is very credible. To hear she has been apointed to the bench is a breath of fresh air. Quite a relief from a raging lunatic like Peter Leask. I'm still hearing stories of that clown's idiocy.

This legal opinion ties in with the Overview of the John Nuttall Entrapment case.

5 comments:

  1. And are we surprised that the RCMP didn't follow this legal instruction :rolleyes: yet another example of "We're the police, we can do whatever we want".....this is like having a dog that tries to bite everyone it can, only a stiff yank on the choke chain gets any results at all, and even then the dog doesn't let go of the idea that it's going to do whatever it wants. Bad dog? Yeah, but that's too simple, it's as much lack of oversight and sufficiently strong punishment to get the message across.

    The police in Canada need to have civilian oversight by elected boards, not by boards appointed from within the system and stacked with retired cops and other pro-LE folks such as relatives. Such a board needs to have the ability to issue a finding of misconduct and fire officers so found. Simply referring such findings to the Crown for prosecution would only result in the Crown deciding there was not enough evidence to charge, or going through the process where the officer is found guilty but given an absolute discharge and allowed to keep his job.

    This is the best CSIS and the RCMP can do for counter terrorism? LOL. Why do the Israeli's have such success at this? BECAUSE THEY PROFILE. They actually identify people who are the obvious candidates for involvement in such activities. PROFILING WORKS. They do it for serial killers, but all of a sudden when it might target folks who all happen to belong to identifiable population subgroups, political correctness (meaning LIES) "has to be observed". That needs to go, because political correctness is one reason why CSIS/RCMP won't pursue real Tango's and their supporters/sympathizers, and to make it look like they can catch Tango's, they manufacture them.

    Plus this is easier than doing actual work.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Indeed. Here they aren't trying to catch bad guys they are trying to create them.

      Delete
  2. that was certainly an interesting read. Thank you for providing the information. What a waste of our tax dollars.

    if this is what the provincial government is doing with our tax dollars perhaps its time we got something else instead of the RCMP. Oh, right we're stuck with them for 20 years and the provincial government isn't going to do anything to interfere with all of the RCMP'S "good works".

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That's the point. Aside from being morally wrong, spending large amounts of tax dollars on trying to bride drug addicts to commit an act of terrorism is a waste of money. That money would be better spent on housing and drug rehab.

      Delete
  3. What ever how much money the government spend to this people must recovered. No sense at all bribing drug addicts. This people must be on jail and punish on the crime that they committed.

    http://www.goldbachlaw.com/long-beach/whistleblower-lawyer/

    ReplyDelete