The bad news is:
Border security cuts will allow ‘sexual predators,’ ‘hardened criminals’ into Canada: union
news.nationalpost.com
The Good news is they all work for Border security and will be out of a job!
Border guard charged with sexual assault
An officer with the Canadian Border Services Agency has been charged with sexual assault after a teen complained she was strip-searched in a public washroom near the Douglas border crossing customs building.
An officer with the Canadian Border Services Agency has been charged with sexual assault after a teen complained she was strip-searched in a public washroom near the Douglas border crossing customs building.
Daniel Greenhalgh, 30, is next scheduled to appear in court Aug. 15 on one charge of assaulting the 18-year-old young woman, according to a written release issued by Surrey RCMP.
Greenhalgh was released on bail and ordered to have no contact with the alleged victim before the trial.
The CBSA is fully cooperating with the RCMP in the investigation, the statement says.
Police have not ruled out the possibility that more victims may come forward.
© (c) CanWest MediaWorks Publications Inc.
canada.com
Woman allegedly mocked during airport strip search
Sheena Goodyear, QMI Agency First posted: Monday, July 19, 2010 04:49 PM EDT | Updated: Tuesday, July 20, 2010 11:50 AM EDT
Shileen Flynn, 29, had already missed one flight and lost her luggage when she says she found herself in a room at the Vancouver airport, naked and squatting, while two crude border agents strip-searched her.
It was December, 2009, days after a suspected al-Qaida member tried to ignite an explosive device aboard a Detroit-bound flight. Flynn had just returned home to Vancouver from a trip to Seattle, and was on her way to Palma de Mallorca, Spain, to start a new job as a public relations officer.
She was a day behind schedule, having missed her flight from the U.S. the night before, and had to catch the next plane to Germany so she could then catch a flight to Spain and start work the next morning. Somewhere along the way, the airline lost her luggage.
She was talking to her mom on a pay phone when a Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA) officer approached her.
"All of a sudden, the guy comes over to me and says, 'Can I talk to you?' I said, 'Of course, why not?'" said Flynn.
She said he asked her where she was travelling and why she was using a pay phone. He told her to take off her sunglasses so he could see her eyes. She slipped them off, looked at the officer, and then pushed them back down.
His tone became aggressive, she said.
"He said, 'No take your sunglasses off!'" said Flynn.
As he searched her carry-on bag and asked more questions, a bystander offered her a card for a lawyer, but the officer sent him away, Flynn alleges.
More officers arrived with a police dog who walked up to Flynn, sniffed her, walked away, came back over to her again, hesitated a moment, then left.
Then they brought her to a room with two female CBSA officers for a strip search.
Flynn - a frequent traveller who has been strip-searched twice before - said this time was different. She said the women made her bend over a table, open her legs, and squat and cough. They asked her personal questions, like when she last had sex, Flynn said.
She fought back tears throughout the ordeal.
"I thought, if I start crying, they're gonna think I'm guilty," she said.
"As soon as they finished the strip search, I started bawling."
One guard told her if she didn't stop crying, she'd be detained, Flynn said. When she explained why she was crying, Flynn said a guard piped up: "How do you think I feel? I just had lunch. You make me feel sick."
"It's the most embarrassing thing that's ever happened to me in my life," said Flynn, who cried the whole way to Frankfurt. "It was totally demeaning and degrading. ... I've done nothing wrong. Absolutely nothing wrong."
As soon as she got to Spain, she called her father, Charlie Flynn, who reported what happened to CBSA.
CBSA launched an internal investigation, interviewing Shileen and the officers involved.
After months of back and forth, Charlie received a letter from CBSA that read: "We have fully investigated the incident and concluded that the BSOs involved in examination of your daughter followed established guidelines and conducted themselves in a professional manner."
"They keep saying that I'm lying," said Shileen.
With no mention of the alleged verbal harassment by the border service officers, the letter explained that a strip search can be conducted if an officer "has reasonable grounds to suspect that a person has secreted contraband on or about their body," as long as a senior officer approves the search, and the suspect is informed of their rights.
"It was sickening to watch and see what they were doing. They then went into full cover-up in the investigation and simply lied when convenient to cover up any wrongdoing," Charlie told QMI Agency.
On May 18, the CBSA told Charlie there would be a new investigation and that someone would call to answer his questions about their detaining polices. As of Monday morning, he hasn't heard back from anyone.
Mark Holland, federal Liberal critic for public safety and national security, has been helping the Flynns with their case.
While he declined to comment specifically on what happened to Shileen Flynn, he said the case highlights the need for greater transparency and independence in CBSA's complaints process.
"It's like a black hole that people fall through all the time," Holland told QMI Agency.
CBSA employees investigate complaints, and report to the agency's president, said Holland.
Holland said the government should overhaul the complaints system and appoint an independent officer to investigate cases like Flynn's.
The results of those investigations should be made public, and the officer should be given power to implement mandatory policy changes, he said.
Currently, the CBSA's admissibility branch, which operates independently from the rest of the agency, handles complaints.
If a person isn't satisfied with the branch's conclusions, they can appeal the decision to the Canadian International Trade Tribunal.
QMI Agency placed multiple calls and e-mails to CBSA Friday and Monday seeking information about their complaints process and comment regarding Flynn's allegations, but as of Monday afternoon, has not heard back.
Charlie, meanwhile, is considering pursuing criminal charges or perhaps filing a lawsuit.
Shileen just wants to protect others from experiencing what she experienced.
"All I want from this is that it never happens to anyone else," she said.
torontosun.com
Attention:
Canada Border Services Agency
Ottawa ON
Canada
K1A 0L8
Dear Mr. Sabourin:
RE: Shileen Amanda Flynn
I am in receipt of your letter sent on April 30th and received on May 7th at the address above. I do note in your reply, you provided, no email address, no telephone contact and not even the courtesy, as most professionals do of a physical address. In trying to locate you at the CBSA site, the only response I get repeatedly is the following:
The connection has timed out
The server at sage-geds.tpsgc-pwgsc.gc.ca is taking too long to respond.
This lack of transparency seems quite appropriate given the “investigation” conducted on a totally non transparent or even logical level.
You are employed by our Government. Our government is elected by the citizens of Canada. However for some reason, once those paycheques start coming, this fact is totally pushed aside and it becomes a matter of you protecting yourself and those that are governed or work under yourself. It seems a matter of pride, as it was in the Catholic Church or indeed the Canadian military in protecting perpetrators under their supervision at all cost. However, surely you can use at least a little investigative powers to still maintain your cover up but in the least pretend or fashion an investigation that meets even the smallest of logic or rational explanation.
I do not know if you realize how illogical and unsubstantive your letter of April 30th was to this writer, a father and citizen of Canada. I served our country. My father served our country and my son now serves it with pride and honour. However I was taught by my father who was awarded the Member of Military Merit by the Governor General and hopefully I have taught my son, that key word, we “serve” Canada and Canadians. We would never engage in a cover up or a less than thorough review to ensure us and those around us were at all times doings so. I am not sure you have received the opportunity to be taught the same honour and integrity with your service to our country. It is not one of self preservation or protecting ourselves or those beneath us. You are placed as an agent of the CBSA to protect our rights and our country, nothing less is acceptable.
I note while, convicts and criminals with drugs and guns slip past in their business suits or married mothers carrying contraband, you chose to focus continually on innocent pretty young ladies. This is an absolute fact. When caught with your officers getting their sexual perversion or betraying our sacred trust, this is the answer you provide. You must believe you are above the law or our Charter to write such dribble. It is not an “investigation” at all, surely you realize this fact.
You state in a recent letter to the Editor, when others note your lack of professionalism and Canada Border Guards rudeness touches a nerve.”, that the CBSA received 1, 421 complaints. Rather than acknowledge one complaint is too much, you try and justify it by the number of people crossing our borders. This is illogical at best, as you can not, nor does Cuba or Communist China stop every traveler.
You then state an absolute untruth, as exhibited in my daughter’s case, “I want to reassure Canadians that the CBSA takes very seriously the complaints and concerns raised by the public,” Now read your letter to myself and recognize this is not true and you seek to mislead Canadians with your untruths. “Each allegation of improper behaviour by CBSA employees is thoroughly investigated, and is acted upon accordingly and promptly.” This is another complete untruth, which if this was your job description, i.e. misleading Canadians, you are the professional you claim to be. However professionalism should not be a word in your lexicon. You totally and absolutely stone wall investigations or conduct none at all, on the most slowest possible pace allowable in an electronic world.
Now in the “non investigation investigation of my daughter’s case, let us examine your misleading and outright untrue statements.
You responded to my email dated January 4th, 2010, on April 30th, 2010, obviously hardly the prompt manner you promise in your letter to the editor.
You then state, you would like to answer my questions of how the Canada Border Services Agency authorizes searches and under what specific conditions. Well if you would like to do so, I am still waiting. Your letter in no manner or fashion answers this simple question. It wanders around it and hints at it and slips by it, but you do not answer it specifically at all. Why do you not do so? Yes I realize section 98 of the Customs Act gives you the power to search individuals leaving Canada. However you do not answer, where they can be searched, is it any individual that decides to leave Canada? Is there a certain location as they leave Canada? What happens if that individual does not want to leave Canada at all? What is it you are searching? It is a fundamental question is it not? You fail completely to answer or explain. Why are you stopping individuals leaving Canada? Where are you stopping these individuals? What are you stopping and searching them for as they leave Canada? What are you challenged or attempting to protect Canadians from as a pretty young blond lady leaves Canada? Please I await the answer you said, you would like to answer. Was this another untruth in your running battle to find the ability to tell just one?
Now you digress in to a ridiculous dialogue of “after completing all routine customs processing”. What routine customs processing do we go through as we leave Canada, as your Ms. Kerr-Perrot told the Senate committee no such processing takes place. Why did she mislead Parliament or why alternatively are you misleading this writer?
Well since no routine customs processing took place, let us ask you in your inability to answer a straight question, what exactly was it that gave the Border Services Officer at the departure lounge and gate of an aircraft to “have reasonable grounds to suspect that my daughter had secreted contraband on or about her body.”? Can you answer that simple question? They forced her to empty the contents of her purse in front of all passengers and found nothing. They brought a contraband dog over, who we assume is well trained and he gave no indication what so ever of contraband. Now come on it is a very straight forward question, which you “take very seriously” as you tell the readers of the Toronto Star and Hamilton Spectator. Yet you do not take the complaint seriously enough to provide this answer. This is inexcusable surely, when measured against your very own words.
Then this CBO without leaving his post or my daughter’s side in the departure lounge demands in front of all passengers she undergo a strip search. Now as you know she was found totally innocent, so in the least send this misinformed CBO back for retraining. He obviously is not good at this ability to determine suspicion, is he? The dogs you employ one would consider well trained and they did their job properly or are you going to try and suggest, the dog did sit beside by daughter as they are trained to do, since this would be a lie and the dog would be poorly trained if he made this type of mistake, no?
How did this CBO without using his walkie talkie or leaving my daughter’s side get the approval of his superior and on what grounds? One more time your “serious consideration of a complaint” fails to even answer this investigative question. Whom did you talk to in your investigation and what findings were made available to you, in any?
Next you must either send yourself or Mr. Norm Sheridan, the Director of your agency at Pearson Airport, because one of you is ill or poorly trained. Mr. Sheridan told this writer, that the only reason for a search of a person leaving Canada was for money laundering purposes. The Pearson BSO that stopped by daughter on her return to Canada also needs retraining and your systems are poorly equipped to operate if you all do not know the law. You see, Mr. Sheridan told me what happened to my daughter could not happen. The Border Agent, who detained her, due to this complaint for two hours on her return to Canada, called her a liar when she said she was searched leaving Canada. He said it was against the law. So I do know you want to be professional, please schedule these two individuals for retraining. Also when I first sent my email, I was informed by your very own agency that CBSA agents do not search individuals leaving Canada; please schedule them in for retraining as well. As a matter of fact, I would say Ms. Kerr-Perrot could use a refresher course, since she told Parliament this does not happen to Canadians leaving Canada. I guess by now you are the only one still working at the CBSA that knows the law, rules and regulations governing your agency, so you will be too busy to respond in your usually “prompt” five months?
You then state, that my daughter was detained. You fail to state why again. Can you not do the least bit of investigatory work and find out why she was detained and provide us with that answer? She had to be advised of her rights and cautions. Does this include threatening her with pulling her off the aircraft she had been waiting for 26 hours to get on due to the over reaction on Canada’s part to the incident in Detroit on Christmas eve? Did these agents mention the treats and disgusting treatment of an innocent Canadian, during your serious investigation? Did they have her sign something to ascertain she was given her rights, which she steadfastly denied? Of course you most likely found this out when your thorough investigation, which you take very seriously lead you to speak and ask her these questions. However strangely when I questioned my daughter, she has not been contacted by your serious investigation at all. How did you ascertain she was given these rights? I guess you asked those charged or complained about mistreating her, correct? I suppose if we want to find out if any convict is truly guilty, we just wander down to their jail cells an ask them, right? You can not consider this a serious investigation and you must now admit you mislead not only the write but the entire citizenry of Canada, when you so stated in print. How can one investigate any complaint without talking to the individual involved? What do you do ask your agents, “Did you do anything wrong?” They answer “No Sir” and your investigation is complete, honest and fair?
You state the person must be asked if they understand section 98 and whether they wish to be taken before a senior officer to contest the search. You fail to mention the truth, which does not seem impede you from being honest in your very own opinion. My daughter was told if she did not succumb to an immediate body search for no apparent or logical reason her luggage would be pulled off the aircraft and she would be prevented from traveling. This is an inconvenient truth, is it not? Surely you’re found this out during your thorough and fair investigation, yet you fail to tell the truth, why?
Finally you state one truth in your white wash diatribe meant only to attempt to mislead any logical clear thinking individual, “each situation is unique”. However the next statement is another untruth, as both my daughters and most young pretty women have found, these to be “routine” processes with your testosterone laden young unprofessional men and women untrained and provided with your ability or attempt to cover up every incident. You serve Canada and this agency without honour or integrity in your response to an innocent Canadian, who has been stopped by your agents at least twenty times over the last five years, as has my other daughter, once accompanied by me. I demanded on that occasion they search my luggage as well, but the CSO refused on the grounds it is their choice. I explained I could carry contraband as easily as my daughter and it was their duty to examine my luggage. However after rifling through my daughter’s personal belongings and underwear, they still refused. We asked for a woman to conduct the search, this was also refused. Your agency is a disgrace to the good people of Canada.
The most egregious part of this entire episode and your cover up, is you are not even doing your job, as I pointed out, Mr. Norbert Grupe, a convicted felon and many other convicted drug traffickers and felons wander in and out of Canada undetected as you spend your time harassing your ladies and then covering up the complaints and doing no investigative work what so ever.
May I ask since you did not speak to my daughter in your “thorough investigation”, which of her fellow passengers did you speak to? I am sure you spoke to the East Indian Gentleman that comforted afterward and attempted to give her is lawyer’s number, right? I am sure you spoke to the stewardess on Lufthansa, who got my sobbing daughter a glass of wine and stated the agents were disgusting and only targeting her since she was a young pretty girl? You did speak to some objective source, correct? I mean you do take these complaints seriously right?
You conclude your non investigation with more complete untruths, which you are now well accustomed to scribing I am sure.
“We have fully investigated the incident”, a complete and utter untruth, how could you without talking to my daughter, who maintains your investigation is mythically majestic it in the lies told? Then you go on to state the “CBO’s involved followed established guidelines”, one then must assume your guidelines allow a CBO agent to tell a young embarrassed lady that it upset their stomach after just having eaten to see her spread eagled on a table? This is professional manner of which Colonel Williams would be proud, no one else.
Certainly you can trust that the lies, cover ups and outright misleading conclusions and lack of any objective investigation are not satisfactory information and answer none of my questions.
They remain,
1. Under what specific legislation do you stop an innocent Canadian and attempt to prevent her from leaving Canada?
2. What reason was my daughter detained and why was she not handled in a professional manner?
3. What was the underlying reason for the search, what specifically did these agents assume (wrongly as we now know) that my daughter had secreted money or some sort of contraband out of Canada to Spain?
4. Why did your CBO agent tell my daughter she almost lost her lunch having to witness my daughter spread eagle on a table?
5. Where did Parliament ever enact this legislation other than loosely hanging your hat on section 98, which one can be sure no Parliamentarian ever thought your arrogance would allow you to use against an innocent Canadians in this manner?
6. Why did Ms. Kerr-Perrot and Mr. Lefebvre mislead Parliament?
7. Why do you not clearly tell Canadians they could be subject on an unwarranted strip search when boarding an aircraft leaving Canada for no reason?
8. How do you justify these actions against our Charter Rights?
Mr. Sabourin, truthfully, you investigated nothing and you answered nothing. It is your type of behaviour and you are one of best examples we have, of why Canadians do not trust their government or their agencies. If I stated your letter was disingenuous and your investigation corrupt, these would be kind words from me.
I am appalled that any Minister of the Crown allows you to stay in your position.
Yours truly,
Charles D. Flynn
PLEASE NOTE I HAVE THE COURTESY OF PROVIDING EMAIL, PHONE NUMBER AND PHYSICAL ADDRESS IN MY CORRESPONDENCE, WHAT ARE YOU HIDING FROM IN YOUR LACK OF SAME? |
