• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Active Shooter In NS. April 19 2020

SeaKingTacco

Army.ca Fixture
Donor
Reaction score
1,579
Points
910
Got it- the author has an axe to grind with RCMP.

So how do explain a $475k Brinks withdrawal? A mere mortal cannot do that. Somebody, somewhere had to help him with that. If it wasn’t a government agency, it implies that there is deep corruption in NS and maybe beyond to set it up in the first place and not ring bells at FINTRAC.

I am not saying he was an RCMP informant, but I think there is way more to this story than some looney tunes dude going on a rampage.
 

Humphrey Bogart

Moderator
Staff member
Directing Staff
Subscriber
Reaction score
468
Points
1,010
Brihard said:
Ah, Paul Palango again... Suffice to say you can take most of what he writes on the subject of the RCMP with a considerable grain of salt.

Half a mil would be a pretty massive payment for an agent. If you think someone who’s well known as a cop fetishist with uniforms and cars is going to be able to get in that deep with organized crime... yeah. Also, agents don’t get freebies the way the innuendo in this piece suggests. Nor would police be sending an agent themselves to an institution to pick up their own payment.

For someone who purports to have access to mounties experienced in covert ops, he’s done a pretty lousy job at info gathering. For purposes of critical thinking it’s important to note that Palango has had some sort of axe to grind against the RCMP for many years, as is clear in his writing. Some of his other work on the NS shooting has been equally garbage. I would put little stock in it.

Whatever Wortman had going on, I highly doubt working with the police was among it.

I doubt the money would be to pay him.  It could be for him to conduct illegal activity with though. The guy was a Police fetishist and had known criminals he was associated with.

The fact he is a Police Fetishist makes me think he would potentially make a very good candidate for Agent status. 
 

brihard

Army.ca Fixture
Mentor
Reaction score
1,779
Points
890
Sure as hell there’s weird stuff going on with the guy, no doubt there. I just thing Palango remains very out to lunch, as he has through most of this.
 

blacktriangle

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
170
Points
630
If he was an agent, it seems like he was running some pretty lousy tradecraft.

Definitely makes you wonder if there is more to this story though...
 

Cloud Cover

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
30
Points
530
In this article, Paul Wells lays some compelling reasons for a full judicial inquiry into this one. In addition, he refers to some nuanced social media discussion by Jess Davis regarding the weight of argument that the shooter may have been an RCMP asset. (he likely wasn't but the RCMP need to be much more clear about that).

https://www.macleans.ca/politics/ottawa/time-for-real-answers-on-the-nova-scotia-mass-murder/

Cheers
 

Furniture

Sr. Member
Reaction score
100
Points
480
SeaKingTacco said:
Got it- the author has an axe to grind with RCMP.

So how do explain a $475k Brinks withdrawal? A mere mortal cannot do that. Somebody, somewhere had to help him with that. If it wasn’t a government agency, it implies that there is deep corruption in NS and maybe beyond to set it up in the first place and not ring bells at FINTRAC.

I am not saying he was an RCMP informant, but I think there is way more to this story than some looney tunes dude going on a rampage.

I agree. The way this has been handled from the beginning screams cover-up. Whether it's covering up the inept response from police or something more serious, I don't know. 

If this had happened in the USA we would have had the police tell us the weapons used, the shooters criminal record, and anything else potentially useful in the first 24 hours. Up here it's cover, obscure, and delay as much as possible... The RCMP have a public image issue, and hiding information in this case is not helping it one bit.
 

Cloud Cover

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
30
Points
530
I think that’s why we need a judicial inquiry.  I’m not prepared to accept the police response was “inept”, but I don’t trust any other process to get to the bottom of it.  It’s pretty clear there has been political interferences from early on in the disclosures. I’d like to think there was no operational or evidentiary interference.
 

Furniture

Sr. Member
Reaction score
100
Points
480
CloudCover said:
I think that’s why we need a judicial inquiry.  I’m not prepared to accept the police response was “inept”, but I don’t trust any other process to get to the bottom of it.  It’s pretty clear there has been political interferences from early on in the disclosures. I’d like to think there was no operational or evidentiary interference.

I only say inept, because apparently other police services in the province, near the route/scene were not brought in to assist. My understanding is they never closed the highways/roads he was suspected to be traveling on... Seems inept to me when it's a known active shooter.
 

Journeyman

Army.ca Legend
Subscriber
Reaction score
438
Points
910
CloudCover said:
In this article, Paul Wells lays some compelling reasons for a full judicial inquiry into this one. In addition, he refers to some nuanced social media discussion by Jess Davis regarding the weight of argument that the shooter may have been an RCMP asset. (he likely wasn't but the RCMP need to be much more clear about that).

https://www.macleans.ca/politics/ottawa/time-for-real-answers-on-the-nova-scotia-mass-murder/

Cheers

I suggest anyone following this issue read the Twitter thread by #JessMarinDavis.  She's ex-CSIS and is probably Canada's foremost expert on FINTRAC/criminal finances.  She highlights some serious flaws in the Macleans' article.
 

Remius

Army.ca Fixture
Reaction score
879
Points
860
Journeyman said:
I suggest anyone following this issue read the Twitter thread by #JessMarinDavis.  She's ex-CSIS and is probably Canada's foremost expert on FINTRAC/criminal finances.  She highlights some serious flaws in the Macleans' article.

I was waiting for the counter argument to come out. Thanks for the link.
 

NavyShooter

Army.ca Veteran
Subscriber
Reaction score
451
Points
960
Inept is not the word I would use.

Confused?  Yes, because it appears that GW was moving around and sowing confusion. 

It was a REALLY GOOD THING that his fake cruiser was taken out by the RCMP officer (though at the cost of her own life) because he appears to have been on his way to the city...he was a 10 minute drive from Lower Sackville, and a 20 minute drive from downtown Halifax. 

With the carnage he wrought in a rural environment, can you imagine what he could have done on the loose in downtown Halifax?

The bad guys always have a free reign until the first good guy with a gun shows up.  In Canada, that usually means a police officer.

NS
 

brihard

Army.ca Fixture
Mentor
Reaction score
1,779
Points
890
Furniture said:
I only say inept, because apparently other police services in the province, near the route/scene were not brought in to assist. My understanding is they never closed the highways/roads he was suspected to be traveling on... Seems inept to me when it's a known active shooter.

They don’t use compatible radio systems. They DID assist by taking other unrelated calls on behalf of the RCMP to free up members, but they weren’t able to safely integrate on the primary call. Truro police on the road couldn’t talk to RCMP and vice versa. You can probably imagine how hugely dangerous that is. I’ve worked on the road in a jurisdiction where multiple uniformed police services overlap and don’t share radios. It can be a huge problem. Those other police services were better used taking other calls, and they did.

Bear in mind that for a considerable portion of the night he was *not* an active shooter (or ‘active threat’ in our parlance). His behaviour had changed, he had gone to ground, though all police knew is there were no longer new scenes coming in. That changes some aspects of the response. With an active threat you throw everything you have at the threat based on information about their location, which will generally continue to flow in. Once they are no longer actively killing, you slow it down, work the problem, gather info, and try to find, contain, and safely capture the suspect. In this case once he stopped killing for the night and took off, what they had was an immensely overwhelmed gaggle of night shift members, a critical incident command team establishing itself, an already horrendously complex investigation, and a whole lot of info to try to gather, corroborate, and act on. They were flooding resources in from the length of NS and from NB, but that takes time, and police services don’t ‘ad hoc’ an ORBAT on the fly nearly as capably as the military does.

There will undoubtedly be a full inquiry of this, likely resulting in something similar to the MacNeil report following the Moncton murders. Like that one, it will take time.

Transparency is important, but we also don’t know what other investigative angles are being worked, likely including the trafficking of firearms across the border. We will learn more in time, but wanting answers now does not mean we’re entitled to answers now. I’d rather they run absolutely everything down and then offer that up. The public generally has no clue how tremendously complex a major investigation is. Even with a dead suspect, all of this still needs to be meticulous in case it forms the basis for subsequent legal proceedings involving other parties.
 

lenaitch

Sr. Member
Reaction score
346
Points
810
Furniture said:
I agree. The way this has been handled from the beginning screams cover-up. Whether it's covering up the inept response from police or something more serious, I don't know. 

If this had happened in the USA we would have had the police tell us the weapons used, the shooters criminal record, and anything else potentially useful in the first 24 hours. Up here it's cover, obscure, and delay as much as possible... The RCMP have a public image issue, and hiding information in this case is not helping it one bit.

We also don't 'perp-walk' an accused in front of cameras or release mugshots.  I'm not sure how "useful" this information other than to satisfy public curiosity.  What is value is the shooter's criminal record?  Does it establish that he did it or just likely to do it?  At that point, they are convicted of nothing.

The singular goal in a major criminal investigation is to put the puck in the net - identify a suspect and obtain a conviction.  If something is released that is later determined to be incorrect, you have an uncertainty or inconsistency.  It all becomes part of the disclosure package.  Do that enough times and defence counsel will try to call all of it into question.  The more times a Crown witness has to clarify inconsistencies, say 'ya but' or 'I don't know' in front of a jury the better the defence case gets.  It's almost got to point now that not only do you have to prove the accused did it but prove that nobody else on the planet could have.

Obviously, in the NS case, a trial is not in the offing, but that is common investigative standard.  Besides, an inquest or inquiry is inevitable.
 

lenaitch

Sr. Member
Reaction score
346
Points
810
Brihard said:
They don’t use compatible radio systems. They DID assist by taking other unrelated calls on behalf of the RCMP to free up members, but they weren’t able to safely integrate on the primary call. Truro police on the road couldn’t talk to RCMP and vice versa. You can probably imagine how hugely dangerous that is. I’ve worked on the road in a jurisdiction where multiple uniformed police services overlap and don’t share radios. It can be a huge problem. Those other police services were better used taking other calls, and they did.

Bear in mind that for a considerable portion of the night he was *not* an active shooter (or ‘active threat’ in our parlance). His behaviour had changed, he had gone to ground, though all police knew is there were no longer new scenes coming in. That changes some aspects of the response. With an active threat you throw everything you have at the threat based on information about their location, which will generally continue to flow in. Once they are no longer actively killing, you slow it down, work the problem, gather info, and try to find, contain, and safely capture the suspect. In this case once he stopped killing for the night and took off, what they had was an immensely overwhelmed gaggle of night shift members, a critical incident command team establishing itself, an already horrendously complex investigation, and a whole lot of info to try to gather, corroborate, and act on. They were flooding resources in from the length of NS and from NB, but that takes time, and police services don’t ‘ad hoc’ an ORBAT on the fly nearly as capably as the military does.

There will undoubtedly be a full inquiry of this, likely resulting in something similar to the MacNeil report following the Moncton murders. Like that one, it will take time.

Transparency is important, but we also don’t know what other investigative angles are being worked, likely including the trafficking of firearms across the border. We will learn more in time, but wanting answers now does not mean we’re entitled to answers now. I’d rather they run absolutely everything down and then offer that up. The public generally has no clue how tremendously complex a major investigation is. Even with a dead suspect, all of this still needs to be meticulous in case it forms the basis for subsequent legal proceedings involving other parties.

Inter-agency communications has been an issue in many incidents, which is why the Ontario government spent mega-bucks a number of years ago putting provincial law enforcement and EMS agencies on the same system, and is spending mega-more-bucks to upgrade it to North American standards which most if not all municipal police services are now on (and may be extended to municipal fire services).

The "want" vs. "entitled" argument is quite valid. Keeping the public happy while assembling evidence is a dance and balancing act. Some would want the police to investigate from glass houses.  I don't even like the release of ITOs before court but it seems the SC and I disagree.  Given the number and geographic spread of scenes, this investigation is astonishingly complex.  Not only do they have to solve each scene, they have to solve each scene to each other scene, and do it in a way that is comprehendable to a court/inquest/inquiry.

This unfolded in a small rural area at night.  The police were trying to make sense of what was unfolding, while it was unfolding, and ramping up their response at the same time.  It's not like the required resources are sleeping in barracks waiting for the alarm.
 

Jarnhamar

Army.ca Legend
Reaction score
1,144
Points
1,060
[quote author=lenaitch]It's almost got to point now that not only do you have to prove the accused did it but prove that nobody else on the planet could have.

[/quote]



Assoun murder case: RCMP suppressed, erased evidence of other suspects

HALIFAX -- The RCMP chose not to disclose an investigator's theories about other suspects to a wrongfully convicted Halifax man fighting to prove he was innocent of murder, federal documents revealed on Friday.

Not only that, but the Mounties digitally erased or destroyed most of this potential evidence -- including the possibility a serial killer, Michael McGray, was a suspect, says the report.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/beta.ctvnews.ca/national/canada/2019/7/12/1_4505150.html

 

Furniture

Sr. Member
Reaction score
100
Points
480
Brihard said:
They don’t use compatible radio systems. They DID assist by taking other unrelated calls on behalf of the RCMP to free up members, but they weren’t able to safely integrate on the primary call. Truro police on the road couldn’t talk to RCMP and vice versa. You can probably imagine how hugely dangerous that is. I’ve worked on the road in a jurisdiction where multiple uniformed police services overlap and don’t share radios. It can be a huge problem. Those other police services were better used taking other calls, and they did.

Bear in mind that for a considerable portion of the night he was *not* an active shooter (or ‘active threat’ in our parlance). His behaviour had changed, he had gone to ground, though all police knew is there were no longer new scenes coming in. That changes some aspects of the response. With an active threat you throw everything you have at the threat based on information about their location, which will generally continue to flow in. Once they are no longer actively killing, you slow it down, work the problem, gather info, and try to find, contain, and safely capture the suspect. In this case once he stopped killing for the night and took off, what they had was an immensely overwhelmed gaggle of night shift members, a critical incident command team establishing itself, an already horrendously complex investigation, and a whole lot of info to try to gather, corroborate, and act on. They were flooding resources in from the length of NS and from NB, but that takes time, and police services don’t ‘ad hoc’ an ORBAT on the fly nearly as capably as the military does.

There will undoubtedly be a full inquiry of this, likely resulting in something similar to the MacNeil report following the Moncton murders. Like that one, it will take time.

Transparency is important, but we also don’t know what other investigative angles are being worked, likely including the trafficking of firearms across the border. We will learn more in time, but wanting answers now does not mean we’re entitled to answers now. I’d rather they run absolutely everything down and then offer that up. The public generally has no clue how tremendously complex a major investigation is. Even with a dead suspect, all of this still needs to be meticulous in case it forms the basis for subsequent legal proceedings involving other parties.

Interesting insight, thanks for sharing. Perhaps inept is the wrong word to use in this case.

lenaitch said:
We also don't 'perp-walk' an accused in front of cameras or release mugshots.  I'm not sure how "useful" this information other than to satisfy public curiosity.  What is value is the shooter's criminal record?  Does it establish that he did it or just likely to do it?  At that point, they are convicted of nothing.

The singular goal in a major criminal investigation is to put the puck in the net - identify a suspect and obtain a conviction.  If something is released that is later determined to be incorrect, you have an uncertainty or inconsistency.  It all becomes part of the disclosure package.  Do that enough times and defence counsel will try to call all of it into question.  The more times a Crown witness has to clarify inconsistencies, say 'ya but' or 'I don't know' in front of a jury the better the defence case gets.  It's almost got to point now that not only do you have to prove the accused did it but prove that nobody else on the planet could have.

Obviously, in the NS case, a trial is not in the offing, but that is common investigative standard.  Besides, an inquest or inquiry is inevitable.

The problem is, the people being served by the police have expectations. If people don't have faith that the police are doing everything they can, and are sharing everything they can with the public, the public will lose faith in the system. I understand investigations require time, and not everything can be released as it may impact the investigation. What apparently happens though is that the police default to not releasing anything, and fight any attempt to get more information.

A perfect example from the case being discussed is; Why was it so long before the RCMP confirmed he had no firearms license? It would have been a quick search to see if there was a license linked to his name, and address. Would confirming his lack of a firearms license impact the trial that won't happen, or did it serve to help the politicians who were pushing a blatantly partisan policy through to try to get some good news, and tick off an election promise? Why were the actual firearms used not released, same as the license?

Maybe that isn't why it took so long to confirm a simple detail, but it sure looks that way, and that undermines the credibility of the police. Now clearly not everybody feels that way about this case, but with every case they pull these stunts they undermine their credibility a bit more with more people.

Now to be clear, I'm not anti-police at all. My concern is that the police forces across Canada have not learned the lesson on openness and accountability the CAF had to learn the hard way.

 

lenaitch

Sr. Member
Reaction score
346
Points
810
Furniture said:
Interesting insight, thanks for sharing. Perhaps inept is the wrong word to use in this case.

The problem is, the people being served by the police have expectations. If people don't have faith that the police are doing everything they can, and are sharing everything they can with the public, the public will lose faith in the system. I understand investigations require time, and not everything can be released as it may impact the investigation. What apparently happens though is that the police default to not releasing anything, and fight any attempt to get more information.

A perfect example from the case being discussed is; Why was it so long before the RCMP confirmed he had no firearms license? It would have been a quick search to see if there was a license linked to his name, and address. Would confirming his lack of a firearms license impact the trial that won't happen, or did it serve to help the politicians who were pushing a blatantly partisan policy through to try to get some good news, and tick off an election promise? Why were the actual firearms used not released, same as the license?

Maybe that isn't why it took so long to confirm a simple detail, but it sure looks that way, and that undermines the credibility of the police. Now clearly not everybody feels that way about this case, but with every case they pull these stunts they undermine their credibility a bit more with more people.

Now to be clear, I'm not anti-police at all. My concern is that the police forces across Canada have not learned the lesson on openness and accountability the CAF had to learn the hard way.

I agree, and some Forces do it better than others.  It's a dance, and the dance was probably easier when the media was all professional, with large outlets having 'crime reporters', who better understood why things were not said, and before social media.  Culturally, cops aren't big at sharing, but what is said and not said has to be credible.  We had one instance where a member was doing a live interview saying he could neither confirm or deny that a homicide had occurred while, at the same time in view of the cameras, a body was being carted out the house in the background.  Most large Forces have dedicated and fairly extensively training media relations members' however, many do not have extensive criminal backgrounds.  Neither do many senior police commanders these days, and operational leaders are often put in a position of not telling their superiors of every investigative detail, for fear that something will slip out at a press conference.  Some demand to know ('I'm the boss') until they are reminded that their name could end up in the Crown Brief.  I have witnessed that and it is uncomfortable.
 

Jarnhamar

Army.ca Legend
Reaction score
1,144
Points
1,060

Crown says release of N.S. mass shooting details could harm 'massive' probe


https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-scotia/crown-ns-shooting-details-could-harm-massive-probe-1.5630044
 

Remius

Army.ca Fixture
Reaction score
879
Points
860
Just read that.

Sounds like a mess if any of it is true.

Edit:

The author has made a career of going after the RCMP in his written work,  I can%u2019t verify how accurate any of it is though.
 
Top