Case #1: RCMP Sgt. Gary Tidsbury involvement in attack on suspect in Mindy Tran’s murder

December 5, 2016

IMBALANCE IN THE COURT ROOM (PART 3)

The following is the first case in a series where we examine several of Richard Peck’s cases where he acted on behalf of the government as a special prosecutor. The analysis will demonstrate at the very least a perception that Peck may have a pro-accused viewpoint that may lead to a propensity to withdraw charges in cases involving police or government officials. Peck’s pro-accused bias created a perception that he was not independent when he acted as special prosecutor in case against former Ontario Attorney General, Michael Bryant.

 (R. v. Murrin, 1999 CanLII 6025 (BC SC)

 

On August 17, 1994 eight year old Mindy Tran disappeared near her home in Rutland, BC. Her body was discovered on October 11, 1994. The prime suspect in her murder was a neighbour, Shannon Murrin. He would be arrested, tried and acquitted of her murder.

 

 

An RCMP review of the police investigation found that it “was plagued from its first day by police mistakes and personnel problems that ultimately doomed their case against Shannon Murrin” (“Tran murder case doomed from first day, review says”, Globe and Mail, July 18, 2001)

 

 

The report noted that the lead investigator, RCMP Sergeant Gary Tidsbury, should have been replaced. “The downfall of this case was the integrity of the investigation.”  “There were a few whose bad judgment, loss of objectivity and a failure to live up to one’s duty as a member of the RCMP contributed to the downfall of this file.”

 

 

Murrin’s defence attorney’s argued that Tidsbury investigated with tunnel vision and decided very early that Murrin was guilty.

 

 

The review team said that the integrity of the investigation came in to question as a result of a beating of Murrin by three men, “described by RCMP spokesman Cpl. Grant Learned as controlled by the police.” (“Review critical of RCMP”, Kelowna Capital News, July 18th, 2001). The men claimed they were put up to the beating by investigators, including Gary Tidsbury.

Read the rest of this entry »


SPECIAL PROSECUTOR RELIED UPON DISCREDITED EXPERT IN MICHAEL BRYANT CASE

September 27, 2016


CALL FOR EXPERT ANALYSIS REPORTS TO BE RELEASED

image

When special prosecutor Richard Peck withdrew all charges against former Ontario Attorney General, Michael Bryant resulting from Bryant’s killing of Darcy Allan Sheppard, he failed to warn the court and the public about the credibility and bias of the prime video expert in the case.

Peck based his decision in large part due to the analysis of former Vancouver police officer Grant Fredericks whose work has been scathingly discredited as flawed, and biased in favour of law enforcement officials.

Grant Fredericks was a Vancouver police officer from 1988 until 2000. He is now an instructor at the FBI National Academy, an advisor to the International Association of Chiefs of Police, and a principal instructor for the non-profit Law Enforcement and Emergency Services Video Association (LEVA).

Fredericks’ work has come under fire on both sides of the border as it has been repeatedly discredited. In the case of the death of Robert Dziekanski at the hands of the RCMP, Richard Peck acted as the special prosecutor. The Dziekanski case resulted in the dismissal of [Fredericks’] expert testimony and raised questions about “his cozy relationship with the Vancouver police.”

In a United States case involving the death of Otto Zehm, also at the hands of the police, the Justice Department argued that Fredericks offered his services to police and came to his conclusions before he finished analyzing the video of the incident.

The Center for Justice in Spokane, Washington reported:

“The gist of the Justice Department’s rebuttal is that Fredericks has a long record of bias in favor of embattled police officers and police departments, and that he regularly shapes his expert testimony accordingly.”

These shocking revelations raise credibility and bias issues surrounding the expert video evidence in the case against Michael Bryant. They create a perception of conflict of interest and special treatment for the former chief administrator of the justice system in the province.

Read the rest of this entry »


WHY DID MICHAEL BRYANT WAIT THREE MINUTES TO CALL 911?

October 22, 2015

On August 31, 2009, former Ontario Attorney General, Michael Bryant was involved in a road rage attack that killed cyclist Darcy Allan Sheppard. Bryant was arrested that evening but he did not make a statement to police. He would not make a statement until almost eight months later when he and his lawyers received complete and full disclosure of the Crown’s case. Bryant did however make a 911 call to police. After he successfully knocked Darcy Allan Sheppard off his car with a fire hydrant, Bryant fled to the Hyatt Hotel on Avenue Road just north of Bloor. It became the staging area for his defence.

BryantSaabHyatt

Bryant described his actions in his book, “28 Seconds”

“So I turned right on Avenue Road and drove into the hotel’s circular driveway and found, I thought, sanctuary. I stopped the car and pulled up the emergency brake-for what would be the final time. I couldn’t find my cell phone. Susan offered hers.”

In a video interview with the Toronto Star, he said: “And so I pulled over and called 911. It was… police need to come and protect us.”

In his CBC interview with Amanda Lang he said: “So I drove in and called 911 and ah said, help, bring police..”

His lawyer, Marie Henein wrote in her article, “Split Seconds Matter,” “He drove to safety just around the corner to a hotel and called 911.”

What’s missing from all of these descriptions is that when Michael Bryant drove to the Hyatt Hotel, in what he described as a state of fear, he did not call 911 right away. He waited three minutes!

Read the rest of this entry »


28 Questions!

February 14, 2015

Follow Allan Sheppard’s blog on his son’s violent death at the hands of former Ontario Attorney General Michael Bryant:

“In the meantime, know that I hope to talk here about my late son Darcy Allan Sheppard and the circumstances and events that preceded and followed his violent death in Toronto on 31 August 2009.”

Mr. Sheppard will also comment on his efforts to understand the special prosecutor’s decision to drop the charges.

“I will also comment extensively on my largely unsuccessful efforts to find out why and how Mr. Peck and Mark Sandler, the Toronto lawyer who oversaw the investigation, chose to exonerate.”

28 Questions


Conclusion of the Police Reconstruction Report – Michael Bryant

June 11, 2014

Toronto Police prepared a detailed collision reconstruction report based on eyewitness accounts, forensic evidence and video evidence. This report was made available to Michael Bryant and his legal team BEFORE Mr. Bryant came up with his version of the events.

Note that the forensic investigation revealed that:

Blood was not located on the steering wheel, passenger side or on the tires of the vehicle. 

Below are the Conclusions of the report. The full Police Collision Reconstruction Report is available here.

Compare its contents to the Special Prosecutor’s brief in court and you will be struck by the vast differences.


 

CONCLUSION

 

Mr. BRYANT and Mr. SHEPPARD shared responsibility in the death of Mr. SHEPPARD.

 

Mr. BRYANT struck Mr. SHEPPARD not once, but twice from a stopped position on Bloor Street West east of the pedestrian signalized intersection which was captured on a building security cameras at#112 Bloor Street West.

 

The first collision occurred after Mr. SHEPPARD stopped his bike in front of the Saab. Mr BRYANT accelerated the Saab from a stopped position into the rear of the bicycle, knocking the bicycle over and jostling Mr. SHEPPARD.

 

The second collision occurred after Mr. SHEPPARD righted his bicycle in front of Mr. BRYANT. The Saab was stopped for two seconds. Mr. BRYANT rapidly accelerated the Saab again into the stopped cyclist, Mr. SHEPPARD was struck, carried on the hood of the car and thrown to the ground from the force of the impact.

 

Mr. BRYANT reversed his Saab and drove around the bicycle which was on the ground with Mr. SHEPPARD.

 

As Mr. BRYANT tried to drive around Mr, SHEPPARD and the bicycle, Mr. SHEPPARD approached the Saab and held onto the drivers’ side of the vehicle. Mr. BRYANT accelerated rapidly in a south westerly direction into on-coming traffic.

 

There was no physical evidence, or independent witness statements suggesting Mr. SHEPPARD affected the steering of the Saab, or anything to suggest he physically attacked Mr. BRYANT.

 

Mr. BRYANT drove the Saab on the roadway westbound in the eastbound lanes with Mr. SHEPPARD holding onto the drivers’ side of the vehicle.

 

Mr. SHEPPARD’s left leg struck a tree near#131Bloor Street West, and he continued to hold onto the side of the vehicle.

 

Mr. SHEPPARD held onto the side of the vehicle until his torso struck a fire hydrant.

 

Mr. SHEPPARD landed on the pavement striking his head on the asphalt.

 

Mr. BRYANT continued to drive the Saab in a westerly direction and left Mr. SHEPPARD lying on the street.

 

Mr. BRYANT drove westbound on Bloor Street West and turned north on Avenue Road. Mr. BRYANT entered the Hyatt Regency Hotel and parked his vehicle. Mr. BRYANT had a conversation with the concierge and called police. (three minutes later)

 

Mr. SHEPPARD died as a result of his injuries sustained in the collision.

 

Mr. BRYANT’s final actions in the third collision sequence led to the death of Mr. SHEPPARD. Mr. BRYANT’s failure to stop the Saab when Mr. SHEPPARD deliberately hung on to the side of the Saab, and driving his vehicle on the opposite side of the road in an attempt to dislodge Mr. SHEPPARD from his vehicle gave the appearance of a deliberate act according to witnesses.

Mr. SHEPPARD also is responsible for his actions that led up to the concluding incident.

All of these incidents were unfortunate and avoidable.

 


Michael Bryant’s road rage deception

April 30, 2014

After Michael Bryant’s road rage attack and killing of Darcy Allan Sheppard he has embarked on a campaign to deceive the public by reframing, misleading and outright lying about evidence.

Michael Bryant claimed witnesses did not link his killing of Darcy Allan Sheppard with road rage but more than one witness used the term “road rage” to describe Bryant’s behaviour.

 


Michael Bryant’s complaints of harsh treatment by Toronto Police proven false

August 27, 2012

Bryant’s Lawyer praised Police investigation

Bryant Watch August 27, 2012

Michael Bryant in custody

Michael Bryant’s memoir about the night he killed Darcy Allan Sheppard is to be released tomorrow. The book is entitled “28 Seconds” and gives his self-serving account of the events that evening.

Bryant has been on a media tour of soft-ball interviews allowing him to promote the book while avoiding questions regarding the parts of his version that directly conflict with the evidence and or prior statements contained in court transcripts. Bryant revealed that he was an alcoholic until 2006. It’s not known if and when he had any relapses because no one in the media had asked him the question.

One of the new charges Bryant raised is police rushed to judgment when they charged him in Sheppard’s death.

“He is wrong,” police spokesman Mark Pugash protested.

“He had a team of very aggressive, very good lawyers whose job it is to jump on anything that will help their client, and we haven’t heard anything about this (until now),” Pugash said. “If he had all these concerns, why has he been quiet for the last three years? Why have his lawyers not raised a single one of these concerns?”

In fact in the court transcripts Bryant’s lawyer Marie Henein praised the treatment Bryant received from police:

“I want to take a moment to also express our thanks to Detective Britton, Detective Lane, Detective Lalla, for a thorough and evenhanded investigation.

I was confident throughout this case that we would be treated the same as, not better and not worse, than any other accused, that Mr. Peck would do no more and no less than is demanded in the prosecution of any case.”

Read the rest of this entry »