The fact that the RCMP “investigators” ignored key and critical evidence was biased and misleading at best. When the integrity of the RCMP and the conduct of their investigation was challenged at the Public Inquiry, this was recognized by not only the Commissioner, but also his counsel, and counsel representing the FSIN. The Commissioner noted that the RCMP may have prepared a corrupt document by changing the context and content of a direct question put to me by the investigator, and by the answer I provided in response (Public Inquiry pg. 7872 – 7874 ). This was in relation to what I had read in a Feb. 22, 2000 StarPhoenix article in which Jason Roy made his allegation public (“Decade-old death resurfaces”). The RCMP officer had asked me if I read it. I said I had and that there had been lots of discussion about the article among my colleges. He asked me what the talk was about and I repeated what was discussed. The only problem was that, although he asked me a direct question: (what I had read, heard from others, and discussed), my response to this question was portrayed as a statement that I made voluntary and one that matched Jason Roy’s allegation. In the RCMP final report this was portrayed as a voluntary statement made by me about something I experienced first hand and that I was recalling the information as a result of being directly involved in this alleged incident.
This was brought up at the inquiry by retired Saskatoon Police officer Keith Jarvis, who stated that the RCMP made a series of suggestions to him about what they believed, and perhaps hoped were facts, in order to induce him to make statements about things that he says he had no recollection of, as if they were from his own memory (Public Inquiry pg. 4573).
This was also the case for the Commission Investigator hired to tie up “loose ends” before the Inquiry began. This “investigator” was an ex-RCMP officer who not only recorded an interview with Jarvis, he edited the tape, taping over answers given to “make it sound better.” This was done many times, to a point where it seemed that Jarvis “confessed” that Jason Roy did tell him of his allegation in 1990 and that Jarvis did not record it or report it anywhere.
In any other case, this would be called corruption. In any other case, the RCMP officers who did this may well stand accused of obstructing justice.
Instead these “investigators” were excluded from testifying, even though they had been scheduled to do so. The decision about who testified and who did not was up to the Commission counsel. Did this constitute misconduct as well?
Once again. All of this, and so much more, has been ignored and is still ignored to this day. This kind of conduct by ANY police officer or justice official puts everyone at risk. It also demonstrates that, to many, the end justify the means. It also demonstrates the Saskatchewan justice system and its officials are not worthy of respect.