- 2000 MAY 01 -




Received a memo from Sgt. Tom Juby addressed to O I/c Insp. Andy Latham concerning seawater wire standards, auger testing which is to be conducted the 12th to 16th June in Ottawa, Ontario.  In Sgt. Juby's memo he has outlined ten areas of rationale for the support for him to travel to Ottawa, to assist with documenting the testing on the AES seawater wire standards, auger testing.  I have supported and have discussed this with Insp. Latham that he attend, however I find that Sgt. Juby's memo is very confrontational in regards to the TSB.  Examples area: We have undertaken the Seawater Test preparation virtually on our own after lengthy discussions with TSB.  If we fail to attend at this stage it will be as a message to the TSB and partner companies that we are insecure in our desire to complete the testing.  Other area of concern: if we fail to attend at this stage the TSB will imply from it that we have lost interest in the matter.  When the AES report from Dr. Brown is finally completed they will have reason to ignore us and withhold it as they have done with countless other reports in the past.  Our continued attendance will provide a strong foundation argument in our favour.  Another area is:  This member is the only person from the TSB and the RCMP who has complete continuity with ‑‑‑ the wire testing including the Seattle and the AES stage process.  The only person with similar qualifications is Larry Fog, who is employed Boeing, one of the agent companies.  This will be a key factor in the preparation for any upcoming court proceedings.  Sgt. Juby in much of his correspondence shows anti feelings towards the TSB.  I discussed my concerns with Cpl. Purchase.

(CLARIFICATION)    These are Gorman's notes in E&R for this date.  E&R was the data base for exhibits and the notes created by RCMP members in the hangar.  It eventually would be turned over to the TSB for their filing purposes, but in the mean time, every entry was open for other members to read. 

Gorman, as my supervisor, has recorded material that was not appropriate for general reading as it was disciplinary in nature, and as such it was improper for him to record this material in E&R.  What’s more, Cpl. Peter Purchase was subordinate to both of us.  For Gorman to discuss the matter with him as he has described was again improper and it undermined my authority as a sergeant and as an identification section physical evidence investigator.  Gorman had a form 1004 available to him on which this should have been recorded, with a copy then going to me for my information and discussion.  This did not happen.  What he did was to display the material for all to see for two purposes.  It contributed to the effort to discredit me, plus it was readily visible to Lathem to enhance Gorman's commissioning aspirations.

During the meeting of 01 FEB 20 (Change the Notes Meeting), I asked Lathem what he intended to do about these notes.  His response was that they were now in E&R as notes, so they cannot be removed or altered.  He intended to do nothing about them.  Ironic considering they had just demanded that I change my notes.




*  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *



------------ TIME LINE ------------