1327 replies to this topic

[rmpeers]

Here's what continues to gnaw at me: Helps knew about several of the Elsner allegations and yet still subsequently told a reporter he was the best thing ever. Why?

Option 1: she genuinely thought that. Unlikely. I'll assume she doesn't think harrassment is the best thing ever.

Option 2: she lied. And in lying she must have known how bad she would look when the truth came out. Now, anyone who's followed her knows that her public comments are always calibrated to make her look good.

So after much thought, the inevitable conclusion seems to me to be that she lied because she was confident that the truth would be kept under wraps. As part of an investigation that she at the time was controlling.

I read that as deliberate intent to suppress the allegations, but would love to hear any credible alternative theories.

Since we won't get a public inquiry, I think this merits further discussion.

[Bingo]

Give it up. We aren't gonna get anymore traction out of this debate unless some of the VicPD members pursue it further.

[Rob Randall]

Here's what I think prompted Helps' "greatest thing" comment.

 

While expected, the reporter's question still caught her a little off guard. She had been prepped by Desjardins to internalize the reality that because the investigation had been rushed to a conclusion before reporters could get to the co-chairs, that there really wasn't an investigation. There was no investigation in progress at that particular moment, yes, it was technically true.

 

In response to the reporter's inquiry, Helps gave a firm "no". But that word just hung in the air, suspiciously. Helps instinctively knew she had to say something to fill the dead air and draw attention away from what was supposed to be a secret investigation. She probably sensed that words like "The Chief has our confidence..." was damning with faint praise so instead blurted out something she thought would create a firewall in order to buy time until the harassment allegations could be sorted out.

 

The words “He's the best thing that's happened to this town and Esquimalt in a long time” tumbled out of her mouth. The phrase immediately turned sour and she tried not to wince. She realized she got out in front of her skis a bit too far. But never mind. Disaster averted. For now.

 

"The best thing that's happened to this town...".

 

Which, apart from the sad plight of Elsner's out-of-control libido, seemed to have a ring of truth, especially after the excruciating and destructive reigns of Chiefs Graham and Battershill. If he had managed to keep his baton where it belonged he might have been the best chief we've seen in a long time but we'll never know. Now Elsner's hawking cannabis, which seems to be the last resort for washed-up civil servants. 

Edited by Rob Randall, 23 October 2018 - 02:25 PM.

[Sparky]

...”keep his baton where it belonged”... Jesus Murphy I think I just backed some Red Bull out my nose.

[spanky123]

Here's what I think prompted Helps' "greatest thing" comment.

 

While expected, the reporter's question still caught her a little off guard. She had been prepped by Desjardins to internalize the reality that because the investigation had been rushed to a conclusion before reporters could get to the co-chairs, that there really wasn't an investigation. There was no investigation in progress at that particular moment, yes, it was technically true.

 

It wasn't technically true if the Mayors had proceeded with a request for the 2nd investigation as they both have claimed.

 

I think what happened was pretty straight forward. When the first allegations were brought forward the Mayors assessed that they were pretty minor in nature and that it would be in everyone's best interest if they just kept a lid on things and handled the issue between the 3 of them. They felt that keeping the OPCC and police board in the dark would not distract anyone from their message and image. As new allegations surfaced and their investigator dug deeper they found themselves in the situation where the hole kept getting deeper and deeper and the political cost of hauling themselves out was getting greater and greater. Rather than cutting their losses and fessing up, they decided to go for broke and obfuscate. They guessed, largely correctly, that most voters would not invest the time to understand what actually happened and that they could rely on their base for support.

Edited by spanky123, 23 October 2018 - 04:38 PM.

[Belleprincess]

Why did people vote for Desjardins? She had no serious challenger.

Why did people vote Helps? Because the alternatives looked worse than a bad mayor. I know a lot of people that voted Helps relectlantly because Hammond gave them no evidence he could actually be an effective mayor and the other two guys just did not engage the public on the doorstep. Helps won because people had more confidence in her flawed history than Hammond.

To win an election like mayor of Victoria you need to have a lot of door-knocking volunteers IDing your support and then make sure they all vote by tracking everyone that voted as they voted. Guess what, only Helps did that.

Hammond should have had a team of 100 volunteers IDing the vote starting in July. That is elections 101

I would choose mild incompetence over total destruction any day of the week. But that’s just me

[rmpeers]

It wasn't technically true if the Mayors had proceeded with a request for the 2nd investigation as they both have claimed.

I think what happened was pretty straight forward. When the first allegations were brought forward the Mayors assessed that they were pretty minor in nature and that it would be in everyone's best interest if they just kept a lid on things and handled the issue between the 3 of them. They felt that keeping the OPCC and police board in the dark would not distract anyone from their message and image. As new allegations surfaced and their investigator dug deeper they found themselves in the situation where the hole kept getting deeper and deeper and the political cost of hauling themselves out was getting greater and greater. Rather than cutting their losses and fessing up, they decided to go for broke and obfuscate. They guessed, largely correctly, that most voters would not invest the time to understand what actually happened and that they could rely on their base for support.

Good thoughtful analysis from both Rob amd Spanky; but given her evasiveness, Spanky's rings truer for me.

[Sparky]

"A number of the women expressed concern about the Police Board, and whether real change can take place without a change in leadership. Their perception was that the Board seemed to support their former chief, yet chose not to communicate or offer support for the women who were the victims of his harassment."

 

Stan Lowe 2018

[Mike K.]

Someone should make that statement their forum signature.

[rmpeers]

"A number of the women expressed concern about the Police Board, and whether real change can take place without a change in leadership. Their perception was that the Board seemed to support their former chief, yet chose not to communicate or offer support for the women who were the victims of his harassment."

Stan Lowe 2018

And now the same board chairs have been reinstalled. Wonderful.

[Sparky]

Dec 10 2015

https://vancouverisl...o?clipId=767340

Nov 15 2016

https://vancouverisl...o?clipId=995752

[spanky123]

Give it up. We aren't gonna get anymore traction out of this debate unless some of the VicPD members pursue it further.

 

I think that the last outstanding item would be the results of an FOI act request for the letter that Mayor Helps says her EA forgot to send to the OPCC. 

 

I am sure that there has been a few requests now for that!

Edited by spanky123, 26 October 2018 - 10:14 AM.

[rmpeers]

I think that the last outstanding item would be the results of an FOI act request for the letter that Mayor Helps says her EA forgot to send to the OPCC.

I am sure that there has been a few requests now for that!

Is there currently an FOI request on this?

Not that it'll make much difference. I'm certain that you could show Helps supporters time-coded video of her saying "we'll make sure these allegations never come out" and then laughing maniacally, and her supporters would still insist it was an innocent mistake.

[Sparky]

Isn’t this the cover letter you are looking for?

https://opcc.bc.ca/w...a-Statement.pdf

[Sparky]

Timeline

Nov 16 2015 Desjardins and Helps receive report and cover letter from investigator. Report notes that Elsner did have an inappropriate relationship with member’s wife. Cover letter included alleged sexual harrassment with a number of other female officers and staff.

Dec 3 2015 Early morning email from Desjardins to Helps requesting to finalize internal investigation before media exposes internal investigation.

Dec 4 2015 Desjardins and Helps advise the Police Board of their decision to put a reprimand in Elsner’s file as punishment and submits report to OPCC without the cover letter. The report included the reprimand with different wording than the one in Elsner’s file. Desjardins and Helps deny the existance of the investigation to the media.

Dec 6 2015 Desjardins acknowledged that there was an investigation regarding inappropriate use of Twitter account but denies that there was an inappropriate relationship with member”s wife.

Dec 7 2015 OPCC asks for more material from Helps and Desjardins because of media misleadings.

Dec 11 2015 Police association (Union) advises OPCC of lack of confidence in the Police Board and Elsner.

Dec 18 2015 OPCC orders external investigation.

Desjardins and Helps had knowledge of the alleged sexual harrassment for over a month before the OPCC ordered an investigation.

It has taken almost another 3 years for the public to know what the Police Board Co-Chairs were advised of by the investigator.

[Nparker]

...It has taken almost another 3 years for the public to know what the Police Board Co-Chairs were advised of by the investigator.

But it took barely a month for the Helps/Desjardins spin doctors to cast enough doubt on the matter to allow both of these amoral people to get a pass from a sizable contingent of the electorate. It saddens me that neither of them will likely ever pay the price for their role in this entire sordid episode.

[spanky123]

Isn’t this the cover letter you are looking for?

https://opcc.bc.ca/w...a-Statement.pdf

 

No. Helps claimed that she was planning to investigate the allegations of assault and harassment, but the letter that she intended to send to the OPCC about the matter was mishandled by her EA and was never sent.

[Rob Randall]

This is the key portion of Desjardins' defence that appears to contradict the PCC and the timeline above:

 

After the discipline issue we had recently concluded was leaked to the press, the PCC changed his mind and ruled that the matters we had investigated and imposed discipline for were indeed matters involving the public trust, after all. 

 

He then decided he would re-investigate and re-adjudicate those same matters under the public trust discipline process set out in the Police Act.  By then he had also had other allegations of misconduct on the part of Chief Elsner to consider.   Some of those other allegations came out of his reading of the evidence reported by our internal investigator, and others were brought straight to the PCC by the Police Union.

 

 

Who is ngw2 at the bottom of the cover letter? Presumably that's the person that prepared the letter and may have been responsible for sending it to the PCC.

[spanky123]

This is the key portion of Desjardins' defence that appears to contradict the PCC and the timeline above:

 

 

Who is ngw2 at the bottom of the cover letter? Presumably that's the person that prepared the letter and may have been responsible for sending it to the PCC.

 

That would be Gallivan's assistant.

[Rob Randall]

^Sorry, I forgot it was Helps' assistant, not Gallivan's, that "forgot" to attach the letter.

 

Desjardins or Helps never explained the two different reprimands given to Elsner.