A Vancouver woman feels upset every time she sees United Way Campaign commercials claiming that donations will be used to promote “respect” in the community. If United Way values respect, she says, why haven’t they helped get fake evidence attached to her name in police files expunged. The fake evidence, she says, appears in a Vancouver Police report dated Dec. 18, 2002, written after Ron Dumouchelle, Executive Director of United Way of Vancouver and the Lower Mainland, lodged a police complaint against her.                

Dumouchelle wanted police to pressure the Vancouver woman — we’ll call her “the whistleblower”– to suppress a Report on United Way to which she and others had contributed and were making available to major donors. Dumouchelle stated in an internal document, dated the week police were called, that if donors got even a “whiff” of this report, donations to United Way could be affected.

Even after Constable J.P. St. Amant admitted in his police report that he and Dumouchelle were aware that this case was “not a criminal matter” but a civil matter, the police report reveals that Dumouchelle continued to pressure police to make contact with the whistleblower.

The whistleblower believes that the VPD, who fundraise for United Way and appear in their newspaper advertisements, were performing favors for United Way. Certainly it was acknowledged in the police report that Dumouchelle had recruited police to visit the whistleblower because civil court wouldn’t be quick enough for him.  And police did not follow the usual procedure of entering, at the top of the police report, the alleged “OFFENCE” being investigated; that section was left blank. 

The first visit by police to the whistleblower’s home occurred on Dec. 18, 2002, the same day as police reported taking “oral statements” from Dumouchelle and other individuals guaranteed anonymity. Dumouchelle had invited these anonymous individuals to a meeting with police at United Way Campaign headquarters on Dunsmuir St. in Vancouver. When Constables Lee Patterson and J.P. St. Amant arrived at the apartment of the whistleblower, she says, they pounded on her apartment door until the entire wood-framed building shook: “They scared my neighbors and damaged my reputation.” Const. St. Amant later left the woman a voice mail, which she has preserved, denying that he and Patterson, had acted aggressively at her home.

The report that United Way wanted suppressed contained information about practices in United Way member groups that several women and men wanted funders to put a stop to. The report focused primarily on allegations against a battered women’s organization, allegations such as unfair labour practices and course entry requirements that differed for different applicants.

Dumouchelle was feeling the heat. He revealed in an internal document dated Dec. 2002 that he had been contacted by the Canadian Labour Congress and a few corporate donors about the Report on UW. It was then that he asked police to press the whistleblower to take out of circulation a form letter which offered the Report on UW to major donors.

Evidence Fabrication and Misrepresentation
After reviewing the police report, the whistleblower lodged a written complaint in 2003 to the Board of Directors of United Way in which she outlined evidence that had been fabricated. Shortly afterwards, Dumouchelle resigned as Executive Director — no reason given publicly. But United Way “has done nothing in five years”, says the whistleblower, to have the libelous material attached to her name expunged from police files.

In the police report written on Dec. 18th, the day police were briefed by anonymous individuals at United Way, Const. Patterson announced that the Report on UW was “paranoid in nature”. The whistleblower calls this, “Outright fraud.” To support Patterson’s claim, text presented in the police report as excerpts from the Report on UW was either completely fabricated or taken out of context and misrepresented — consistently in a manner which made the whistleblower look like a nut. Following is a sampling:

lesbian “couch-trip” practices
Const. Patterson wrote that the whistleblower had written about lesbian “couch-trip” practices in the UW Report. “Outright fraud”, the whistleblower says again. The term “couch trip” had appeared nowhere in the Report on UW. Yet the term “couch trip” was presented in quotation marks in the police report and identified as a direct quote from the UW Report. The whistleblower has no idea what a “couch trip” is.

“cult-like practices” 
In the police report, the whistleblower was presented as having gone on in the Report on UW about “cult-like practices” at the battered women’s organization. What was conveniently concealed in the police report, though, was the fact that it was clearly stated in the Report on UW that it was an anthropologist from Simon Fraser University who had identified a few practices at the battered women’s organization as being typical of cults — not the whistleblower.

“mentions Homolka case and comparisons”
Another deceptive claim inserted in Patterson’s police report on the day he met with Dumouchelle was the following: “mentions Homolka case and comparisons.” A review of the Report on UW reveals no “comparisons” whatsoever with the case of Homolka, who was convicted of being an accomplice to her husband in serial killings.

“sexual overtones”
Despite the fact that the bulk of the Report on UW focused on unfair labor practices and fluctuating course entry requirements, it was summarized in the police report as having “sexual overtones”. The whistleblower found this “bizarre”. She speculates that this “sexual overtones” claim resulted from a tabloid journalism style “magnification” of one segment of the Report on UW, a segment which outlined allegations of discrimination against heterosexual women at the battered women’s organization where administrators were lesbian.

“requesting $525 compensation for her 16 page report.”
Even the content of the form letter announcing that the Report on UW was available to major donors was falsified in the police report. An announcement in the form letter that the report was available for a fee of “$25 to cover labour costs” was misrepresented in the police report as “requesting $525 compensation for her 16 page report.” (The date on the form letter was correctly identified in the police report.) The inflation by $500 of this fee on a page of the police report in which the Report on UW was being portrayed as “paranoid in nature” served to enhance the portrayal of the whistleblower as a crackpot.

 “concerned for the safety of employees” (a claim which was retracted the same day)
On Dec. 18th, Cst. Patterson claimed in his report that the reason for the police visit to United Way was, “DUMOUCHELLE” is concerned for safety of Employees.” Yet this claim was retracted just hours later. During follow-up questioning the same day, Const. Patterson got Dumouchelle to acknowledge that safety “is not perceived as an issue.” Dumouchelle further admitted, according to Patterson’s report, that there had been “no threat (direct or indirect) involving physical harm or property damage.” In fact, in the police report which was absurdly redundant, Dumouchelle admitted on 15 separate occasions during questioning either in person or over the telephone that the whistleblower posed “no physical risk”.

Request for Criminal Investigation into United Way and Several Major Donors
The whistleblower has never been told the names of anonymous witnesses who, according to Constable Patterson’s Dec. 18 report, met with police at United Way Campaign headquarters: “PC’s 2010/2125 met with witnesses and complainant at 777 Dunsmuir…” Later on the same page of the police report, though, Patterson entered the names of several major United Way donors as witnesses in the case:

· Canadian Red Cross
· Revenue Canada
· Canada Post
· Toronto Dominion Bank
· Westminster Savings
· Canada Safeway

In requesting a public mischief investigation into this case, the whistleblower named the above-listed donors along with United Way and Dumouchelle. These donors were presented in the police report as witnesses based on the fact that they had obtained copies of circulating documents — a Report on UW or a form letter making the report available. Documents collected from them were later turned over to the VPD “harassment unit”, as indicated by the Dec. 29 police report. [This process may have been interrupted by a ‘Cease & Desist” letter sent to St. Amant’s supervisor, Sgt. Hatchman, as the Dec. 29th page would be the final one in the police report.]

In addition to an investigation into donors, the whistleblower had wanted an investigation into the role, if any, of the national United Way of Canada in the lodging of the “mischievous” police complaint . A letter exists to support the whistleblower’s claim that Executive Director, David Armour, became aware of this case shortly before the police complaint was lodged.

Despite Inspector John De Haas of the VPD having telling the whistleblower that she was entitled to request a public mischief investigation if a police complaint lodged against her had been unfounded and involved fabricated evidence, no investigation took place. When she requested the investigation, she got a call from Sergeant Warren Lemcke making excuses to stall it (this issue will be covered in a separate article, along with Lemcke’s alleged illegal activity in this case). 

PART II: United Way and VPD face allegations of further retaliation against the whistleblower based on the ordering of a VPD “Car 87” visit to her home after she put on record her intent to seek a “Public Mischief” investigation.
Canadians Opposing Political Psychiatry have labelled this alleged retaliation, “political psychiatry”. The whistleblower has documented evidence to support her claim that the Car 87 visit was ordered under “fraudulent pretenses”. More on this in Part II, to be published soon.

For the complete text of the original article, “Fraudulent Evidence Found In United Way Police Complaint”, go to Downtown Eastside Enquirer

Be Sociable, Share!