Manna from a good reporter.
Rob Ford’s prominence in police investigation into two other men puzzling, experts say | National Post
It is on page 96 of a 465-page police file released by an Ontario Superior Court judge when euphoria over a deluge of salacious details on Toronto Mayor Rob Ford wanes and a question creeps in:
why is the mayor’s request for a junior staffer to bring two cases of Diet Coke to his Etobicoke home included in a police search warrant, written to help pinch two small-scale marijuana dealers?
On page 118, Toronto police say a former member of the mayor’s staff told detectives the mayor was “bawling” when he learned he could no longer coach high school football; on page 135 police say Mr. Ford called staff in tears from his father’s gravesite; on page 155 he is accused of calling a taxi driver a “Paki;” and, on the next page, detectives reveal they were told he called out to a female security guard he was “going to eat her box.”
Such embarrassing entries, guzzled by the world’s media and late-night comedians, are puzzling when read against the document’s pro forma opening: on page 2,
detectives say the document was prepared to justify a search of property belonging to two men, neither of whom is Rob Ford.
Mr. Ford is referenced 2,049 times in the document. One of the men charged in the case, Jamshid Bahrami, is named only 184 times. The other man charged, Alexander Lisi, is named 2,029 times.
The Fords — the mayor and his city councillor brother, Doug — expressed their views on why, with Doug accusing Police Chief Bill Blair of a conspiracy aimed at regime change; of wanting to “put a political bullet right between the mayor’s eyes.”
But there are broader, less fervid, concerns.
“There is an inordinate amount of information on our mayor that does not appear to be relevant to the investigation or the request to a judge to issue a search warrant. There is a lot about conduct which is of questionable value to the stated purpose,” said Joseph Neuberger, a Toronto criminal defence lawyer, who is not involved in the case.
“The police were doing what they had to do – following crime. They gather as much information as possible. But the reason for the inclusion of so much information on the behaviour of the mayor in the [Information to Obtain, called an] ITO is not sufficiently clear to me.”
Related
“How did those very personal and very sad details get deemed as relevant to use, as reasonable and probable grounds to believe
an offence has been committed, for the purpose of a search warrant?”
It is not so much a question of why police looked into the mayor at all. That has been amply answered in the ITO. There is enough evidence gathered by officers to show cause for alarm, although none of it has been tested in court.
The proximity of the mayor to a large guns-and-gangs probe, codenamed Project Traveller, and to a murder investigation, that of Anthony Smith, prompted detectives to raise
“the Rob Ford connection,” as it is called by police in the ITO. Mr. Smith was killed in March; police think he might have had a video on his phone that appears to show Mr. Ford smoking crack cocaine.
Other portions of the ITO appear to be relevant to a drug probe, including pages of information provided to detectives by the mayor’s former staff who suspected Lisi of helping Mr. Ford buy drugs.
‘How did those very personal and very sad details get deemed as relevant to use?’
It seems natural that an investigator might secretly follow the mayor when he is with Lisi, a suspected drug dealer, especially when the meetings take place under suspicious circumstances, such as when Lisi is seen placing packages in the mayor’s car or disappearing into the woods with the mayor.
The public importance of investigating a nexus between a city’s chief magistrate and drug dealers, not to mention a video that may have led to violence, threats and death, appears to be clear. But what of the plethora of other shocking information, much of it best described as juicy gossip? Are police investigating moral lapses and crass behavior?
Mark Pugash, spokesman for the Toronto police, said investigators anticipated the criticism — and reject it.
“There is a strong element of ‘we’re damned if we do and damned if we don’t,’” he said. Put a lot of detail in and police are accused of being politically motivated against the mayor; put little in and the same officers are accused of shielding and covering up for the mayor.
Mr. Pugash agreed that when the mayor stumbled into the frame of the police probe it required special handling, if for no other reason than that it would draw unprecedented scrutiny. “It is because of the profile of the investigation that there has been this abundance of caution,” he said.
Chief Blair worked to mitigate the fallout, he said.
Step one was the chief assigning his top investigator to be at the helm, Det.-Sgt. Gary Giroux, said Mr. Pugash. Step two was to consult outside the force: “They have consulted with the Crown throughout the whole process. They have taken advice at every single stage in the process,” said Mr. Pugash.
Before Chief Blair stood on live television to reveal that police had recovered a copy of the infamous video — during which he said watching it left him “disappointed” — he consulted with two lawyers on what he should and should not say, Mr. Pugash said.
“The best defence against people accusing you of either targeting or shielding is to make sure that everything you’ve done is absolutely clear, that you can articulate why you’ve done what you’ve done, the length you’ve gone to get advice.
“The decision about what would be included in it came as a result of very detailed consultation with the Crown.”
But venture into specifics — like why Mr. Ford’s call to a staff member to come change the light bulbs outside his house or to replace batteries in a children’s toy — and Mr. Pugash declines to explain.
“It may well come out in court,” he said.
“We have been accused of both covering up for him and for targeting him. If people are accusing you of completely incompatible things, the chances are, you’re probably right down the middle.”
Defence lawyers questioning the police approach agree that, for now, police get the benefit of the doubt, but the difference between the ITO involving the mayor and any other does not diminish.
Mr. Neuberger has dissected many ITOs in his career, including in a massive probe against Mafia boss Alfonso Caruana, one of the world’s largest drug traffickers. None looked like this one.
“It is extremely long. It is extremely detailed. I’ve never seen a 500-page ITO. I have never seen such detail in an ITO. All of this sort of comes together quite uncomfortably,” he said.
“If it is not bearing fruit for a criminal investigation it is not relevant. Superfluous, irrelevant information ought not to be in there,” he said. “As to the motive, I can’t speculate,” said Mr. Neuberger.
Notes Mr. Clark: “Once it is in the ITO, the investigators know it will be seen by other eyes.”
“I have wondered,” said Mr. Clark, “about what might happen when police do that to a politician who hasn’t alienated so many people, who hasn’t been so belligerent and engendered such animosity.”
The court proceedings that may shed light on the police investigation are proceeding but could take years to conclude.
