Nov 4 2018 – Kevin Yaworski – www.WiseUpWinnipeg.com
Image of For Profit Conduent Photo Enforcement vehicle with For Profit Traffic Safe Solutions Inc. “designated” Peace Officer / Special Constable / Operator setup in Waverly DCZ in July 2018.
This DCZ was extended south of Victor Lewis drive in July 2018 beyond what was approved by the City of Winnipeg for the construction starting at Wilkes and Hurst way and with limit reduced to 50 km/hr instead of 60. Signage was also against MB and national standards. The operators were there daily after the zone extended and parked unsafely, in no parking zone, turn lane and just before a bus stop. This continued till Sept 2018 after several FIPPA request results released after delays and resistence from the City of Winnipeg.
Even with regular protests with WiseUpWinnipeg members and media WPS and the City allowed enforcement to continue. We have had more response from the accused at this location than any other. This was not only unfair, it was unsafe and arguably unlawful. All the other locations they target also have known, created and dangerous engineering deficiencies. They target the average safe driver in these locations instead of dangerous drivers and are reactive only. There is little to no prevention and mostly manufactured violations that trend up with more and more dirty tactics being used.
To learn more about the Waverly DCZ issues, prepare for trial if you accused and more here:
There is an upward trend of MB Ombudsman, LSM, APEGM, Chief Justice and other formal complaints in Manitoba and Winnipeg. We have information to prove many of these are being dismissed, not investigated properly or inadequate consequences. Worse steps taken to change the ethics and related rules to make it easier to cover up or ignore lying, professional misconduct and other wrong doing.
Some recent Ombudsman complaints are starting to reverse this trend but much more needed. We will cover more of these issues in the near future.
For now here is an important update regarding formal complaints to the Manitoba Law Enforcement Review Agency (LERA) for abuse of authority, false statements, altering evidence, putting the public at risk and related by photo enforcement operators or police officers.
Followed by some related issues in MB Courts and examples of when LERA complaints required for operator or officer with simple alleged traffic offenses plus related information on this “safety” revenue before proper engineering, real safety, justice, pedestrian and driver education and other public interests.
Related media coverage:
Max Churley is the current appainted LERA Commissioner and they have four investigators. Max was previously a investigator and administrator with the RCMP for 29 years.
One of our members contacted us with the following:
“Hello. Just thought I would let you know that LERA has finally agreed to do an investigation into my complaint against photo enforcement operator. I am going down there to sign my email of complaint to make it official. I have had many emails back and forth. Thank you for the advise you gave me. It made my argument much more convincing and official.”
In the end Churley or the investigator assigned finally agreed to open complaint but dismissed it without investigating using more excuses of jurisdiction or it being past 30 days of the incident. There is more that needs to be done to expose this wrong doing, puppet organization and need for reforms.
We would like to thank the members and general public that reported issues of LERA claiming they did not have jurasdiction or not investigating abuse of authority or other misconduct properly to us by emailing firstname.lastname@example.org or posting or commenting on the WiseUpWinnipeg Facebook group or sending private messages. We will continue to add these to our archives and use to help demonstrate the trend of anti public interests and using “safety” to increase revenue by the system.
This has led to us getting more informed of the sections of the MB LERA and Police Services Acts plus the Code of Ethics so we know what specifically is acceptable behavior of our police officers, peace officers and special constables as well as what LERA should be investigating.
This allowed us to help this member to get investigations opened into photo enforcement operators / special constables that were denied initially saying no jurasdiction, they are not employed by WPS or some other excuse.
I have started to share this and will post about this so we can help others who have been or get denied like them initially. I will ask Robert to post to the website as well.
If you are detail oriented like me we have to be careful not to over complicate the message or in this case complaint which was part of her issue initally.
Regarding LERA complaints and the sections of the LERA Act below.
Amendments to the HTA and regulations for speed limits, reductions, CZ, SZ, RCZ and DCZ have very specific requirements for signage to insure public safety for pedestrians, drivers, passengers and workers.
Several cases where required signage was not present and enforcement occurred proven in Court and available in transcripts, FIPPA results, media coverage, many 1st hand accounts. Even perjury by operator or officer proven in Court but JJP dudn’t do anything other than stay the alleged offense.
** If the operator setup where signage was not present or inadequate as per these requirements which they are required to know and check before setup it is a false statement if they note in evidence or in court that they checked which is a violation of at least section b) below.
Perjury, altering or destroying evidence are also serious Federal or Provincial crimes / offenses.
It is endangering workers or the public by not reporting the missing or inadequate signage which is a violation of at least section f) below.
There maybe more you can elaborate and maybe apply other sections. We have several open and closed formal complainsts with WPS or …, FIPPA results or Ombudsman complaints, transcripts etc …against or involving TSS operators, ACS / Xerox or WPS that demonstrate a clear trend. If needed more details from these can be requested from us or the WUW members involved and more transctript and or FIPPA requests filed if needed.
Some Sections of tbe MB LERA ACT:
(b) making a false statement, or destroying, concealing, or altering any official document or record;
(f) being present and failing to assist any person in circumstances where there is a clear danger to the safety of that person or the security of that person’s property;
Sections of MB LERA and Police Services Acts
When the commissioner declines to take further action on a complaint, the complainant may apply to the commissioner to have the decision reviewed by a provincial judge. Section 13(2) of The Law Enforcement Review Act stipulates that the Commissioner must receive this application within 30 days after the date the decision was sent to the complainant.
This from here. Also read some hearing results. Officers names redacted.
A Justice is required to give some leeway where possible and approproate including process and time frames etc… when you are self represented as per the MB Court Directives. They let me file my delay motion application (charter 11b challenge) with less than the required 30 days notice so maybe worth trying and saying this.
Examples of issues when issuing alleged offenses and in Court.
“(b) making a false statement, or destroying, concealing, or altering any official document or record;”
In several cases with transcripts available (for a fee from transcript sevices) it proven, in court that operator or officer committed perjury about checking required sinage present, observing violation, tampered with court documents, or other crimes or wrong doing. The Crown has answered for their witness and led their witness. The Crown and JJP’s ignored in most cases and if a few stayed but no consequences go the operators or officers. These “justice” people regularly take advantage of the self represented lack of knowledge.
There is many violations of the fundamentals of our Justice System, Charter, Court Directives, due process and other legal rights, codes of ethics and conduct, sworn oaths, professional standards, MB Justice policies and more.
More than just shame on them on their zero ethics and morals towards the administration of justice.
MB JJP’s have show to be uneducated in relevant law, regularly error and demonstrate bias towards the Crown, their witnesses and getting convictions. They memorize a script for start of trial and other basics.
Several cases were they are unsure about valid arguments and ask for 15 min recess. Then come back with unrelated technicality for Crown to use and suggest the matter be stayed. This appears to be to avoid a unfavorable decision for the Crown or avoid appeal and precedence in the higher Court.
They have also allowed the Crown to answer for their witness, added testimony when they not permitted and required to be impartial. They have done nothing about perjury or evidence tampering by officers or operators when they caught other than in a few cases stay the alleged offense.
Complaints to Chief Justices should be made. These too have resulted in inadequate responses like they are allowed to error and that is what the appeal process is for. They have ignored the clear and repeated issues of errors, bias loss off public confidence and trust plus related. Once more people wronged file complaints they will not be able to so easily ignore.
The CJ, LERA and other complaints also need to be escalated to Judicial Review and if needed Judicial Council. There is caselaw of JJP’s being removed from office for bias or ignoring the right of the self represented.
I will be updating post to add several examples of signage missing, enforcing were not permitted, extending construction zone farther than permited etc…