BRENNAN GUIGUE WAS TRANSFERRED from Port Cartier Institution in eastern Quebec to the structured intervention unit (SIU) at Donnacona Institution near Quebec City at the end of March.  The information and accusations underpinning the move were fabricated under the direction of Port Cartier’s warden, Jerome Vigneault.  His motivation?  He had an activist inmate making justifiable and legally correct “waves” directed at the institution’s health care unit.  With that as a starting point, the warden enlisted the aid of underlings to create a series of unsubstantiated allegations to support Brennan’s transfer.

Port Cartier and Donnacona management must have thought that Brennan Guigue would not ‘fight city hall,’ he would roll over and simply accept whatever decisions Correctional Service of Canada made.  Their unfettered bias against English-speaking inmates and/or Black and Indigenous inmates emboldened their disregard for policy, procedure, the law, and the Charter.  To boot, conditions in the Donnacona SIU more closely resembled the outlawed “administrative segregation” ranges of old, particularly in the first few weeks he was there.

THIS HAS KEPT BRENNAN GUIGUE AND HIS SUPPORT engaged with the here and now.  No time to rehash the past.

As one example, while we have the original documentation that would unravel a part of Warden Vigneault’s claims, Port Cartier and Donnacona have “repaired” the file twice to remove information that could expose their malfeasance.  It’s possible too that the changes to the file came about from an unauthorized management breach of a right to confidentiality Brennan has with certain designated parties.

We also have documentation from the independent external decision maker (IEDM), a party to the Implementation Advisory Panel formed by the federal government to monitor SIUs, that lists Donnacona’s failures to provide Brennan Guigue with his entitlements.  As if to underscore the deprivations, on July 28, a Quebec judge gave the go-ahead for a class action lawsuit to test the validity of the SIUs, based on the lead plaintiff inmate Daniel Fournier’s charge that his 40 days in Donnacona’s SIU amounted to cruel and unusual punishment.  Brennan Guigue has so far spent over 100 days in the unit.  Currently, this suit applies only to Quebec federal prisons.

In addition, the Montreal lawyer who was to pursue Brennan’s cause suddenly experienced an undisclosed medical event and dropped out of sight.  It took two months and an appeal to the Quebec association that oversees lawyers to retrieve the relevant material he had sent her.

It’s a challenge to keep up.

SO, WHAT HAPPENED at Port Cartier to bring down the wrath of the prison industry upon Brennan Guigue?

This will be skeletal.  Two points to begin:  First, most federal prisons have inmate committees made up of approved members who mediate inmate concerns with staff/management.  Port Cartier instead is one of a very few that have range representatives who meet as a group with management to the same purpose.
Second, prison health care is a major sore and sour point for federal prison inmates.  A subject for another time, but briefly for here, while community issues with health care arise primarily from underfunding, prison health care suffers from both pronounced underfunding and conflicts with delivery.

Brennan Guigue did not want to be a range rep at Port Cartier, even though he was a preferred choice by guards.  There are imposed responsibilities and the higher profile can make reps a target for both disgruntled inmates and staff.  He reluctantly agreed to take the post.
In addition, his long experience with prison health care taught him that the CSC grievance process is not the forum to air complaints.  It appears that Correctional Service of Canada can’t oblige its health care units to follow its directions.

Frustrations with accessing proper, timely, and legally set down health care in the CSC facilities where he has been incarcerated over the years led Brennan Guigue to bypass internal complaint processes and file his concerns with the disciplinary bodies that govern doctors, nurses, and dentists.  He did this at Port Cartier with a doctor who failed to comply with prescribed CSC policies and medical ethics.  We supplied the relevant Quebec College of Medicine forms, and when Brennan learned the scope of the problem with other inmates, we forwarded further complaint forms, and he had additional copies photocopied to meet the demand.

This led Warden Vigneault to claim that Brennan “incites disorder by being the instigator of a major movement against the Health Care Centre” as a lead argument for an unwarranted transfer.  As Brennan argued, “How is helping the men to file proper grievances, which is our right, grounds for a transfer?”  More than that, the institution’s records justify the complaints; that is, assuming Port Cartier has not “repaired” health care data, too.

To further flesh out a supporting scenario for a transfer, the warden alleged that “Guigue actively participates in the reign of terror in the IM (where Brennan was the range rep) by attacking the most vulnerable inmates,” pointed to “17 incidents in the past year,” accused him of “six incidents in which Guigue was in possession of a slasher,” and “delaying the official count.”  Guards in contact with Brennan, and even the institution’s security officer disagreed with the warden but could not risk censure for the sake of one inmate.

Since Brennan is creating a paper trail of complaints and grievances, the written assaults continue.  Most recently, his Parole Officer at Port Cartier (he met with this person only three times in almost two years) filed a report alleging that he exhibited bad behaviour when meeting with his case management workers.  No such meetings took place.  Inmates should have regular case management meetings under CSC policy, but the institution simply doesn’t bother.

How can this happen? …….We let it!

(8 minute read)
Brennan Guigue would readily agree that people have good reason for their low opinion of him.  He deserves to be in prison, as do almost all men and women who walk the ranges of our federal institutions.  Under the law though, prisoners also deserve the benefits of the obligations Correctional Service of Canada has under its governing legislation and policies to rehabilitate and safely return offenders to the community, and to uphold that as its principal aim.

Policy is one thing; practice is another.  Inmates too often are overwhelmed by a system that doesn’t listen to itself, won’t regulate its own infractions, and where truth is what it says it is.  Most offenders simply ‘cave.’  How can you stand up to a system that has so many ways to kick your legs out from under you?

Brennan Guigue is intelligent and articulate and speaks truth to power.  He picks his battles and when he takes a stand, it’s not just about him.  It’s for the people who can’t/won’t speak for themselves.  It confronts the uniforms who do what they want with impunity.  It’s for what’s right.

Readers of Brennan’s letter to a correctional investigator we’re publishing here are right to think they’ve begun reading a book from the middle.  Background will come in a later posting but the crux of the issue is the help he was giving other inmates to deal with prison health care was seen as an insurrection.  Creative CSC writers went to work to demonize Brennan without supporting documentation and then suppressed his access to files that would support him.

)()(

Correctional Investigator Schwartz.                               June 29, 2023
Office of the Correctional Investigator.
P.O. Box 3421, Station “D”,
Ottawa, ON  K1P 6L4

From:   Brennan Guigue, FPS#104902C
Donnacona Institution

Written from May 23 to June 01, 2023

Thank you for responding to my contacts with the Office of the Correctional Investigator (OCI) regarding the decisions at Port-Cartier Institution to remove me from my range, house me in the restrictive movement unit (ADR), and then transfer me to the structured intervention unit (S.I.U.) at Donnacona.

When I met with you last week, you told me basically that nothing can be done about the allegations against me because they’re opinions, more or less.  Opinions!  Are you telling me that my life has suffered major disruptions because of someone’s opinions?  How can that be?  Do I have no rights?  Can Correctional Service of Canada (CSC) say whatever it wants, and inmates have no recourse?  Am I not to be believed simply because I’m an inmate?  This reeks of discrimination.

I cannot understand your conclusion that my transfer was justified when you only considered the institution’s position.  Nobody from your office asked for my version of events, and as far as I know, no one from the OCI has investigated the veracity of Port-Cartier’s allegations.  How can you tell me I have no basis to challenge CSC’s claims because no one will believe me?  What about CSC’s own file information that does not support what is alleged?  Doesn’t that carry any weight?  How can false assertions have more relevance that facts?

It’s insane.  Actually, it’s depressing, and frustrating.  Worst of all, it’s par for the course with CSC.  The system can work, but if federal courts can’t compel the Agency to eliminate the difference between policy and practice, what hope do I have to win this fight?  Where is the political/institutional will to stand up for what is right?

I will be the first to admit that I am no angel.  Far from it.  However, this shouldn’t be just about me, or the countless offenders adversely impacted by the arbitrary agendas of CSC staffers like Port-Cartier Warden Jerome Vigneault, who act with impunity under Correctional Service of Canada’s shielding.  It should be about holding CSC to the higher standards of integrity and honesty it claims to champion.

Would it interest you to know that the ‘fight’ with inmate Chris Melanson at Port-Cartier was the first in the previous 18 months.  CSC’s position that I “participated in a reign of terror by attacking the most vulnerable inmates” is not supported by any evidence.  In fact, I truly believe that this is the reason why relevant documents are being withheld from me, and that I was ‘emergency transferred’ before I had an opportunity to obtain the information that would contradict their allegations.  Warden Vigneault’s reasons for wanting me out of his institution has very little, if anything, to do with the reasons given in the SIU file information.  It can’t be any other way.

Would it be unreasonable to argue that helping other inmates in their efforts to exercise their right to file lawful grievances should not be listed as an “incident” to justify the illegal transfer of an inmate from an institution for “security reasons”?  How about questioning a completely fabricated statement in a legally significant document, like an Authorization for Transfer writ?

When one reads a statement such as, “Mr. Guigue incites disorder by being the main instigator in a major movement against the Health Care Centre (HCC),” doesn’t that make anyone wonder what I could have done to prompt such a statement?  Is the writer suggesting I organized a group of inmates to participate in a “picket line” outside the HCC?  Or perhaps I led a peaceful/violent stand-off of some sort?

No, what I was doing was attempting to avoid stand-offs of any kind, and to save my fellow inmates a great deal of anguish when they learned that CSC does not resolve health care complaints.  CSC does not have any authority to compel HCC’s to do, or not do, anything.  I was helping the guys to file complaints against perceived mistreatments, or lack of treatment, with the appropriate provincial medical regulatory bodies.

I have had my own frustrations dealing with HCC’s at Port-Cartier as well as other institutions, and have a better understanding of the ins-and-outs of the process.  Unfortunately, other than that initial statement no further explanation has ever been offered.  Neither have officials at Port-Cartier cared to even elaborate on the allegation.  When I ask for one, I’ve been met with an almost impenetrable wall of resistance.

Do you know that since arriving at Donnacona Institution I have yet to meet anyone from my “case management team”?  All my requests to receive and review documents necessary to my defence had all gone unanswered.  Except for one.  The assigned Parole Office (P.O.), Marie-Pierre Gagnon, responded to a request by telling me that I must write to the Access to Information Office of Canada, pay a $5 fee, and then wait however many months it would take for the material to arrive.  It seemed to me that my P.O. was trying to impede my efforts to form an adequate defence to the allegations against me.  As strange as that sounds, I could not come up with any other reasonable explanation.

I have learned that those very same documents were requested by Independent External Decision Maker (I.E.D.M.) Sabine Michaud who is reviewing my status and they were to be given to me by CSC in preparation for my upcoming S.I.U. Review Committee hearing which was scheduled for April 25, 2023.  Even though it was my right to have them, and CSC’s obligation to provide me with that specified list of relevant documents, they failed to do so.  That included security file documents with logged observation and offence reports.  How can I confidently mount a challenge if the very proof I require is being withheld by CSC officials, parole officers, assistant wardens, guards, and so on?

I believe most people know b.s. when they hear it, and this situation is clearly that.  Yet nobody seems to want to acknowledge it because that would force them to actually do something.  God forbid they should ever go against any of their fellow colleagues in whatever conflicts that may arise with inmates.

I think I’ve made my point clear enough.  You informed me during our conversation that I shouldn’t expect that you will be able to do much on my behalf, as many of the allegations being put forth in the Authorization for Placement in the S.I.U. are that of someone’s opinion.  However, I will point out to you that, no, the allegations cited in the document are presented as fact, and therefore should be supported by factual documentation.  And that especially if they are intended to justify major disruptions in an inmate’s life, and even more so if those same claims are later used to determine a level of risk that inmate may present to the community in matters of parole eligibility.  They better damn well be true!

Actually Mr. Schwartz, I put it to you that the reason I shouldn’t expect much from you in this matter is more likely due to your identifying as ex-law enforcement.  There are some who view the world through “rose coloured glasses,” and I would suggest that you cannot help but view inmates as guards look at inmates, through “blue coloured glasses.”  Sure you can take the man out of the uniform, but you can’t take the uniform out of the man.

I honestly don’t believe you have any business at all being a Correctional Investigator.

Sincerely,

Brennan Guigue, FPS #104902C

cc:      Jerome Vigneault, Port-Cartier Institution
Sonia Tetreault, Port-Cartier Institution
Sabine Michaud, Senior IEDM, Eastern Region
Anne Kelly, Commissioner, CSC
Ivan Zinger, Correctional Investigator
Sena Hussain, Communications, Cell Count
turnoverarocktoday.com

)()(

Brennan is challenging “practice.”  More to come……

Brennan Guigue was speaking recently about the total absence of social or rehabilitative programming at Port-Cartier Institution in the far reaches of eastern Quebec where he’s been incarcerated since early November of 2021.  He dug into his personal archives for an earlier experience to underscore how little Correctional Service of Canada, or the Parole Board of Canada for that matter, cares about returning inmates safely to the community, then and now.

Brennan has been in prison on and off for most of his adult life.  He has repeatedly asked for mental health care intervention that would help break his cycle of criminal behaviour.  He’s still waiting.  Along the way, there has also been a lack of health care in general, which is the basis for so many inmate complaints to CSC, the Office of the Correctional Investigator, and the provincial professional bodies that regulate doctors and nurses.  Treatments for physiological ailments become more urgent with age, and inmate requests, pleas, and petitions for help often gather dust.

But for this outing, an experience from several years ago about safe reintegration into society is worth the telling.

Brennan was in a maximum-security prison several years ago, and approaching his warrant expiry date, that date a criminal sentence imposed by a court at sentencing officially ends.  The Parole Board of Canada in a scheduled hearing a few months prior had ruled he was too great a risk for an earlier release.  He would be held to the end of his sentence.  Brennan was getting no programing and of course no mental health care.  He asked the board for support prior to and after his release to lessen his risk to the community, post-release help like counselling and a residency period in a halfway house.  The answer was ‘no.’  The parole board would do nothing to help him or reduce the risk it judged him to be.

Now, some time before that scene played out, Brennan was in a session with a prison social worker.  He talked about his concerns for not completing his correctional plan because there were no programs available, how unprepared he was for the outside, and the fear he would do something to prevent his release.  After that last parole board hearing, the social worker went to the institution’s security unit and told them about that conversation.  No issue of confidentiality here.

Brennan was put into solitary confinement as a preventative measure for the entire three months before his release.  Better to increase his risk to the community with what has become recognized as torture than chance a mishap in the institution, according to CSC logic.  This was before Bill C-83 nominally eliminated solitary confinement in November of 2019.  The practice continues of course by other means, but that’s for another time, another place.

Thirty days before his release, Brennan wrote to the parole board, again asking for help to mitigate his risk to the community.  His letter was ignored.  He went to his institutional parole officer with the same plea.  His parole office told him it wasn’t his responsibility to help.

So, if he was considered too great a risk for parole before spending 90 days in solitary confinement, he would have been an even greater risk to reoffend when he was dropped off on a street corner at the end of his sentence.

How about this.  The Parole Board of Canada and Correctional Service of Canada are much more concerned about covering their own butts than they are committed to community safety.  Looks that way, doesn’t it.

As a by the way, how long do you think it was before Brennan reoffended?

……FROM BEHIND THE WALLS

The Correctional Service of Canada

Study this name.  What does it tell us about its purpose?  This name suggests the government of Canada operates a “service” for the benefit of society that attempts to “correct” and “rehabilitate” the behaviour of incarcerated offenders, the men and women who violate the law.  Some would claim it’s an obligation our government has to its citizens.

With that, one might argue that CSC has a responsibility to society to release people from prison who are, for one, healthier than when they were initially incarcerated.  The truth though is that Correctional Service of Canada washes its hands of paroled inmates’ health care, even with a residency requirement in a half-way house.

I know this to be because I’ve been released on parole on more than one occasion, as have many inmates.

I will never forget when I was released from a prison in Quebec while in the middle of treatment for Hep C.  This was way back when the regimen consisted of a combination of injections along with oral medications (Ribavirin and Interferon).  I was to reside at a Montreal area half-way house, formally called a C.C.C., a Community Correctional Centre.  I believe it was the Ogilvy House in Parc-Extension.  Before leaving the prison, I asked about continuing the treatment in the community and was given assurances that it was “all taken care of.”  I was handed a parcel of documents and appointment slips for a clinic in Montreal, l’Actuel.

However, when I reached the half-way house and went to what I had thought was an arranged appointment at l’Actuel to resume that treatment, I found there was in fact no appointment listed, and that they had no idea who I was.  But, if I wanted a consultation with an infectious disease specialist, they would be happy to oblige, provided I paid the $62.00 consultation fee.

I was fresh out of prison and the only income I had was the $98.00 weekly food & transportation allowance provided by the half-way house, I couldn’t possibly afford such an expenditure.  In my frustration and disappointment, I returned to the half-way house to ask my then Parole Officer to simply explain why, after showing the clinic all the paperwork given to me by the prison, I was having so much difficulty in obtaining adequate health services in the community?  Why would the prison health department go through the motions of providing me with all this meaningless paperwork if in fact they had no intention of helping me once I was released.  Basically, she told me that providing me with adequate health care services was not her problem.

It seemed incredibly ridiculous to me that as a ward of CSC, residing in one of their community facilities, and receiving a food allowance from them, that I would actually have received a better quality of health services if I had remained in prison.

This exchange with my Parole Officer was recorded as a “negative interaction”, and later listed as one of the deciding factors…a deteriorating attitude and arrogance…when the ‘house’ sent me back to prison.  Was I wrong to assume that being a ward of CSC should afford me at least the same level of service in the community as I could expect to receive if I were still incarcerated?

EDITOR’S NOTE:  Staffers at CSC half-way houses do not help ex-offenders reintegrate.  They’re in place to find reasons to suspend a parole and send their charges back to prison, where they await a review by the Parole Board.  Brennan Guigue had found a job on the production line of a company in the Montreal suburbs that manufactured heavy duty shelving for industrial use.  He took the subway and two buses to get to and from his afternoon shift.  He lost the job when his parole was lifted.

As it turned out, I was returned to the community and to that same half-way house after about 98 days in Donaconna Institution because once I was before the Parole Board for my hearing, it could not find a reason NOT to revoke my suspension.

This is a true accounting of this incident.  It really happened as described and without any exaggeration.

My experience is not unique with just this one occasion.  No matter how small the reason, it serves to demonstrate CSC’s mentality as it skirts its responsibilities whenever an opportunity presents itself.

I’ve been rambling on and on for hours.  It has been very therapeutic.  I no longer feel like smashing my head against the nearest wall.

Brennan Guigue, April 19. 2022

AN ILLUSTRATION FROM BEHIND THE WALLS IN TWO PARTS

Writing is one way I vent the frustration I feel over how challenging it is to access mental health services within Correctional Service of Canada.  Contrary to its on-line media page, in reality it is much more difficult than CSC would have the public believe.

As it stands now, an inmate in a ‘bad place’ who tries to get help must first send a written request to their Parole Officer, wait for a call to meet which may take a day, or perhaps two.  Depending on the Parole Officer’s recommendation, the inmate in distress may or may not be granted an audience with a trained mental health professional.  Now, I am just a lowly inmate in CSC’s eyes, but it seems to me that this is not a particularly effective way to help mentally destressed inmates.  However, what do I know.

Most Parole Officers were once guards who require a grade 12 education and no criminal record.  After approximately sixty days of training, and a one-year on-the-job probationary period, successful candidates are officially certified as Correctional Service of Canada guards.  It seems to me that hardly qualifies a guard to decide whether an inmate is in enough distress to require mental health intervention.  It seems to me that determination should be made by a mental health care professional, no?

Basically, anyone can be a prison guard with a minimum of effort.  After nearly 30 years in the federal system, I’ve learned most prison guards employed be CSC are straight-up sociopaths in their attitude and treatment of inmates.  Believing otherwise suggests that racism, for instance, does not exist in Canada.  Who would admit to seeing inmates as nothing more than pieces of s—t?  Let’s face it, it’s ugly to admit to that.  How many racists do you think would feely admit to it?  But, at the end of the day, it’s always there, just under the surface and it governs every decision CSC makes regarding the treatment of it’s wards.

But that’s a whole other conversation.  For now, we are considering inmate access to adequate mental health services.

The whole process I’ve described can take as many as three days at the minimum, but usually more like a week.  CSC tells the world that in cases of extreme distress, where an inmate ideates suicide or intends to hurt themselves or others, there are mechanisms in place for immediate assistance.  Why should it come to that?  Why should an inmate in distress be made to jump through hoops before getting help?  Why wait until the problem reaches those extremes?  CSC policy on mental health services is reactive rather than pro-active.

I should not need to be suicidal to get help for my mental health issues, but it seems to be the only way to be seen in a timely manner by a psychologist or psychiatrist.  However, if an inmate decides to claim that they are suicidal simply to access an audience with the appropriate and qualified professionals, well then, CSC also has an institutional policy for that as well.

The policy in place is to immediately put that inmate into an empty cell, no toilet paper, a concrete slab for a bed.  But first, the inmate is stripped of clothing and given a ‘security smock’ made of untearable fire-retardant material called a “baby-doll.”  Believe me, it is very rough and uncomfortable, and wearers feel extremely exposed and vulnerable.  Is that CSC’s intent?   The inmate remains in this cell for at least 24 hours and as much as 72 hours.  From experience I can tell you that this does nothing to help and is a long and difficult way to get some counselling.

Am I exaggerating, fabricating, misrepresenting?  Absolutely not.  This is not only the truth, but it can easily be substantiated as CSC practice and policy.

As I wrote at the start, I am just trying to vent some negative emotions which stem from being left all on my own to deal with the mental health issues I have.

I challenge you to find any logic for how these practices and policies can help anyone recover or how they could possibly lead to a clean and mentally healthy life.  There are people who say, “Who cares, they’re just low-life criminals.  Let them all rot.”  Well, you should care.  Why?  Less than 10% of all federal inmates will never get out of prison.  Do you want the 90% who will be back on the street one day to be mentally healthy, or at least stable?  Do you?

It’s easy not to care when you’re safely tucked away in your homes and comfortable in your lives.  But what happens when a mentally distraught ex-inmate in a bad way invades that comfortable life, or the life of a loved one?  And yes, drug addiction and alcoholism are symptoms of mental distress, contrary to what some might think.

Do you blame the drug addict who puts others in danger when he commits an armed robbery, or breaks into your home looking for drug money and for items to sell for drugs?  What about the ex-con who has no grasp on the rage which stems from unaddressed childhood trauma and commits a violent act against some innocent victim.  Do you blame him?  Perhaps, and you wouldn’t be wrong. 

Accepting responsibility for criminal acts is the whole point of the criminal justice system, isn’t it?  Yes, it is.  But then, just where is Correctional Service of Canada’s responsibility to service mental health care needs and offer constructive programing to give offenders an opportunity to succeed in the community?  Yes, where is it?

Brennan Guigue, April 19, 2022

PART TWO next week

..…Against ONTARIO, The Only Defendant.  CHILDREN’S AID SOCIETY Organizations Responsible For Placing And Supervising Crown Wards, And With Authority To Begin Claims On Their Behalf, Is Not A Defendant.  Neither Are Individual Abusers.

A Lesson In How To Seed Criminality Through Abuse And Neglect.

Koskie Minsky LLP filed a statement of claim on January 22, 2014, alleging that Ontario owed Crown Wards who were abused a duty to advise of rights to civil claims (lawsuits) and administrative remedies (the Criminal Injuries Compensation Board).  Ontario is also accused of failing its duty to facilitate and pursue those claims for Crown Wards, when appropriate.

The Superior Court of Justice certified the class action on March 30, 2017, a class that included all persons who became Crown Wards in Ontario between January 1, 1966, and March 30, 2017.

A proposed settlement was reached and dated January 29, 2021.  Brennan Guigue submitted his claim on April 13, 2021.  With his permission and encouragement, this is his complaint, his written responses to 11 questions on the claim form.

)()(

D.O.B.:  June 10, 1970

I wanted to point out that while specific dates, names, and addresses may be difficult to recall, the abuses suffered are quite real and vivid in my recollection. As for certain details of where and when, I’m sure the Children’s Aid Society of Canada must have records that could be researched for verification of Wardship.

Date of Wardship:  I cannot remember exactly, but if I had to give an approximate timeline, it would be some time in the early to mid-70s…..1974, 75, 76.
I know I was young because I remember my mother tried to prevent a court order to surrender custody of us by putting us, my brother Jerry and sister Amber, into the care of her best friend Sue Dietrich (Aunt Suzie), and then boarding us onto a train out to British Columbia.
I remember that night very clearly because my hand got accidently slammed in the cab door by and absent minded taxi driver.
It must have been early because the Hamilton train depot on James Street North was still a main hub as the train we boarded took us all the way out west without having to transfer trains.

Why was I taken from family home?  My mother was a drug addict with all the ugly and unfortunate attributes that come along with that.  Neglect, physical and emotional abuse, etc.  My father, Barry Griffith, was a drug dealer, pimp, and all around p.o.s., a real great guy.

Crown Ward history (where did I live & when):  Upon our arrival in Coquitlam, B.C., we were dropped in the custody of our Aunt Dena (Guigue).  She immediately began to beat us whenever the mood suited her.  Later, we were passed on to our grandfather, Edward Guigue, who also lived in Coquitlam.  Life got a little better in that he did not beat us or abuse us in any way.  In fact, he didn’t bother with us at all.  He concerned himself with attempts to ‘feel up’ Aunt Suzie as a means of a morning wake-up call.  She was around 19 or 20 something at the time.
Eventually CAS of Canada caught up to us when my brother was hit by a car and the hospital notified all the people hospitals are required by law to notify.  We were taken into custody.
Once the three of us were apprehended we were immediately separated and placed in different ‘homes’ to await extradition back to Ontario.
The ‘home’ I was place into is where I heard the word “nigger” for the first time in my life.
It was also the first place I ever took a shower with a grown man; after all “how else was I ever gonna learn how to wash myself it not from another man?”
I was only tall enough to be just about waist high.  How old could I have been?  Not 10 years.  Certainly, too young to be washing a grown man, no?
Next…1982?  Linden, Ontario.

Description of abuse or neglect:  British Columbia – From what I can recall from my time at the ‘home’ in B.C., the ‘caretakers’ consisted of a youngish middle-aged (30-40ish) married couple, at least one bio-child (maybe an infant also), an older woman (perhaps a mother-in-law).  She was the mean one.  I think there was one other ward-child in the home besides me, but I cannot be sure.
It’s funny because I don’t really remember the ‘house mother’ or the husband’s faces.  I only recall the male as a wet body in a cramped shower.  Well, there’s the erections of course, but other than that, and the memories are quite vivid, almost lucid, I couldn’t tell you what he looked like.
I remember the old woman as skinny with a weathered face, and a heavy accent, German or eastern European perhaps.
All I know for sure is that she whipped me for the slightest things (she liked to use one of those woman’s dress belts, real skinny, made of leather.)
Boy, did it sting!
I remember the Ice Capades came to town and the whole bunch of us went to see them perform.  Well, I guess I had shown too much excitement, and she took me into the bathroom stall and whipped my ass for laughing too hard!
Who does that!!!
Her favourite name for me was Black Bastard.  She also beat it into my head that I was “black like shit and your garbage mother doesn’t even want you.”  Like I said before, she was the first person to ever call me a nigger.
Note:  What happened there made it easier for my biological father to molest and sodomize me a few years (2 or 3) later back in Hamilton about age 9 or so.

The home in Linden, Ontario is where I experienced real despair.
I only got beat once there by the ‘house father,’ but it was a bad beating whereas I was slammed into the floor (he straddled me) several times.  It was so bad that I now recognize the symptoms suffered afterwards were that of a concussion.  There I, as well as the other 2 Wards, were locked out in the cold until 7pm at night.  We were starved for food constantly.
It was so bad that I began digging through the lunchroom garbage at school and eating unfinished lunches thrown out by other kids.

Me?  I’m a survivor.
I remember there was a young girl there, about 9 years old, and the “family’s” 18-year-old son used to trade food for sex regularly.
When I discovered it happening and told the ‘house mother,’ I was told to mind my own business.  When I threatened to tell my CAS worker…that’s when I was beaten dizzy.
I eventually ran away.  When my worker…..Mary?….found me at my own home, I told her what was happening in Linden.  My own mother threatened legal action and so ‘Mary’ left me at home, and it was never mentioned again.

Report the Abuse?  See above.

Action Taken?  Not that I’m aware of.

Charges Laid?  Not that I am aware of.

Advised of Right to Litigate?  Nope.

Advised of my right to pursue monies from the Criminal Injuries Compensation Board?  Nope.  Why would I have been?  Nobody paid any attention to me unless they were taking something from me or denying something to me.

Did I receive any counselling for my abuse or neglect?  No.  If I had been treated of a sick child rather than a bad kid, then, ABSOLUTELY 100%, I would not have lived the life of shame, self-loathing, and drug addiction that I did.  Nor would I have ended up where I am today.
I believe this with all of my being.
I have been clinically diagnosed as having:-
Borderline Personality Disorder
Complex PTSD (childhood trauma)
Bi-Polar Disorder
Clinical Depression
At least two suicide attempts documented.  Revived.
Anti-Social Personality Disorder
You name it.  Take your pick of one, or all of them if you like.

The Children’s Aid Society of Canada did NOT aid me in any way whatsoever.
I aged out of CAS control in 1988 when I turned 18.

)()(

The Court denied approval of the settlement on May 27, 2021, as several class members objected to the amount of the settlement.  The claim was for over $100 million initially, but the proposal before the Court was for $10 million, and Koskie Minsky’s share would come from that.  A leave to appeal the decision was dismissed on September 21, 2021. 
The case is still active.

There’s nothing more to add, is there.

……BY INCOMPLETE, INACCURATE OR MISLEADING INFORMATION.

Google the name ‘Brennan Guigue’.

Results reprinted from news outlet sources are dated in November of 2015. After that, the media lost interest when Brennan Guigue was arrested in Montreal and he was no longer the flavour of the month.

Police investigations and court proceedings over the next two years leading to a resolution in the fall of 2017 did not attract any broadcast and press attention, as Brennan Guigue did in 2015. But, that long undertaking would have moderated the mass media perspective of the man and his crimes that was first circulated in 2015.

There was no intent by the media to misinform five years ago. What was printed, what was seen, is what was available at the time, and what the police were circulating. It’s not unusual for sources to overstate a potentially dangerous situation, but it is rare to see later clarifications. That can be laid at the feet of investigators who prioritize the demands on their resources, and editors who decide what constitutes worthy news. Today’s demands on policing and the justice system trump yesterdays closed files for one, and the fourth estate is a business for another.

No pretty pictures come out of society’s underbelly. No perspective will make Brennan Guigue look good. As with anywhere in the spectrum though, there’s no black and white either. The predominance of grey blurs the landscape and shapes an ambivalence that leaves the observer with the task of discerning where the truth lies.

Never rush to judgement. Peel back the layers.

……IN THE END, WE ALL PAY.

One last time…..for now:

“The security features inherent in federal correctional facilities are designed to keep people in as much as they are to keep people out. As a result, the management of the federally-sentenced population is largely conducted away from public scrutiny. Invisible to the general population, federally-sentenced persons are often forgotten.”
The Senate of Canada, Human Rights Committee, Interim Report, February 2019

In conclusion:

“Most people would probably be unlikely to adhere to any advice offered by those who they felt were in direct conflict with their well-being. This sentiment would be even truer if they felt those same entities were actively disregarding their welfare. I say actively because, I swear, sometimes it seems some Correctional Service of Canada’s policies are purposely designed to frustrate and anger inmates, with absolutely no thought of how they will affect us, or the environment they create. Given these circumstances, it’s no wonder there are increased levels of violence, excessive drug use, and low motivation within Canada’s prisons……duh! (Please don’t take offence. My sarcasm is reserved for the ‘heads’ in Ottawa, and not the layman reading this.)

It boggles my mind to try and get my head around the idea that CSC would want to create an environment which produces frustrated, angry men, and then release them back into society! Or, could I be mistaken in my assessment of their motives? Could it be that CSC is actually trying to beat down the inmate, thereby breaking his spirit and hoping that will cause him to no longer be a threat to whatever community into which he is released.

Yeah, I know, but if you knew what I know about CSC from living under its boot for almost three decades, then you wouldn’t think I was on some delusional paranoia trip. The contrast between what the public is led to believe about the CSC mission, and what actually happens behind the walls is as black is to white. You’d be surprised.

This is just one long convoluted example of a situation created by CSC policy makers who have never even seen the inside of a prison! Let me assure you that there are many similar scenarios which can equally be related. You can assume the infinite wisdom of the Correctional Service of Canada, as with most government bureaucracies, knows no bounds. Stupid and nonsensical rules and regulations that do absolutely nothing to contribute to the reform of a ‘criminal’ and cause him/her to become a positive member of society seem to be ‘standard operating practice’ here.

Oh well, what can you do when you live in a show, eh?

Thank you for giving me your time by reading this. Even if you do not agree with me, I do appreciate the patience you took to get through it. I’ll chalk up disagreement to a simple inclination to just be a good citizen who trusts that their government will always be honest and open, and that people in this country aren’t marginalized and pushed to the side. After all, the government is good, and criminals are bad. Right?

Here’s the rub though. Most of us, 85-95% or more, are getting out! You have your own life to think about, with its own struggles and tribulations. I don’t presume to have the right to ask you to put us before your own needs. I’m just trying to offer some food for thought. So, if you are ever privy to a conversation about the conditions in Canada’s prisons, you’ll have a few truths to offer on the matter.”

This series ends here but the offensive does not.

……IS REHABILITATION IN CSC’S VOCABULARY? (B)

As usual:

“The security features inherent in federal correctional facilities are designed to keep people in as much as they are to keep people out. As a result, the management of the federally-sentenced population is largely conducted away from public scrutiny. Invisible to the general population, federally-sentenced persons are often forgotten.”
The Senate of Canada, Human Rights Committee, Interim Report, February 2019

To continue:

“So, wha’dya’ do about the lack of inmate financial resources?

We’re human beings. We adapt. We find a way.

The problem is that to adapt often means finding oneself in conflict with institutional rules governing contraband, which if caught will have a definitely negative impact on an inmate’s Correctional Plan. (An Inmate Correctional Plan is a mechanism by which CSC guides an inmate toward their specific course of rehabilitation, for eventual reintegration into the community.) Some do tattoos, others produce alcohol, some even manufacture and sell weapons. Certainly, there are less extreme schemes such as running a ‘store’, which is a sort of boot-leg canteen bartering system, i.e. canteen items 2 for 3, 3 for 5, 5 for 8, etc. However, a ‘store’ doesn’t make much sense, as it often can put more strain on an inmate’s finances in his effort to meet his obligations, and that leads to new problems for both parties involved. I could list a hundred different things that I’ve seen, and in some cases that I’ve done too, where the guys have participated, including selling their medication, and even some things I won’t mention.

However, all are contrary to conforming to the rules, and viewed as ‘not following your plan.’ These things will inevitably lead to one incurring institutional charges, both minor as well as major. Institutional charges of any kind will negatively affect an inmate’s ability to cascade down to lower security, and parole. Not good.

Yeah….it’s wrong. I know it, and you know it. We all know it. One thing about it though is being hungry and miserable all the time will mess with your head. Being poorly fed and locked in your bathroom-sized cell for 20 plus hour a day at Millhaven is a powerful motivator to ‘get your hustle on.’ Regardless of the consequences, inmates who have spent much of their lives circumventing the rules to get by will revert to what they know best in order to generate that little bit extra income to improve their circumstances.”

Conclusion upcoming…….

…..IS REHABILITATION IN CSC’S VOCABULARY? (A)

Yes, there’s a point to repetition:

“The security features inherent in federal correctional facilities are designed to keep people in as much as they are to keep people out. As a result, the management of the federally-sentenced population is largely conducted away from public scrutiny. Invisible to the general population, federally-sentenced persons are often forgotten.”
The Senate of Canada, Human Rights Committee, Interim Report, February 2019

From his cell at Millhaven Institution Brennan Guigue begins to make his argument in this third installment:

“Referencing inmate pay scales, this lower liquidity can play a direct role in the reform and rehabilitation of an offender because as canteen prices continue to rise, his/her buying power decreases. Combine that with inadequate food quantities, and more importantly, also poor quality, you have morale issues that will in turn effect what’s called ‘institutional motivation.’ It is exactly the same principle as understanding that an army will be a more effective force if it is well fed, or why there is a great importance lent to breakfast programs in schools. Well fed students produce better students.

If CSC and, by greater extent, society wish to talk about producing law-abiding productive members of society, who are reformed from their criminal ways, wouldn’t creating a better motivating environment go a long way in achieving that goal? C’mon now, you don’t really believe that things will just fix themselves, do you? (Gee, aren’t we the optimist.)

CSC’s food policies prescribe a caloric intake of around 2600 calories per day for the average male inmate. However, if you look closely at the information, the ‘average male inmate’ described is somewhere between the ages of 25 – 35 years, maybe 150 – 175 lbs. He’s also described as ‘sedentary’, he’s not doing anything! Why do people lift weights and exercise, what comes to mind when your doctor or psychologist tells you to ‘get out and do more, join a gym…it’ll be good for you?’

The reality is that the average inmate, based on what I see around me, is between the ages of around 20 – 30 years of age, and most of them want to get out of their cells, work out, maybe play some b-ball, or floor hockey once of twice a week. Then there are guys like me who are getting up in age but have been active all of their lives and wish to stay in shape. Or even just to alleviate some stress, anxiety, depression, suicidal thoughts/ideation. Name the symptom and I bet being active will help in some way.

More than a third of the guys in here aren’t average as described by the Canada Food Guide, which is what CSC dieticians use as a measure. Many are 200 lbs. or more, and not sedentary. I myself am 213 lbs., having lost a good 12 lbs. since arriving at Millhaven Institution, and although I am only 5’9” tall, I am definitely not a fat guy. My body could stand to lose another 5 – 6 lbs. or so, but I think I’m doing pretty good for a 49 year-old. Besides, being locked in a 13’7” cell for 20 hours a day makes maintaining any consistent, healthy weight difficult.

However, living off just the prison diet does not allow me to work out, or exercise nearly as much as I’d like to. I am hungry ALL the time! I play floor hockey once a week as a must as it is my favorite sport to play, but I no longer get into the weight pit, which is something I’ve done since the age of 15. I try to walk the yard at least 3 times a week, but I’d much rather run around in the gym more often, perhaps play two games of hockey and even a game of b-ball a week. I just can’t do it.

As anyone who is getting older is aware, lack of energy can be very frustrating and thus have a negative effect on one’s morale.

However, keeping inmate energy levels low makes for an effective control mechanism. Now there’s an interesting thought, eh?”

Yes, there’s more……..