Brennan requested a status report from his Montreal lawyer at the beginning of April.
With apologies for not keeping him better informed without a prompt, Stephen Fineberg replied with a lengthy and detailed two-page email on April 13. The Access to Information and Privacy Division of Correctional Service of Canada had provided nothing to him as of that date. The bottom line: “The Access office now estimates that it will complete its work soon and have such material as exists and can be shared at my office by the end of April.”

Brennan answered the next day, reminding Stephen Fineberg that the Office of the Correctional Investigator agreed with CSC’s assessment that it had acted inappropriately. The implication was that the OCI had reviewed the video tapes as well, that they do exist, and the Correctional Investigator may be helpful in providing the information. The video tapes are the most sensitive material in question and CSC’s Access office had been advised to give them their priority.

Again, Brennan contacted Montreal on May 16. Was the CSC able to meet its end-of-April target? Montreal answered immediately and briefly to say messages had been left daily with the CSC access office asking for an explanation for the delay but there had been no response. Brennan wanted more details, and asked if Howard Sapers, the Correctional Investigator might be of help.

Stephen Fineberg’s answered on May 20: “In the unlikely event that the office of CSC’s Privacy Coordinator remains invisible, I shall seek assistance from the Privacy Commissioner of Canada rather than Mr. Sapers.
The former is an official of CSC, dedicated to suppressing info. The latter is a neutral officer outside of and above individual government departments and agencies, dedicated to squeezing the info out of reluctant departmental privacy coordinators. The Privacy Commissioner is supposed to be approached on appeal from an unacceptable result from the Coordinator, but I suppose it should be possible to solicit his assistance where the Coordinator is definitely declining to act at all. Such an allegation would be premature at this point.”

The wheels turn slowly.

On November 2, of 2014, I posted “Body of complaint letter to Quebec College des medecins”. Dr. Michel Joyal responded on behalf of the College in a two-page letter dated February 16, exonerating Dr. Lesage after an examination of the records. “I am therefore left to conclude that there was no breach of any kind on his part”, Dr. Joyal wrote. He also attached the necessary document should we choose to ask their Review Committee for a second opinion. We won’t be doing that. As I wrote in my March 6 letter to Dr. Joyal in answer (which follows here), “My February 16th (sic) letter was intended to put Brennan Guigue’s position on the record.” (My letter was actually dated October 31)

March 6, 2015

Michel Joyal, M.D., Assistant Syndic,
Collége des médecins du Québec,
2170 Réne Lévesque Blvd. West,
Montreal, QC H3H 2T8

Re: Doctor David Lesage/Patient: M. Brennan Wayne Guigue/Your file: 54856

Doctor Joyal:

I’m in receipt of your February 16th letter in response to mine of October 31st.

To quote a relevant paragraph: “After careful examination of all the documents consulted, I believe that Dr. Lesage’s clinical approach during your son’s assessment on August 19, 2014, was appropriate and in keeping with established standards. After his assessment, he issued a prescription consistent with his diagnostic opinion and, given the difficulty in positing a more precise diagnosis, referred him to a medical specialist. I am therefore left to conclude that there was no breach of any kind on his part.”

We did not anticipate a different outcome to your inquiry. My February 16th letter was intended to put Brennan Guigue’s position on the record. After a long wait, my son is only now about to consult with a specialist in the community. In the meantime, all remedies prescribed by various health-care professionals have been for naught, but we’re confident there is a connection between his present condition and the chemical assault at the Regional Reception Centre in Sainte-Anne-des-Plaines on July 22 of last year.

Brennan Guigue’s recollection of his contacts with health-care professionals at Donnacona Institution from July 23rd onwards is as presented in my letter, regardless of what any records may suggest to the contrary. Nonetheless, I am satisfied with your due diligence in investigating my complaint, and I thank you for a reasonably prompt reply.

Yours truly,

Charles H. Klassen
cc
Dr. David Lesage, Centre Méd. Hochelaga, Montreal
Elain Tousigmant, Deputy Commissioner, Regional Headquarters – Quebec
Marc Lamoie, Director/Warden, Donnacona Institution, Donnacona
Stephen Fineberg, Montreal
Brennan Guigue, Toronto

To compliment the February 26th entry to “Justice for Brennan Guigue”, Frédéric Héran’s February 12th letter needed a follow-up. Here’s my March 2nd response to Mr. Héran, and a March 6th letter to the Director/Warden at the Regional Reception Centre in Sainte-Anne-des-Plaines north of Montreal. Both are self-explanatory.

March 2, 2015

Frédéric Héran, Manager of Investigations,
Office of the Correctional Investigator,
P.O. Box 3421, Station “D”,
Ottawa, ON K1P 6L4

Dear Mr. Héran:

On behalf of Brennan Wayne Guigue, thank you for your February 12th letter regarding your Office’s findings around the July 22nd incident at RCC at Sainte-Anne-des-Plaines. He acknowledges that the OCI has now closed this file.

Brennan Guigue will continue to have an interest in this, however, as RCC staff members not only acted inappropriately, as you concluded, but contravened CSC policy on the use of OC, and behaved criminally as well. Needless to say, they also violated provisions of international treaties on the treatment of prisoners to which this country is a signatory. In addition, there is a real and probable possibility other inmates have been subject to the same abuse. One point that did not come to light here was the “seed” from which this experience sprang, but then, the reasons that ignite and inflame these situations rarely do.

These concerns are outside your purview of course, but Brennan appreciates the work you and your Office has done to bring the substance of this incident to CSC’s attention.
In gratitude, I am,

Yours truly,

Charles H. Klassen
cc Stephen Fineberg, Montreal
Don Head, Ottawa
Brennan Guigue
turnoverarocktoday.com

March 6, 2015

Stephane Lalande, Director,
Regional Reception Centre,
246 Montée Gagnon,
Sainte-Anne-des-Plaines, QC
J0N 1H0

Re: Brennan Wayne Guigue, FPS104902C
RCC use-of-force incident, July 22, 2014

Director Lalande:

The Office of the Correctional Investigator wrote Brennan Guigue on February 12 to say that with respect to the July 22, 2014 use-of-force incident at RCC, “the conclusion of the local management and the regional review from Correction (sic) Service Canada (CSC) which is consistent with our review of the fact that the level of force used was inappropriate and inconsistent with the Situation Management Model.”

This circumstance began when a guard made an unwarranted and unjustifiable decision contrary to CSC practice. Other CSC staff members escalated what should have been resolved quickly and without fanfare into an “inappropriate” action that also contravened both CSC policy and the manufacturer’s recommendations on the proper use of OC, crossed the line into criminality, and violated the provisions of international treaties on the treatment of prisoners to which this country is a signatory. In addition, there is a real and probable possibility other inmates have been subject to this same abuse.

According to the OCI letter referenced above, “CSC has identified and completed the corrective actions to address the concerns our Office had in regard to this incident.” This writer objects to the disregard for the law and CSC directives by many CSC employees on the one hand, and the absence of substantive consequences on the other. It’s important the public is made aware when civil servants do not act in our best interests, and I am keen to be an instrument to that end.

Yours truly,

Charles H. Klassen
cc blind copies

Brennan received a call from Frédéric Héran, Manager of Investigations at the Office of the Correctional Investigator, on the afternoon of February 12, the day after “Office of the Correctional Investigator Looks at Justice for Brennan Guigue” was posted here.
The Correctional Service of Canada review of the July 22 incident at the Regional Reception Centre north of Montreal concluded that the use-of-force was not justified, and the OCI investigation agreed. Mr. Héran gave Brennan a reference number for the OCI file, and a phone number should he have further questions.
He knew Brennan had filed a third level grievance on this incident with CSC in Ottawa, he knew Brennan hadn’t received a response as they needed a current mailing address, and he gave him a contact number to update that information.
Mr. Héran also indicated that some data the OCI had requested from CSC HQ in Ottawa was still not in their hands, that CSC had imposed four extensions, and the OCI had issued a warning to them just that day.
Finally, Brennan was told he’d be receiving a letter by mail confirming their findings.
This is Mr. Héran’s February 12 letter; it speaks for itself, is good news, and Brennan’s Montreal lawyer has received a copy………

The Correctional Investigator
Canada
P.O. Box 3421,
Station “D”
Ottawa, Ontario,
K1P 6L4

Ottawa, February 12, 2015

M. Brennan Wayne Guigue,
908 – 31 Alexander Street,
Toronto, ON M4Y 1B2

Mr. Guigue,
This letter is further to M. Klassen’ letter dated February 3, 2015, as well as our brief conversation surrounding our Office’s finds pertaining to the incident that occurred at the Regional Reception Center (RCC) on July 22, 2104.
The object of this letter is to share the conclusion of the local management and the regional review from Correction Service Canada (CSC) which is consistent with our review of the fact that the level of force used was inappropriate and inconsistent with the Situation Management Model.
Furthermore, according to our review, you were in the shower and refused to accept the underwear provided to you. According to our records, you did not cooperate with orders but you also did not show aggressiveness. Our Office has concluded that there was no emergency to intervene. Therefore, the use of OC was not appropriate to the situation.
As per the Situation Management Model that CSC applies to all use of force incidents, CSC should have re-evaluated the situation and responded appropriately to your uncooperative state. Of note, CSC has identified and completed the corrective actions to address the concerns our Office had in regard to this incident.
I trust that the above information is of some assistance to you. Please note that we have now this file closed at our Office.
Sincerely,

Frédéric Héran
Manager of Investigations

Following the use-of-force incident at the Regional Reception Centre north of Montreal on July 22, and as soon as it was possible after his transfer to Donnacona on July 23, Brennan contacted the Office of the Correctional Investigator in Ottawa.
Subsequent to this telephone call, he received a letter dated July 28 from Jean-Frédéric Boulais, Manager of Investigations at the OCI. In it, Brennan was told that an OCI analyst would review the documentation and video footage of the July 22nd incident “as soon as the file is received by our Office.” In the meantime, he was strongly advised to present a grievance to CSC’s National Headquarters, which he did.
Mr Boulais then met with Brennan at Donnacona on August 19 to assure him that the OCI would take an active role in moving the investigation forward. He explained that even if 50% of what Brennan described as having occurred on July 22 was true, it represented a serious breach. I followed up with a letter to Mr. Boulais on September 4, thanking him for the OCI participation, and expressing Brennan’s resolve that this would not be shunted aside. I also asked that this should be seen from a wider perspective, noting that Brennan’s experience could not be a one-of and that other inmates must have endured similar treatment.
I received a September 10 acknowledgement of my letter from an intake officer at the OCI, a more or less stock response, and I wrote back to Manuelle Larocque on September 22, underscoring our intention to pursue this investigation vigorously, and stressing the importance for consistency within the OCI by having just one investigator on this case.
Brennan has heard nothing further. What follows here is my February 3rd request to the OCI asking for the results of their review of the information received from CSC. How the Office of the Correctional Investigator phrases its answer will be interesting.
February 3, 2015

Manuelle Larocque, Intake Officer,
The Correctional Investigator Canada,
P.O. Box 3421, Station “D”,
Ottawa, ON K1P 6L4

Re: Brennan Wayne Guigue

Dear Mr. Larocque:
Please refer to my September 22, 2014 letter in response to yours of September 10 concerning the OCI’s examination of Brennan Guigue’s July 22, 2014 experience at the Regional Reception Centre in Ste. Anne des Plaines.
Jean-Frédéric Boulais’ letter of July 28 to Brennan Guigue indicated your analyst would review the documentation and video footage of this July 22 incident once the file was received at the OCI office. Brennan is asking for the results of this review.
You may contact him through me at the above address, or as an alternative, you may provide the information to his Montreal counsel, Stephen Fineberg, at 625 Rene-Levesque Blvd, Suite 900, Montreal, QC H3B 1R2.
In anticipation of your response, I am
Yours truly,

Charles H. Klassen
cc Stephen Fineberg, Montreal

Brennan Guigue was given a status report in a January 6th teleconference with his Montreal lawyer with respect to requests made of Correctional Service Canada’s Access to Information and Privacy Division, as specified in the November 2, 2014 posting in this file.
A November 28 letter from CSC’s Access Division to the lawyer indicated the approximate time to research the materials requested would be five hours, and an estimated cost for the service was quoted. A 50% minimum payment was due in advance. That has been made and a confirmation has been received by the lawyer.
Once the research is initiated, the lawyer’s experience with the process tells him several people will be assigned to look at one file at a time, moving on until the work is completed. There are additional costs per page for photocopies over a specified number, although it seems there is no charge for copies of video information.
The lawyer believes this could take as little as one month which complies with provisions of the Act, although delays should be expected.
This exchange between the lawyer and CSC’s Access Division should in no way suggest that Correctional Service Canada is cooperating fully and openly to provide what details are necessary to prove the case against them. Let’s just say this is the top of the first inning, and CSC now knows Brennan Guigue is serious in his intention to pursue this action.
The balance of the conversation between Brennan and his lawyer dealt with accumulating costs and a summary of expenses to date.

October 31, 2014

Inquiries Division,
Collége des médecins du Québec,
2170 René-Lévesque Blvd. West,
Montreal, QC H3H 2T8

Re: Dr. David Lesage, Attending Physician,
Donnacona Institution, Quebec Region
Brennan Wayne Guigue. FPS104902C

Dear Inquiries Division:
Dr. David Lesage offered an uncaring, cursory, and unprofessional examination of Brennan Guigue at Donnacona Institution on Tuesday, August 19. Brennan Guigue and his family object to his treatment, and as his father, supporter, and champion, I’m appalled that a physician would accept tax dollars for a federal prison rotation and not provide the contracted services under the CCRA, and Commissioner’s Directive 800 Health Services.
Brennan Guigue was a temporary detainee at the Regional Reception Centre in Ste-Anne-des Plaines who suffered serious injury from an extraordinary and unjustified use-of-force incident there on July 22. A liquid chemical agent was sprayed on his naked body. Quite simply, guards at the RCC:
Ignored CSC policy, and engaged in prohibited activity.
Acted unlawfully under sections of the Criminal Code.
Violated provisions of the United Nations Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisonsers, to which Canada is a signatory.
He was then surreptitiously transported to Donnacona the next day as an expedited substitution on a “load”, placed and held indefinitely in segregation there under what convenient justifications were available to prevent interaction with population and to limit contact with the outside, and further, put on ‘cuff status’ when a doubtful excuse arose. Miriam Gautier, the attending nurse in the health care unit at Donnacona on Saturday, July 26, refused to document Mr. Guigue’s injuries and condition. She gave him “Glaxo Base Cream” as a remedy, which was an unsatisfactory solution.
Brennan Guigue did not see Dr. Lesage until Tuesday, August 19, the escorting guard refused to remove the hand cuffs and the doctor did not insist they be taken off in order to facilitate a proper examination and documentation. In any case, Dr. David Lesage’s dismissive attitude excluded any substantive evaluation; he opined that Brennan had dry skin and walked away.
I can’t claim that the management of Donnacona asked Dr. Lesage not to look too closely at Brennan Guigue. What I can say is that Dr. Lesage did not provide adequate medical care, or address the concerns of a patient with obvious trauma.
Yours truly,

Charles H. Klasssen

cc: Dr. David Lesage, Centre Méd. Hochelaga, Montreal
Elain Tousigmant, Deputy Commissioner, Regional Headquarters – Quebec
Marc Lamoie, Director/Warden, Donnaconna Institution, Donnacona
Blind copies

Using the Access Act and the Privacy Act, Brennan Guigue has requested through his lawyer a list of material from Correctional Service of Canada related to the July 22. 2014, incident essayed in his July 23 summary in this file.
The lawyer advises CSC will refute/delay/resist/subvert/waver/obstruct in response, and exercise what resources it has to bury this inquiry.
What we have here then is only phase one of the process to obtain the relevant data.
Keep in mind these are our civil servants, living from our public purse, and acting under the auspices of men and women we have elected, appointed, and employed to represent our best interests.
INFORMATION REQUESTED BY BRENNAN GUIGUE 104902

THE VARIOUS MATERIALS LISTED BELOW BEAR ON AN INCEDENT THAT TOOK PLACE AT THE REGIONAL RECEPTION CENTRE AT STE-ANNE-DES-PLAINES ON JULY 22, 2014, AND IT’S AFTERMATH

* Security Management Protocol governing the case Brennan Guigue on July 22, 2014.

* Report of Security Intelligence Officer concerning the incident of July 22, 2014.

* All logs of the Security Intelligence Officer for a week beginning on July 22, 2014.

* All logs of the Associate Warden for Interventions for a week beginning on July 22, 2014.

* The morning shift briefing reports of July 23, 2014.

* Brennan Guigue’s security incidents on RADAR / OMS.

* Threat risk assessments about Brennan Guigue for a week beginning on July 22, 2014.

* The executive summaries of any grievances made by Brennan Guigue on July 22, 2014, or during the following two weeks (i.e. up to and including August 5).

* The executive summaries of all reports concerning the use of chemical spray on Brennan Guigue occurring on July 22, 2014.

* Reports of any data issuing from all institutional, regional, and national reviews of the use of force against Brennan Guigue on July 22, 2014.

* The names and photographs of all staff who participated in any events and movements involving Brennan Guigue on July 22, 2014 from the time he was placed in the dry cell in the early afternoon until his return from the nurse’s station to his cell in the evening. The term “staff” is intended to include nursing staff.

* All log book entries of any units holding Brennan Guigue for a week beginning on July 22, 2014.

* All log book entries of the Correctional Manager of any units holding Brenan Guigue for a week beginning on July 22, 2014.

* All Operations log book entries for a week beginning on July 22, 2014.

* All log book entries of the Security Intelligence for a week beginning on July 22, 2014.

* All log book entries of the Associate Warden for Inventions for a week beginning on July 22, 2014

* For the period beginning when Brennan Guigue was placed in the dry cell on July 22, 2014, to the end of July, 2014, all emails to or from:

the Institutional Director,
the Deputy Director,
the Associate Warden on Interventions,
the Assistant Director Operations,
the Security Intelligence Officer,
the Correctional Officer (CO II) in charge of the Dome,
the Correctional Manager in charge of detention,
any other Correctional Manager on Shift,
all Parole Officers assigned to Brennan Guigue during the time he spent in the Regional Reception Centre,
the Nursing Staff.

* Hand-held video camera recordings of all staff interactions with movements of Brennan Guigue on July 22, 2014 beginning with his placement in the dry cell in the early afternoon and ending in the evening after his return to his v=cell from the nursing station.

* Film from the fixed security cameras facing the dry cell on July 22, 2014, during the time it was occupied by Brennan Guigue.

*Film from the fixed security cameras facing the shower on July 22, 2014 during Brennan Guigue’s arrival at it and departure therefrom and during the time Brennan Guigue was in the shower.

* Film from the fixed security cameras facing the protocol cell used for decontamination of Brenan Guigue after the use of chemical spray on July 22, 2014. The requested period extends from Brennan Guigue’s arrival at the shower to his departure from it.

* Film from the fixed security cameras facing the nursing station to which Brennan Guigue was brought. The requested period covers the time during which Brennan Guigue was present there in the evening of July 22, 2014.

In short, we wish everything in the possession of CSC that sheds light on Brennan Guigue’s July 22, 2014 confrontation with staff and its aftermath.

Brennan Guigue left Donnacona Institution at 6am on Thursday, October 23, was driven to Quebec City to pick up a Montreal bound train, and where he then transferred to a Toronto train, reaching the city in the afternoon. He went immediately to Keele Community Correctional Centre where he’ll live until his warrant expiry date on December 19 of this year. Correctional Service of Canada usually moves parolees by bus but the train guaranteed the transfer during one business day.
The next morning, he was granted leave to go to St. Joseph Health Centre Toronto, the nearest major hospital, in order to initiate a medical response to his health concerns, particularly those arising from the June 22 incident in Quebec.

Rahim, or Brennan, wrote his summary of the July 22 event at RCC in Ste-Anne-des-Plaines in longhand over fourteen pages; it transcribed onto six typed sheets. I intentionally did not omit the emphasized expletive in order to preserve its integrity.
We’ve known the Montreal lawyer who is representing Rahim for over ten years. Stephen Fineberg has a specialty in penitentiary and post-conviction law; his usual advice when presented with a potential suit is to not bother. The system has too many lawyers, too much money, numerous options to delay proceedings, and employees of the system are more than likely to compromise incriminating evidence in order to protect themselves.
With this though, he’s been pro-active and enthusiastic in setting up resources to move forward on an action, although his own time is under the usual constraints of a busy lawyer. As well, an investigator from the Office of the Correctional Investigator in Ottawa has interviewed Rahim, suggesting if only 50% of what Rahim wrote in his summary is accurate that represents a serious breach. The OCI acts as an ombudsman for inmates, and while they will look into this, they have no powers other than to bring concerns to the attention of authority.
It’s probable that the chemical agent used on July 22 in RCC was a concentrated form of oleoresin capsicum (OC), or pepper spray, although it certainly wasn’t deployed according to specifications.
Quite simply, staff members at the RCC in Ste-Anne-des-Plaines:
Ignored CSC policy, and engaged in prohibited activity.
Acted unlawfully under sections of the Criminal Code.
Violated provisions of the United Nations Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners, to which Canada is a signatory.
Rahim was shipped to Donnacona Institution on July 23, but he wasn’t originally on the “load”, the CSC designation for inmates in transit. Another inmate was removed from the list to open a space for him. RCC’s intention was to shuffle Rahim out of the way and out of sight. He was immediately placed in segregation there, another move to hide him. Staff in that unit was intimidating, unprofessional, and racist, openly harassing him and manufacturing a flimsy excuse to put him on “cuff status”, and with his hands behind his back no less while out of his cell.
Health Care refused to document his injuries. Medical attention will be the first priority when he is released in the third week of October.
One point that should not be overlooked is that Brennan Guigue is not a “one-of”. It’s illogical to suggest that no other person under the control of CSC has been subject to this kind of treatment.
How could this happen? There are three answers, two short and one longer. The first is not one I’d care to post here, but your imagination would be helpful. The long explanation is book length and I wouldn’t impose that on my readers. The second short answer is the most relevant. We let them!