The RCMP's opinion regarding Mr. Weaver's innocence was given short shrift by the warden.

The rebuttal comments on the fact that the RCMP investigating officer, Sergeant Brown, and the polygraph operator have made comments about their opinions regarding the involvement of Offender Weaver in the assault. In the case of Sergeant Brown, his opinion may reflect the extent to which he believes a prosecution would be successful. To simply offer the opinion that Offender Weaver was not involved in the assault ignores the fact that Caziere has maintained he was an assailant and that he was implicated by others. The polygraph results have been characterized as inconclusive. It is again, only the administrator's unsubstantiated opinion based on extraneous information that Offender Weaver was not involved. (Notification of Review, William head Institution, April 19, 1999)

This dismissive commentary mischaracterizes what the RCMP conveyed both to me and to the IPSOs. They had not concluded that Mr. Weaver was involved in the assault but that there was not enough admissible evidence to secure a conviction. Their opinion, based on a full investigation, was that Mr. Weaver was not involved in the assault. The Warden incorrectly states that the RCMP ignored Mr. Caziere's identification of Mr. Weaver as one of his assailants. The RCMP interviewed Mr. Caziere on two occasions, and they made it clear that they discounted his identification because his assailants were masked and the institution had supplied him with information about the suspects. It was Warden Gallagher who ignored the opinions of highly experienced RCMP investigators, based on interviews with the principals, an analysis of Mr. Weaver's clothing, the corroboration of his alibis, and the sheer implausibility that Mr. Weaver could have participated within the likely time frame. Ironically, in the court proceedings in which George Storry successfully challenged his involuntary transfer from William Head, Warden Gallagher had based his assessment of the reliability of informant information on the fact that the RCMP believed it to be reliable; in the case of Gary Weaver, where the RCMP consistently expressed their opinion that the information implicating him was not credible or reliable, the warden chose to dismiss this without providing a scintilla of evidence to the contrary.

Prior to receiving Warden Gallagher's recommendation that Mr. Weaver be involuntarily transferred, I had asked Sergeant Brown and Corporal Gavin if they would prepare an official report on the state of their investigations. I put it to them that, as key players in the administration of justice, it was their duty not only to ensure that the guilty parties were prosecuted but also to ensure that punishment was not inflicted upon those wrongly accused. The Warden's belief that Mr. Weaver had participated in the assault, if left unchallenged, would result in Mr. Weaver being treated as if he were guilty and consequently in his spending many more years in prison. Sergeant Brown and Corporal Gavin agreed this would be unjust. In a letter dated April 20, 1999, they wrote to the IPSOs at William Head confirming that they had completed their investigation into the assault on Mr. Caziere and that there was insufficient evidence to support criminal charges. The letter went on to state:

When Mr. Caziere did agree to provide details of his recollection it was seven days after the assault. By this time the names of several persons had been provided to him as possible suspects. Even at this point in the investigation Mr. Caziere continued to withhold crucial information, particularly, that the suspects were wearing balaclavas at the time of the attack. These actions diminished the value of Mr. Caziere's identification of the suspects and detracted from his credibility.

Several search warrants were effected during the course of this investigation, and items of clothing and footwear were seized as exhibits. These exhibits have been scanned by our Forensic Services Personnel, with negative results in either locating suspect DNA evidence or in physically matching footwear impressions to the scene.

Gary Weaver [was] given polygraph tests on March 25, 1999 by Sergeant Hunter of Vancouver polygraph section. [The test] was deemed inconclusive by Sergeant Hunter. Sergeant Hunter did provide his professional opinion, that it was his belief that Weaver [was] not involved in the assault on Caziere.

Numerous inmates were interviewed to check alibis provided by . . . Weaver. The alibis as provided were confirmed through these interviews. It is our belief that Inmate X [for legal reasons, X has been substituted for the name given in the letter] was involved in the assault on Caziere. He has been interviewed on two separate occasions and on each occasion he denied any knowledge or involvement. Unfortunately there is insufficient evidence to proceed against X. (Letter from RCMP to William Head Institution, April 19, 1999)

Page 2 of 2