Quelle surprise!

Kash Heed lies to the RCMP about cheques he signs transferring public funds to his campaign manager to cover unreported election expenses, stalls Elections BC for two years and gets off with the lightest penalty possible.

Pat Pimm spends the night in jail over a domestic dispute – action that isn’t normally taken by police without a significant reason – and the Special Prosecutor lets him off without any explanation.

Here’s my guess about what happens to these two now.

Pimm comes back for a month or two, the BC Libs nominate a new candidate and the story’s over, no questions asked.  Heed similarly sits out the last few weeks of his disastrous political career, the Libs parachute another candidate in and everything continues on as if these two random events never happened, with the police reports gathering dust on the shelf in some basement case room.

That’s what governments like the BC Liberals do.  What’s really wrong with this is that it’s also what BC’s media do.

For some reason not a single reporter went back and looked at the police information on Heed to figure out if there are unanswered questions.  There are.  According to the sworn information, Heed lied to investigators about cheques he signed handing over public money for campaign activities.  He was actively involved in fundraising and spending decisions.  His campaign staff lied about their roles and their interactions with him on spending decisions.

And not a single reporter has followed up on the Pimm story.  If it weren’t for the night in jail, British Columbians wouldn’t know that Pimm was arrested in a case of domestic abuse.  What really happened up there in Peace Country? What incident provoked the police to arrest Pimm and put him in jail?  Was this the first incident?  What happened after release?  Were any of the normal precautions taken with regard to access to his wife?

There are dozens of unanswered questions in this case that were never asked and now never will be asked by a reporter.

What Richard Nixon wouldn’t have given for BC’s media instead of Ben Bradley and the Washington Post.


This entry was posted in BC Liberals, BC Politics and tagged . Bookmark the permalink.

8 Responses to Quelle surprise!

  1. Laila says:

    I would like to point out to readers Ian, that no charges were approved because there was not a substantial likelihood of conviction …… not because a crime was not committed by Mr. Pimm – a HUGE difference that should be noted by all. The following article headline is completely inaccurate in stating he has been cleared of criminal wrongdoing. http://www.theprovince.com/news/Pimm+cleared+criminal+wrongdoing/5100709/story.html

    RCMP would not even hold him overnight unless there was a belief or evidence indicating at that time of their arrival on that a threat, assault or other crime had been committed, in which case their obligation is to take the person into custody.
    Contrary to popular thought, RCMP do not arrest people and hold them overnight just to cool off.

    I note also that in several articles it is reported that Christy Clark invited Pimm back into caucus in a telephone call with him, something I find quite shocking personally considering the serious nature of the allegations and arrest.

    Also upsetting is the special treatment Pimm received in having a special prosecutor appointed so quickly. What entitles him to special treatment in a K file- the designation given to files of a domestic offence of any kind? Does he not merit the regular system like the rest of us? And what additional information did was he privy to that the police were not in their investigation.

    I do know this, from personal experience. RCMP are often working very hard in their files and reports to bring the right evidence forth to crown for charge approval. Clearly, there was evidence enough to arrest him. The special treatment prosecutor stated ”
    Jette found the evidence “does not provide a substantial likelihood of conviction and therefore does not support the laying of any criminal charges” meaning there was evidence. There was evidence of something that happened. A huge difference between being cleared of any criminal wrongdoing and anyone in the legal field and the RCMP knows that.

    This is hard for me to talk about. I’ve been there. I know that this government put cost cutting before women and childrens lives- they took away mandatory charges, they cut legal services and supports and failed to fund several vital womens centres that provide support and advocacy for women being abused.

    I note as well Mrs. Pimm response when the Province contacted her inititally, and that she would not talk about the incident stating it was not a big deal,something that has been heard by thousands of people involved in K files all over BC.
    “Jody Pimm scolded The Province for inquiring into the incident at the time. “I really wish you wouldn’t go there,” she said. “I don’t really see why you guys are feeding off this stuff. It really wasn’t [a big deal].”

    She declined to explain the nature of the incident that led to her husband’s arrest”

    We don’t know what happened here, but we do know there was enough evidence to arrest him, and appoint a special prosecutor, and that is enough for me to say shame on the Liberal caucus for welcoming him back into the fold with open arms.

    There are failures everyday in these cases and they will continue. Written in 2008, this article is still relevent for highlighting the failures of the BC Liberals in handling domestic assault files. We must go back to mandatory charges.


  2. Ian says:

    Laila, thank you for your very informative – and personally brave – comment. Those are exactly the kinds of questions journalists should be asking. That should be true regardless of party lines. But it’s not in British Columbia.

    On a personal note, thank you for your very kind words on my previous post. While I try and keep my motivation to describing what’s happening to me I can’t say that I’m not overjoyed when readers respond with love and graciousness. I am – overjoyed, that is. Your comments have been particularly sustaining.

    A heartfelt thank you to all my on-line friends.


  3. Laila says:

    There is joy in every moment to be found, even in anger, in sadness, and sharing those moments with others is a gift, even when the subject matter is heartwrenching. Your posts, whether joyous, angry or in sorrow, will change and touch the lives of other Ian. Thank you.

  4. G.J.W. says:

    When in BC, have any of the BC Liberals ever had to pay for their crimes? Even if they are charged, the special prosecutors and the judges, make sure they don’t pay for their criminal activities. I wouldn’t be surprised if, Mrs Pimm is afraid to say anything. This is the case for many battered wives and children. The abuser gets to come home, and abuse again and again.

    In my day a call to the police resulted with, I’m sorry ma’am, the police do not interfere in domestic disputes. There were no woman’s shelters, you had no protection at all.

    My children and I were abused by my ex even as far as, having a loaded rifle aimed at us. My poor little boy’s were beat, pretty much every day. I was also abused by my mother-in-law. She beat me over the head, when I was in my ninth month of pregnancy, as my two little boys screamed in terror. I was always disallowed social assistance, on numerous tries.

    When the divorce was in court. My lawyer sided with my ex’s lawyer. I had witnesses, letters from my oldest son, who wanted to be in the court with me, my lawyer said no. My lawyer did not call my witnesses, nor did he allow my sons letters.

    When my oldest was eight, he already knew, he didn’t want to live. This is what I learned from his brother, in later years. In my sons letter, he told how his father had beat him with a belt buckle. My youngest, had seen his brothers beating. His legs were, bloody and swollen, twice their size. He had never told me. In later years, my oldest sons doctors, were going to help him take his father to court. He died from a drug OD, before that could happen.

    I thought my lawyers butt was stuck to his chair with crazy glue. He objected to nothing. So I tested him, I gave a silly answer, to a question my ex’s lawyer asked. My lawyer leaped off his seat so fast, I thought he would sail up through the roof. So, I then knew my lawyer was corrupt. My in-laws had money. I imagine he was bought. The judge even allowed my ex to keep, my dead mothers oak china cabinet. I received nothing. I had worked two jobs for years. I had an emergency, I missed some payments to my lawyer, he garnisheed my wages. My lawyer is now a judge, in Kelowna BC. My ex has since been fired from two jobs, for sexual misconduct.

    There isn’t a politician, a lawyer, a judge or any police, that I would ever trust. I was in a car accident, I was hit from behind, and was struck by three other vehicles. People advised me to get a lawyer. I couldn’t make myself do it.

    When women don’t lay charges on their abusive spouses. Nine times out of ten, they are far too afraid to. That can get you a worse beating, and some times death.

  5. G.J.W. says:

    Sorry, my lawyer is a judge in Kamloops BC. He was accused of corruption, after he became a judge as well. I was living in Kelowna, after leaving Kamloops, when my wages were garnisheed.

  6. Rod Smelser says:

    One thing the Heed case points to is the fact that the Elections Act in BC is incredibly weird in terms of deterring or penalizing violations of expenditure limits. It provides that ANY spending over the limit, presumably one dollar (one penny?) results in the election of the member being overturned. Unless a court grants “relief”, with no legislated grounds being spelled out to the courts on when to grant “relief”. Totally nuts.

    It’s hard to believe that an act with this kind of medieval approach comes from the Harcourt Govt of the 1990s. What on earth were people thinking?

    Whatever people think of Heed or the way his campaign was run, I am not in favour of vacating elections for what are essentially minor breaches of the spending limit, in this case less than 10%. As a financial agent for a federal NDP EDA I can tell you based on my experience that few parties have a higher probability of getting into an accidental overspending of a few or even several thousand dollars than the NDP. We’re just lucky in this district that we wouldn’t be planning to spend close enough to the limit that any accidents would put us over.

    As for Mr Tieleman’s pronouncements on this subject they are a grotesque reminder of the phoney righteousness that infects BC politics, people advocating rules for others that they could never and would never live by themselves.

  7. Something Smells Funny says:

    Thank you to G.J.W. for telling her story. It rings true in my experience, every aspect of it. Even today.

    I am aware of an incident in the last 6 months where police were called to protect a woman against abuse, and they refused, saying all they were there to do was to keep the peace (gone is the “protect and serve” part).

    I wish you all the best.

  8. Anne-Marie says:

    Thoughtful, outrageous and moving words these past few days. Gives me perspective on what is making me angry this week. Love to you and your loved ones. Best, AM

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *