RCMP boots mother, kids from witness-protection program

[fvkasm2x]

“As a result of the security breaches . . . your safety and security has been significantly compromised and the Royal Canadian Mounted Police can no longer be responsible for your and your dependent children’s safety and security as required pursuant to the Witness Protection Program Act,” states a May 4 termination notice signed by RCMP Assistant Commissioner Stephen White, head of federal and international operations.

agree to disagree.. Ok but it's right there in bold. RCMP were responsible for their safety and security. but because mom was am idiot the kids are hung out to dry.Classy on the part of the people who assumed responsibility.

Exactly.

So these people put themselves in even more risk. The RCMP was supposed to protect them. They drew attention to themselves. Then if they got killed while in RCMP protection, the news article would read:

"RCMP fails to keep witness safe, as family is gunned down in mobstyle hit."

Then the cops get bashed for not keeping them safe, even though they caused greater risk.

Another reason the cops want win no matter what they do.

[grammafreddy]

The husband has his own website ...

http://www.paulderry.ca/

Witness loses his protection
Friday, 25 June 2010 09:04

Mounties won’t help book-writing informant stay safely hidden
By PATRICIA BROOKS ARENBURG Staff Reporter | EXCLUSIVE
Thu. Jun 24 - 4:54 AM

A career criminal who helped put a Halifax Hells Angel and three other men away for a Dartmouth murder says he has been pulled from Canada’s witness protection program.

"As of last Friday, they’ve officially given me the boot," Paul Joseph Derry said in a telephone interview.

"Happy to see me gone, I’m sure."

On May 28, Assistant Commissioner Stephen White wrote that "all protection provided to you pursuant to the protection agreements . . . between you and the RCMP and pursuant to the Witness Protection Program Act is hereby terminated effective immediately."

Derry, who now goes by another name, had been fighting to stay in witness protection since October, when RCMP first sent him a letter saying it was going to end its contract.

News outlets reported at the time that Derry had 13 alleged breaches to the terms of his witness protection agreement. The Chronicle Herald hasn’t seen the list of breaches, but Derry said those incidents included interviews with reporters and radio shows, especially following a book he published in April 2009 about the killing — Treacherous: How the RCMP Allowed a Hells Angel to Kill.

"I see their reasons for kicking me out," Derry said.

"I mean, they’re quite valid. I’ve been very public . . . and I guess this is just part of what we knew would come. They didn’t want me to write a book. I choose to write the book. I don’t think they’re happy about any of the newspaper stuff or the radio, TV, any of that kind of stuff."

A longtime RCMP informant, Derry entered the witness protection program after the shooting death of Sean Eamonn Simmons.

The victim, a 31-year-old former Halifax dockyard worker and married father of two, died on Oct. 3, 2000. He had been shot in the head in the lobby of an apartment building at 12 Trinity Ave.

It was a Hells Angels hit, and Derry drove the getaway car. He and Tina Potts (who later became his wife) also hid and destroyed evidence, including the gun used in the killing.

Derry later testified in court that he had told RCMP about the murder plot about three weeks before it happened but said police didn’t act on his information.

They had used his information on other cases before, but Derry said his information was ignored because he was labelled "treacherous" in his RCMP file in Nova Scotia.

After the murder, he signed an immunity agreement with Halifax Regional Police, the force investigating the murder, and wore a wire to record meetings with the accused individuals.

Derry’s evidence helped send Hells Angel Neil Smith, associate Wayne James, Dean Kelsie and Steven Gareau to prison for murder and conspiracy.

Sgt. Pat Flood, a RCMP spokeswoman at national headquarters in Ottawa, wouldn’t answer any questions about Derry’s claims.

"We’re not in a position to confirm or deny who is still part of or who was part of the witness protection program, so I don’t have a response to your questions," she said in an interview Wednesday.

The money Derry once made dealing drugs and working as an informant is gone. But he said his life has taken a far better path since he and his wife became Christians.

"I’m sure you should wear your workboots and hard hats around us because we’re under construction," the 44-year-old said. "We haven’t changed completely perfectly, but we certainly don’t live anything like we used to."

He does street ministry and is "well-ingrained in my church and my community." He and his family live in an undisclosed location outside of Nova Scotia.

His wife and children are happy, but the threat of danger is always on Derry’s mind.

"Almost every day of my life, I think about what it’s going to be like to be killed, how it’s going to happen," he said.

Derry said he didn’t want to jeopardize his family’s safety and wasn’t interested in the publicity. Instead, he said he wrote the book and did the media interviews because "there was no reason for Sean to die."

Derry said the decision to remove him from witness protection is because "I created a lot of trouble for them."

"I’ve been in a constant fight with them. This is a very simple fight. I just wanted them to admit what they did was wrong with Sean nine years ago. If they had done that, I would’ve just quietly went away. But they haven’t, and they just keep refusing to."

News of his expulsion from witness protection is complicated by the fact that Derry’s wife, who signed a separate witness protection agreement, and their children are all in the program.

Derry doesn’t know if that means Potts and the children will lose their protection or if they will be forced apart because he’s no longer in the program and because people in protection aren’t supposed to associate with people from their pasts.

"We’re still waiting to hear how that works," said Derry.

He is in contact with his lawyer but hasn’t decided whether to appeal the RCMP’s decision in court.

[fvkasm2x]

I love this guy:

"They have reasons for kicking us out. They're quite valid."

Umm alright then. Moving on.

[Captain Awesome]

Even guy himself is ok with the fact.

[FreeRights]

I honestly can't believe what I'm Reading. You all seem fine with the fact these kids are in serious danger from known killers, but hey, whatever, their parents are idiots. I'm flat out stunned.

The government (and the police) went over and above putting these criminal parents on the Witness Protection Program to begin with, and the parents voided it.

Parents are still the responsible party for the safety of kids. The reason why I don't believe the government is going to take custody of the children is because of real vs perceived threats. It's the Hell's Angels - the parents are likely at risk, but I do not believe the kids are.

[FreeRights]

I honestly can't believe what I'm Reading. You all seem fine with the fact these kids are in serious danger from known killers, but hey, whatever, their parents are idiots. I'm flat out stunned.

Why? You've never seen parents who put their kids in danger by making very poor choices either through involvement in organized crime, or dangling them over a balcony? People do that, very often. And very often it results in sad consequences. It's called life.

Would you like to take kids away from every single bad parent and lock them up?

The police always call social services when children are in gro-ops or their parents get caught with drugs in the house.

Although I don't believe the criminals would harm the kids what they might witness happen to their mother who is a known rat could scar them for life.

Yes. The difference is the grow-op parents committed a crime and may be serving a prison sentence. These parent's didn't commit a crime.

[FreeRights]

What appears to me nobody is grasping is they were in protection for a reason... They are in danger because the crown used the parents to get convictions. If there was no danger there would be no witness protection.
at this point is not about who started what or stupid parents or we can't take all kids to protect them. They are in danger now because the parents were used by the crown. Why does nobody get that?

Wrong again.

The parents were charged of organized crime charges as well, and they were offered testimony in exchange for protection, under certain guidelines. The parents made the choice to offer testimony and enter the Witness Protection Program where they voided the guidelines and were subsequently released.

It's very hard to protect someone for long periods of time, and it's impossible if those people don't cooperate. This is why these restrictions exist for people in the Witness Protection Program.

[FreeRights]

Don't get me wrong, I'd prefer the government to take custody of the kids because the parents are obviously stupid, but I do not believe this specific incident falls under any Act that supports the government in taking custody.

The parents did not commit a crime to justify taking their kids. The threat is perceived as opposed to real or imminent.

Nobody here understands how difficult it is for the RCMP to so successfully protect people in the Program, especially when those being protected are so uncooperative and "public" as some are.

What it boils down to is, yes, the parents knowingly voided a contract that was protecting them, and yes, they've made a potentially unsafe situation for the kids. But, as far as I know, their case specifically does not apply to taking the kids custody, because they haven't yet met the guidelines, and the threat itself is perceived.

[WhatThe]

My only concern is the welfare and safety of the kids, the innocent party in all this. The parents I agree are idiots.

[Captain Awesome]

The parents I agree are idiots.

Let's agree to agree

[WhatThe]

The parents I agree are idiots.

Let's agree to agree

Well whaddaya know... Something we agree on lol

[kelownalongtime]

The parents I agree are idiots.

Let's agree to agree

Well whaddaya know... Something we agree on lol

Oh please, would you two just get a room......

[Paul Derry]

Maybe it would be good to find out all the facts before judging my wife or our actions. The truth is;

1. I did not testify to get out of any trouble. I was working, as i had for the previous 17 years, in the capacity of an informant/agent, with full knowlege of the RCMP.
2. My only association with Hells Angels, ever, was in the above capacity.
3. We did the book and doc to share the truth of what happened. Tina has never had anything to do with the publicity and was not breaking any rules of the program when she did the doc.
4. The book and doc were done under my old name and not our new one so how did that endanger my children?
5. Its been 19 years since I have been in any trouble with the law; I have recieved a pardon from the government and quietly raise my family.

We do not write these articles, they are wrtten about us, so maybe keep that in mind.

Maybe keep in mind that these same people who were protecting us were the same people we sued in regards to this murder and settled with, they are the same people who used my services on hundreds of occassions before in which I was considered an "expert in the area of weapons and drugs" "invaluable" "truthful" ....RCMP words not mine.

[KL3-Something]

Maybe it would be good to find out all the facts before judging my wife or our actions. The truth is;

1. I did not testify to get out of any trouble. I was working, as i had for the previous 17 years, in the capacity of an informant/agent, with full knowlege of the RCMP.
2. My only association with Hells Angels, ever, was in the above capacity.
3. We did the book and doc to share the truth of what happened. Tina has never had anything to do with the publicity and was not breaking any rules of the program when she did the doc.
4. The book and doc were done under my old name and not our new one so how did that endanger my children?
5. Its been 19 years since I have been in any trouble with the law; I have recieved a pardon from the government and quietly raise my family.

We do not write these articles, they are wrtten about us, so maybe keep that in mind.

Maybe keep in mind that these same people who were protecting us were the same people we sued in regards to this murder and settled with, they are the same people who used my services on hundreds of occassions before in which I was considered an "expert in the area of weapons and drugs" "invaluable" "truthful" ....RCMP words not mine.

Are you telling us that the media did not present an accurate picture of the circumstances in their reporting? Also that those reading and posting here are possibly forming their opinions without knowing all of the facts because they are basing their opinions solely on the information provided by said media?

Interesting.....

[grumpydigger]

So you are implying, that the public should believe the information provided to the media by the RCMP

I don't think, you want to open that can of worms................