B.C. airline employee refused security clearance

[midwingcrisis]

http://news.nationalpost.com/2013/01/29 ... um=twitter

http://canlii.org/eliisa/highlight.do?t ... 3fc59.html

[altiplano]

Good.

Being caught at a drug house with a drugstore and loaded hangun stashed seems like a fair person to deny clearance...

Not particluarly good press for WestJet to get associated with though...

[slowstream]

Sorry, but I think the correct decision was made here.

Although I may have empathy for her, I find impossible to believe that she did not know what was going on.

[BTyyj]

Interesting how the news article states that her "timing was terrible." How about the fact that she had cocaine and a loaded handgun in her car?

Edited to fix quote.

[Meatservo]

Yep, I've got to say that keeping druggies, thieves and murderers as far away from large fast-flying objects as possible is probably a good thing.

The woman may not be the main criminal in her situation, but I am not averse to people being judged by the company they keep, either.

[Joe Blow Schmo]

Interesting how the news article states "she was at the wrong place at the wrong time." How about the fact that she had cocaine and a loaded handgun in her car.

Yes but had she not pulled up in front of a house that was being raided by the police, nobody would've known about the drugs and gun

Definitely the right decision made to deny her a pass.

[Diadem]

Interesting how the news article states "she was at the wrong place at the wrong time." How about the fact that she had cocaine and a loaded handgun in her car.

Actually, it doesn't; the word "wrong" doesn't appear in the article once. What it says is "Their timing was terrible".
Although you may have the facts incorrect on the specific quote, I agree with the premise that people aren't willing to take responsibility for their actions and the media often portrays them as hapless victims. A few years ago I saw a news report on a homeless man who was getting his life back together, and the background to the story is that he lost everything through a series of bad luck. As the reporter put it, he "became" addicted to heroin, as though it were a tumour that grew spontaneously and not a conscious decision to stick a needle in his arm, and then somehow he lost his job, home and family, but the way it was presented made it sound like it was unrelated to his addiction. I'm sure it was pure coincidence that it all happened at the same time...

[BTyyj]

Apologies Diadem, I didn't feel the need to reread the article so I just quoted what I felt the just of what the reporter wrote was. I fixed the quote.

As for the rest of your comment, that's the way our society is moving. People are now always looking to place the blame elsewhere, and the media catches on to that.

[LousyFisherman]

Wow just wow
They dropped all charges which means they didn't have enough evidence to go to the preliminary hearing much less convict her.

So, lets describe similar circumstances as they may apply to all of you

You are walking down the street with a friend you have not seen in 5 years.
Unknown to you he/she has a warrant out for their arrest.
The cops stop both of you, arrest him/her, search him/her and find some drugs.
They will now arrest you (Trust me, they will, it may be simple possession, it may be conspiracy)
4 months later, 2 to 3 days before your preliminary hearing you get a letter in the mail saying all charges are dropped

Should you now lose your right to work because the police made a deliberate mistake?

Just saying
LF

[bizjets101]

They dropped all charges which means they didn't have enough evidence to go to the preliminary hearing much less convict her.

Actually it doesn't mean that at all. Her husband took a deal and plead guilty, in exchange for his quilty plea, the crown chose to stay her charges.

That is called a plea agreement, happens everyday in courts across Canada - it in no way implies she is innocent - had the husband not taken the deal - it would have gone to trial.

As far as Transport Canada - their mandate is much simpler, 'A criminal conviction is sustained on proof beyond a reasonable doubt. Denial of a security clearance requires only a reasonable belief, on a balance of probabilities, that a person may be prone to or induced to commit an act that may interfere with civil aviation.'

This was a no brainer decision by the board.

NOTE: She also remained married to the convicted party for another 5 years.

The bigger issue is the 'Pardon' process, as Canada hands over records on a daily basis on it's own citizens to the USA, American's will always have a record of Canadian criminal charges and convictions regardless of a pardon.

[LousyFisherman]

They dropped all charges which means they didn't have enough evidence to go to the preliminary hearing much less convict her.

Actually it doesn't mean that at all. Her husband took a deal and plead guilty, in exchange for his quilty plea, the crown chose to stay her charges. That is called a plea agreement, happens everyday in courts across Canada - it in no way implies she is innocent - had the husband not taken the deal - it would have gone to trial.
.

And you know this how?
Innocent until proven guilty is the principle our so-called justice system is supposed uphold.

As for the rest, if you think the TC decision is acceptable then when they revoke your (or your friends) right to work because "they believe" don't whine about it. I believe there is a quote that begins "When they came for ......"

The bigger issue is the 'Pardon' process, as Canada hands over records on a daily basis on it's own citizens to the USA, American's will always have a record of Canadian criminal charges and convictions regardless of a pardon.

Canada no longer hands over details of summary offences due to the US ignoring pardons (Since about 1980 or so I think). This is why US Immigration asks "Have you ever been arrested?"

[Skyhunter]

Wow just wow
They dropped all charges which means they didn't have enough evidence to go to the preliminary hearing much less convict her.

So, lets describe similar circumstances as they may apply to all of you

You are walking down the street with a friend you have not seen in 5 years.
Unknown to you he/she has a warrant out for their arrest.
The cops stop both of you, arrest him/her, search him/her and find some drugs.
They will now arrest you (Trust me, they will, it may be simple possession, it may be conspiracy)
4 months later, 2 to 3 days before your preliminary hearing you get a letter in the mail saying all charges are dropped

Should you now lose your right to work because the police made a deliberate mistake?

Just saying
LF

In order to be similar, you would have to be the principal user of a pair of jeans that had a secret pocket with a handgun and drugs. Your example is nowhere near the same.

[bizjets101]

Canada no longer hands over details of summary offences due to the US ignoring pardons (Since about 1980 or so I think). This is why US Immigration asks "Have you ever been arrested?"

(Since about 1980 or so I think)

Wow your up to date, like nothings happened since 1980???

They ask you because if you lie, or they think you lie, they can immediately deny you entry.

US Customs merely has to scan your passport and the have the same CPIC a Canadian Police Officer has when he runs your name.

With the click of a button they can also see anything you've ever been charged with - instantly.

Canadian records are copied constantly, so no matter when you receive a pardon, or for what for, the Americans can access any information prior to the pardon.

A Source

When you present yourself at a US port of entry and your passport is scanned into the US database, they will often check the CPIC record (Canadian Police Information Center) to look for criminal convictions. If a conviction shows up, they may deny you entry into the United States because of it.

While it is unclear exactly how the US and Canada share information relating to customs, it is generally accepted that once the US discovers a record in CPIC they will store it in their own computer system indefinitely.

This means that even if your offense is pardoned and removed from CPIC, the US will still have a record of it if you attempted to enter the United States prior to the pardon being granted and wiped from the CPIC system.

[LousyFisherman]

US Customs merely has to scan your passport and the have the same CPIC a Canadian Police Officer has when he runs your name.
With the click of a button they can also see anything you've ever been charged with - instantly.

ROTFLMAO

Since I have been charged many times, never convicted, how come the only records they have are the ones I gave them as a result of their questions? How do I know this, because I had to correct the record at a later date (that was 1985 not 1986) How come my ex-wife, who has been convicted (summary), enters the US without any questions or problems?

Whatever, you know it all, so my practical experiences, and legal consultations are irrelevant.

And I would not pay the lawyer you quote, because there is a glaring error within the first two paragraphs.

LF

[bizjets101]

Since I have been charged many times, never convicted

Congratulations. Also great stories about the 80's, anything current??

Suggest you contact Homeland Security, tell them your stories, and hopefully
you'll be able to appreciate their response.

so my practical experiences, and legal consultations are irrelevant

Is this part of the 80's story, or your a lawyer now - even though you get charged a lot.

Kool.

[LousyFisherman]

Since I have been charged many times, never convicted

Congratulations. Also great stories about the 80's, anything current??

How about how I became a possible terrorist threat after 9/11 because of my birthplace?
How about being arrested in Toronto in all the mess with G8 summit.? I am pretty sure
that was later than the eighties. And all I was doing was going to the subway.
Wrong place, wrong time.

Suggest you contact Homeland Security, tell them your stories, and hopefully
you'll be able to appreciate their response.

I had to report to them once a week in San Jose for 8 months in 2001-2002. I think they
are aware of my story. And their response was always "See you next week"

Is this part of the 80's story, or your a lawyer now - even though you get charged a lot.

I travel to the US between 1-12 times a year and have done so since the eighties.
I thought it wise to pay a lawyer so I knew what to expect, and discover what the law is.

So lets talk about your practical knowledge bizjets.
Have you ever been arrested?

As Thomas Wolfe said "A liberal is a conservative who has been arrested."

LF

[bizjets101]

Just years worth of dealing with customs while operating a fleet of 5 corporate jets, all US registered and based in California.

We've had passengers detained, arrested, charged, planes seized etc. Had my share of dealings with US Customs, good and bad - and under Freedom of Information - have accessed files that they have held on customers etc..

When they have info on you, you'll be the last to know what they have, if ever.

In fact, it is easier to get info on Canadians from Americans, than it is to access your own information in Canada -even with a lawyer.

[Wilbur]

Clearly this women is involved in organized crime. Nobody else has a secrect compartment filled with drugs and a gun installed in their car and keeps the car registered in a parent's name. Those are also not things that low level dial-a-dope dealers do. It is entirely consistent with a mid-level or higher drug dealer connected to an established gang. The only possible mitigating factor for her is that it was almost certainly her husband's criminal enterprise in which she was only a conspirator. Since issuing a security clearance is an administrative process, the burden of proof for denial is made on a balance of probabilities. Does the evidence support that it is more likely than not that this women is or was involved in the drug trade and organized crime to an extent that she is a security threat? I certainly think so.

[SheriffPatGarrett]

Quite the double standard here...what about this "hero" who fucked up his fuel handling during a small fuel leak,
(dumped it all overboard), blew up all the tires on landing but never was denied security clearance
despite a conviction of drug smuggling HIMSELF! (not his wife!)...you know who I'm talking about, right?

Corruption in Canada when the "Hundred Families" are involved reach epic size!