Chief J.J. Ewatski Winnipeg Police Service 151, Princess Street Winnipeg, MB R3B 1L1
I have read your letter addressed to Sheila Steele dated March 20, 2003 which was posted on the injusticebusters website.
It goes without saying that, as Chief and supervisor of the Winnipeg Police Service, you felt compelled to voice your opinion and your subordinates' innocence. You also questioned the fairness of posting any allegations of wrongdoing against Mr. Schinkel and Sergeant Thiessen in my case.
What is unfair in this case are the following:
a) That I had endured approximately 9½ hours of intense interrogation, threats and ridicule at the hands of two experienced detectives who knowingly brought me in under false pretence, held me against my will, refused my rights to a lawyer (actually Schinkel laughed when he noted that my lawyer was in Florida and couldn't/wouldn't be there in time), and threatened to lock me up if I didn't immediately sign their statement.
b) That I wrote only one sentence on the hand-written statement, 'I don't believe any of this'. Schinkel and Thiessen were not impressed by my insistence and stubbornness to prove my innocence and time was running out. When I refused to sign the hand-written statement, I was once again threatened to be locked up until I did so, thereby missing my husband's funeral. Exhausted and at my wits end, I 'printed' my name instead. Again your officers were taken aback by my act of defiance. At one of the extradition hearings, a typed police statement was presented.
Needless to say that this 'rewritten' version did not include my one sentence nor was the signature the same. Your two officers took it upon themselves to rewrite their version minus my one sentence and forge my signature. Unfortunately for them, their version of events can and will be proven fabricated.
c) That my father, Jean-Emile Paillé, called the Winnipeg Police (Princess Street) at two different times during the early morning hours of February 15th wanting to know my whereabouts and when I would be returned. At 5:00 a.m., he presented himself at your office. Sergeant Thiessen greeted him and assured him that I would return home shortly. At no time did Sergeant Thiessen indicate to my father that I was locked in an interrogation room against my will. My father would have acted differently had Sergeant Thiessen given him any reason to suspect police wrongdoing. Sergeant Thiessen deliberately lied to my father in order to secure more time for my confession (I still hadn't signed their statement) and to avoid him contacting a lawyer. This on-going police practice of forceful confessions has resulted in many wrongful charges and convictions. Your two officers overstepped their legal boundaries by utilising the Reid Technique and deliberately lying to my father.
d) That Mr. Schinkel and Sergeant Thiessen took two (2) police statements from my abusive ex-husband, Henry Thorimbert. That these two statements, taken days apart, contradict each other. In January 2003, Mr. Thorimbert advised our son that he never gave, signed a second police statement. He denies having met the Winnipeg Police on February 14th. He indicated that same either doesn't exist or that the Winnipeg Police forged his signature. Mr. Thorimbert is either denying same as he realizes that he committed perjury (his 2nd statement can be proven false) OR the Winnipeg Police knowingly took a fabricated and false 2nd statement from an abusive ex-husband OR the Winnipeg Police forged his signature. In any case, the Winnipeg Police did not act in good faith and will be held accountable. Although these statements don't form part of the extradition request, these were to be used at trial. The authorities thought to use Mr. Thorimbert's statement in establishing motive of financial gain in case their 'affair' theory failed.
e) Mr. Schinkel swore in his affidavit that WO Pierre Raymond of National Defence requested the Winnipeg Police interrogate me. This was confirmed untrue by many sources, including Dan Lett of the Winnipeg Free Press. When further investigated, the Winnipeg Police changed their story. They admitted that quote, 'It must have been the military police who requested same' unquote. Again this was proven false. Note that the Winnipeg Police refused to answer any further questions in this matter. They had been caught in their lies. As the Florida authorities had no authority to question me without my US lawyer, the Winnipeg Police were asked to do so. The Winnipeg Police removed me from my parents' home under false pretence, thereby avoiding the Miranda legalities. In their creative approach, no one would suspect their wrongdoing and no lawyer would be contacted. This further confirms that Mr. Schinkel signed a perjured affidavit in his description of the events of February 14th 1996.
f) That Madame Justice Steel ordered my extradition based on Loren Schinkel's affidavit and the rewritten Winnipeg Police statement.
Schinkel and Thiessen have acted inappropriately throughout this case. Their actions and wrongdoings were brought up at the Extradition hearings. Unfortunately, I have no rights under the present Extradition Law and Madame Justice Steel would not examine our evidence or order disclosure/voir dire. I am fighting to change said Law and have the trial held in Winnipeg. A Winnipeg trial will certainly expose this injustice and the Winnipeg Police misconduct.
Winnipeg Police Service has since refused to answer any questions in my case. Although nothing further has been done since their wrongdoings of February 1996, their reason has always been, quote 'There an on-going investigation.' unquote. Nothing has been done on this case since their wrongdoings in February 1996.
Ralph Crompton was convicted of 1st degree murder in the death of my husband. His version of events was not only proven unbelievable, but IMPOSSIBLE. He has undertaken numerous appeals and failed. In 2001, he again appealed and finally introduced a new suspect. ('Diablo' was also brought forth in the Winnipeg Free Press exclusive article in 2000. One of Ralph Crompton's friends was also asked to find 'Diablo' days after Crompton's arrest.) This declaration, which inches towards the truth, was never investigated by the Florida authorities or the Winnipeg Police.
Needless to say that a new suspect would only complicate matters and question the authenticity of my alleged Winnipeg Police statement and the negligent investigation by both police departments.
Although you were not Chief of Police in 1996, you have been aware of this case. When a citizen of Winnipeg lodges a complaint against a member of the police force, it is your duty to investigate same. My father wrote you a letter in September 2001 detailing some of the discrepancies and wrongful actions of Mr. Schinkel and Sergeant Thiessen. You didn't even bother to respond.
My case, along with other cases, is exposed on injusticebusters.com. This website serves to bring forth instances of injustices and wrongdoings by the authorities. Your officers have had many opportunities to answer for their actions, but have either refused or hidden between the curtains of justice in this extradition case. Their misconduct and lack of professionalism in manifesting evidence has contributed to dire consequences in my case. Remember they are not the victims of malicious prosecution or manufactured cases: they are the perpetrators.
Rest assured that this matter will not disappear. Police wrongdoings are of public concern. The Winnipeg Police Service will be required to answer for their actions. Yours truly,
CC : Mr. Greg Brodsky Injusticebusters.com Joyce Milgaard/AIDWYC Dan Lett - Winnipeg Free Press