,
14 tweets,
3 min read
Read on Twitter
Please see thread for my take now that we have heard JWR's perspective. JWR confirmed she was not directed by the PM or his government to enter into a DPA agreement. JWR confirmed nothing illegal occurred. Some facts that contradict JWR narrative.... 1/X
2.Lead prosecutor recommended the use of the DPA tool. The Director of Prosecutions overturned the decision. JWR confirmed prosecution. JWR did not document her legal analysis supporting the rejection of the DPA. JWR contention that due diligence was exercised was not documented
3/X Given public interest/importance of high profile cases & associated risks, JWR appeared to treat this case in a routine manner. SNC Lavalin, 2nd largest engineering firm in the world with over 60,000 employees and $12 Billlion in world revenues, would be offered a DPA if
4/X in any other 5 eyes country (UK, France, Australia and US). SNC Lavalin has requested a judicial review of the decision not to negotiate a DPA. It appears that JWR prefers prosecutions over DPAs in principle. The suggestion of bringing in an external legal expert to review
5/X the applicability of the DPA option that was rejected was completely valid given there is no expertise on DPAs within the Ministry of Justice since it is a new tool/law in Canada. JWR appeared to take offence at the idea that someone would be more qualified to review the case
6 than her yet she only had 4 years of experience working in the Vancouver DTES Office (drug crimes etc) as a junior prosecutor, in addition to her role within the BC FN Org. It is my contention that JWR & PMO overestimated her legal acumen, communication, mgmt & political skills
7/X JWR is a Rookie Politician/Minister. Besides having 4 chiefs of staff in 3 years, poor performance per political rivals & the legal profession, JWR's conduct & motivations are at question given indications that she was rigid, myopic, stubborn & not a team player.
8/X JWR failed to report any ethical violations to the Ethics Commissioner over a 4 month period which involved discussions in mid Sept, mid Oct and mid December. She contends that she felt inappropriate pressure that mounted and in December is when she felt the most pressure.
9/X Yet, JWR only spoke about pressure to PM Trudeau on Sept 17th & January 7th when she was told about the cabinet shuffle. JWR did not report this inappropriate pressure in Dec or offer her resignation at any point in accordance with cabinet convention.
10/X JWR accepted a new cabinet post January 14th after being advised of the shuffle on January 7th; thereby proving JWR had confidence in the PM, PMO & cabinet. Again, this is in contravention to her claim, after the fact, that she was subject to inappropriate pressure.
11/X JWR had the option to resign and did not do so in accordance with the common law convention called the Shawcross Doctrine. No judgement or decisions should be made until the Ethics Commissioner reviews the case.
12/X Also, the results of the judicial review of the SNC Lavalin DPA denial should be considered since there may have been malicious prosecutorial action on the part of the Crown.
13/X It seems obvious now that the PM/PMO/PCO lost confidence in JWR over a period of time (pre SNCL) for the reasons noted above. Intransigence, entitlement & political nativity make for difficult relationships.
* 13/X Spelling correction: naivety. Just a word of thanks to everyone for the retweets & kind words. Honoured to have picked up new followers as a result of this thread. Let's keep an open mind so we're receptive to new information & different conclusions.
