Documents

“Canadians are famously positive about their police. What other country has a police officer as its symbol? The Mountie is on everything from T-shirts to the cover of restaurant guides. We tend to respond to revelations of corruption by denying that there’s a systemic problem – it’s just a few 'rotten apples' – and we punish scapegoats rather than examine the deeper issues.”

Jean-Paul Brodeur, Canadian Criminologist, “If you can’t trust the cops…” The Globe and Mail (9 January 2004) at A13.

• The Search for Eddie
  The focus of the search is on Eddie, Scott's Son, now 13 years old. Although the case is "officially" still open with the State Department Office of Children's Issues, Barbara Greig has since refused to return phone calls from Scott Loper or inquiring news reporters.
• Davison to Andrews June, 2005
  Response to Congressman Robert E. Andrews' original contact with the Office of Overseas Citizens Services and Crisis Management. This letter states that the consulate had no information on Scott. That, of course, is understandable, since his Vienna Convention rights were violated.
  
  According to Andrews, in response to inquiries following this letter, the Canadian government stated they had no record of Scott Loper having lived in Canada. Andrews pursued the matter, but came against a brick wall.
  
  It should be noted that, since the Canadian Government officially deported Scott in 2001, while he was in prison, they certainly had records that he had been living in Canada.
• Andrews to Rice April, 2005
  Letter from Congressman Andrews to Condoleeza Rice.
• Hoyer to Loper November, 2007
  After exhausting other avenues, Scott Loper contacted House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer. This was Hoyer's original response indicating he has notified the State Department.
• Hoyer to Bergner November, 2007
  Hoyer's letter to Jeffrey Bergner, Assistant Secretary of the Bureau of Legislative Affairs, asking him to look into the matter.
• Durkin to Hoyer Undated, 2007
  Letter from Kenneth M. Durkin, Chief of the Western Hemisphere Division of American Citizens Services and Crisis Management, to Steny Hoyer, in which he states he has verified that the Canadian Authorities did not notify the U.S. Consulate of Loper's arrest and conviction. In the letter, he states that they "reminded" the Canadians that it was an important thing to do.
  
  When the Durham Regional Police drug squad members Loper was about to turn in caught on to him, they handcuffed him and took him to a mental institution, declaring he was delusional - was making up wild stories about the police. Loper is certain his wife was threatened, and still fears for her and his son's safety. [DETAIL]
  
  After four years in prison, Loper was quickly released and taken to the U.S. border when an investigation had begun of the Durham Regional Police drug squad - the very cops Loper was about to expose. The investigation was whitewashed.
• Hoyer to Loper January, 2008
  Steny Hoyer's letter to Scott Loper regarding State Department findings and stating the State Department has no jurisdiction over Canadian law enforcement personnel. Obviously, the congressman is losing site of the issue here.
• Durkin to Hoyer April, 2008
  Letter from Kenneth Durkin to Steny Hoyer stating that Scott Loper waived his rights to contact the U.S embassy.
  
  Durkin states that Loper waived his rights on paperwork dated June 3rd, 2003. That is nearly a year after his first sentence would have ended! It is THREE YEARS after his original incarceration!
  
  Even if there had been such a legal document, rather than proving their case, the date would have been shining proof that the Canadians were in violation of Article 36 of the Vienna Convention. You would think that the astute Mr. Durkin would have noticed this discrepancy. Our guess is he did. He was just hoping that it would all go away.
• Durkin to Hoyer May, 2008
  Durkin telling Hoyer the case is all solved - he has the smoking gun - the document in which Scott Loper sign... uh ... well, HE didn't sign it, but a Canadian immigration officer did, so it must be legitimate! Oh - and it's three years after he was incarcerated, but that's a trivial matter, isn't it? While we're at it, would you like to buy some prime farm land in Antarctica? (see the document below)
• 2003 Document Held Up as A Waiving of Rights
  Signature Area of Document Enlarged
  
• House Council to C. Scott Shields May, 2008
  Civil Rights Attorney C. Scott Shields constantly requested a letter that was written to the State Department by Representative Hoyer requesting a copy of the unsigned "waiver of rights". Shields requested that letter several times and received no response. Hoyer's office finally replied that the letter was "privileged". Shields requested to know the nature of the privilege.
  
  This letter, from the House attorneys, was the response. With this letter also came the long-awaited copy of the unsigned document.
  
  Certainly, these U.S. government lawyers know this unsigned document proves the exact opposite of what they are indicating it does, if it even had any credibility at all. Of course, it doesn't.
  
  Scott Loper has filed 3 Freedom of Information requests, which have been denied by the State Department, a violation of federal law.
• Wolf to Bergner August, 2008
  Scott Loper has relocated and is now a constituent of Representative Frank Wolf, a ranking member of the State Foreign Operations Subcommittee, as well as Co-Chair of the Congressional Human Rights Committee (formerly the Human Rights Caucus). Representative Wolf is calling for a State Department investigation in this letter to Assistant Secretary of Legislative Affairs, Jeffrey Bergner.
• Walker to Wolf - Same Old Story November, 2008
  The State Department responds to Congressman Frank Wolf, once again trying to pass off the unsigned 2003 document as a valid indication of Scott Loper waiving his Vienna Convention rights. Acting Western Hemisphere Chief Carolee Walker now says Scott's former wife, Carolyn, is in some sort of Canadian "witness protection program" so they cannot determine her whereabouts.
  
  "Canada has a transparent, open judicial system, and we have a record of excellent cooperation with Canada on a range of consular issues", says Walker. If Canada has such a "transparent, open judicial system", then why is it the Canadians have not produced court records or other documentation to the State Department? Why is it the Canadians have not explained how a "Breach of Court Order" for violation of a restraining order escalates into a conviction of "Criminal Harrassment", which somehow magically now becomes "Felony Criminal Harassment"? Why is it that the only documentation the Canadians will provide is an absolutely meaningless 2003 unsigned document from an admissibility hearing. (in which Scott does not even remember being in attendance.) Ken Durkin of the State Department simply says their reason is "because they don't have to provide us with information".
  
  We have one or two problems here with Carolee Walker's so-called "transparent, open judicial system" - either the State Department is not asking for this important information or the Canadians are refusing to provide it. Recent evidence has shown that Carolyn was granted custody in a closed hearing, where no defense was allowed, pages were deleted from the court record, and court documents were sealed. This is hardly what we would define as a "transparent, open judicial system". We should be counting our blessings that Ms Walker is not sitting on the U.S. Supreme Court bench!
  
  Most important of all, what is this "witness protection program" that Carolyn Loper is supposed to be under? Who was she testifying against? Did she, after all, turn evidence Scott had obtained against the Durham Police over to authorities? If so, would this evidence not exonerate Scott Loper? Or is this another Canadian whitewash which resulted in safely tucking Carolyn and Eddie away from everyone?
• Scott Loper's NJ Sheriff's Identification
  Scott Loper worked as an internal affairs operative for the Camden County Sheriff in New Jersey.
• Newspaper Article on police probe in Durham Region, Ontario
  With the exception of one conviction, the entire investigation was whitewashed and personnel were reassigned.