“Commission Laptops Not Wireless Enabled”

Marc Lemire, an online distributor of far-right propaganda whose hate-speech prosecution has galvanized criticism of Canada’s human rights courts, yesterday filed criminal complaints against the Canadian Human Rights Commission (CHRC) over its alleged surreptitious use of a civilian’s computer. In complaints to the Ottawa Police Service and the RCMP,Mr. Lemire alleges CHRC investigators accessed a chat-room through an unsecured wireless Internet connection owned by a 26-year-old Ottawa woman who lives near the CHRC offices. He said doing so contravened four parts of the Criminal Code.Mr. Lemire alleges they did this “in order to hide their online identity.”Philippe Dufresne, the CHRC’s director of litigation, said that, for security reasons, the Commission’s laptops were not wireless enabled at the end of 2006, and to the best of his knowledge, the investigators would not and could not have accessed a private citizens internet account. He said the matter is under investigation and the CHRC is looking into the possibility of a mistake or a coincidence.Mr. Lemire said the event happened in late 2006, just before the online pseudonym Jadewarr was exposed as the secret identity of CHRC Internet hate-speech investigators, who used it to monitor and post on target Web sites and to elicit the identities of Web site owners.
The issue of the civilian’s computer came to light last week atMr. Lemire’s Human Rights Tribunal hearing, when his legal team subpoenaed a Bell Canada representative to identify which of the company’s subscribers accessed the Web site freedominion.ca as Jadewarr on Dec. 8, 2006.

Alain Monfette, director of the law enforcement support team for Bell, provided the woman’s name and address to the tribunal. The National Post interviewed her that evening, and reported that her Bell Internet account had wireless access that was not password protected, meaning anyone within range could have used it. She said she had no connection to the CHRC. (Source)

This is looking more and more like a third party job.   We need to find out more information about all the parties connected to this case to get to the bottom of what happened.  We need a full and public inquiry.

This is an important fact too:

On March 25, 2008, Alain Monfette, director of the law enforcement support team for Bell Canada, testified under oath before the Tribunal (Warman v. Lemire) that the owner of the IP address on December 8, 2006 at 3:29PM was:

Nelly Hechme
570 Laurier Ave W
Ottawa, Ontario
User ID: b1cgsw59
Connection date and time: December 7, 2006 from 18:37:22 to December 8, 2006 at 21:35:56

In other words, the internet connection to Bell’s server lasted from 6:37pm on Dec. 7 to 9:36pm on Dec. 8 which is over 24 hours.

No Commission employee is going to stay connected to a third party account for over 24 hours.  You could possibly believe a few hours but not over 24 hours.  Furthermore, engaging in this type of behaviour was well known to Steacy’s manager and other investigators and therefore there wouldn’t be any reason NOT to use a Commission account to access the internet for their spying purposes.

It further rules out anyone just “passing by” with a laptop since they are not going to stay connected for 24 hours.

That means the person who accessed that account had to either live in the same building or live reasonably close by.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Solve : *
24 ⁄ 12 =