R. v. Patrick Fox - Probation Violations (leaving BC, being within 100 meters of the US border)
- The Narrative
- Crown Counsel Disclosure
- Law Enforcement Interviews
- Emails Between US CBP, CBSA, RCMP, and Crown Counsel
- Other Shit
- Relevant Parties
- Bernie Wolfe, Crown Counsel
- David St. Pierre, Judge
- Meagan Polisak, CBSA Border Services Officer
- Kirsty Brown, RCMP Constable
- Tyler Hawkins, RCMP Constable
- Abeed Bhimji, Probation Officer
- Chester Bridal, Defense Lawyer
- Jeffrey Obrist, CBP Officer
- Shan-Marie Pereira, CBSA Intelligence Analyst
- Alexander Lo, CBSA, Administrative Superintendent
- Chad Brown, CBSA, Administrative Superintendent
- Steve Riess
- Ricky Riess
In this section of the website we look at the criminal case against Patrick Fox for violating the conditions of his probation by:
- leaving BC without the permission of his probation officer;
- being within 100 meters of the US border; and
- failing to report for prbation as directed by his probation officer.
On March 6, 2020 Fox was convicted of the charges for 1) leaving BC without permission; and 2) being within 100 meters of the US border. He was acquitted of the charge of failing to report. He was sentenced to 12 months in jail and 18 months of probation with the sole condition that he not be within 500 meters of the US border. By the time he was sentenced, Patrick had already been in custody on the matter for 15 months.
Why is this case interesting? Big fucking deal, it's a probation violation. It happens all the time. But, in this case we have the following:
- Prior to Patrick turning himself in to CBSA at the Douglas border crossing, to be removed from Canada, Crown Counsel Mark Myhre agreed on the record, in open court, that if Patrick were to be removed or asked/told to leave Canada by IRCC or CBSA, then he would not prosecute Patrick for violating the probation order.
- CBSA destroyed critical video evidence which would have irrefutably proven Patrick's innocence.
- CBSA, the RCMP, and Crown Counsel Bernie Wolfe lied to the court, consistently, over a period of six months, claiming there was absolutely no record of Patrick presenting himself to CBSA at the Douglas border crossing on March 15, 2019. In the case of CBSA, the lie was upheld by personnel at the Douglas border crossing, the Vancouver office, AND the ATIP office in Ottawa.
- CBSA Border Services Officer (BSO) Meagan Polisak actually testified that at a port of entry, if a person presents themselves for entry to Canada and they have no proof of citizenship or place of birth (e.g. a birth certificate or passport), and CBSA is not able to prove the person is NOT a Canadian citizen then CBSA MUST allow that person to enter Canada.
- CBSA Officer Meagan Polisak falsely testified that when she interacted with Patrick on March 15, 2019, she "did not see" the Country of Birth field of both his FOSS and GCMS reports, which both stated "United States of America", and for that reason, she "was not able to confirm that he was NOT a Canadian citizen".
- CBSA did NOT want one of their people testifying because they would have to admit,
- they know Patrick is not a Canadian citizen and they, therefore, denied him re-entry from the Douglas port of entry - but then how would they explain why they allowed US DHS to deport him here in 2013?; or
- they believe Patrick IS a Canadian citizen and they, therefore, allowed him re-entry from the Douglas port of entry - but then how would they explain why their and IRCC's own documentation and records clearly state Patrick was born in the US and was never granted Canadian citizenship?
- The Crown insists Patrick is the person who was born Ricky Riess in Sudbury, Ontario and is, therefore, a Canadian citizen - however, when both Patrick AND Steve Riess (Ricky Riess's father) offered to participate in a DNA test to finally resolve the question, both the Crown and the court adamantly refused to pursue that.
- Even though Patrick has been convicted of an indictable offense (criminal harassment) and CBSA's/IRCC's own records acknowledge Patrick is not a Canadian citizen, and he is, therefore, inadmissible/removable, they both adamantly refuse to get involved, to remove him, or to even ask/tell him to leave Canada.
- When RCMP Constables Tyler Hawkins and Kirsty Brown began their investigation, in March 2019, they reviewed CBSA's video footage of Patrick at the port of entry on March 15, 2019. But seeing that the footage proved Patrick was actually denied re-entry by CBSA and, therefore, hadn't violated the probation order at all, they deliberately waited until May 7, 2019 - AFTER CBSA had destroyed the video - to make a formal request for it. At the same time, they made formal requests to US CBP for their video footage as soon as they started their investigation in March 2019.
- Crown Counsel, Bernie Wolfe, knew all along about Polisak's notes in the GCMS, which proved Patrick DID turn himself in to CBSA at the Douglas port of entry, even while he was lying to the court about there being no record Patrick presented himself; even while he was insisting in court that the lack of any such record could only mean that Patrick is lying.
- On cross examination, Patrick caught his Probation Officer, Abeed Bhimji, lying (yes, committing perjury) about two critical matters, and he confronted Bhimji with the proof that he was lying - Bhimji's own notes in Patrick's probation case file.
- On cross examination, Patrick confronted Constables Tyler Hawkins and Kirsty Brown about why they waited so long to request the video footage from CBSA, knowing it would prove his innocence - neither was able to provide an answer. Constable Brown first testified that she was not aware Patrick had presented himself to CBSA before proceeding to CBP, but Patrick confronted her with her notes which proved that she was well aware of it.
And all this, all for an allegation of a probation violation (Well, not really. I'll explain, below, what I believe is REALLY going on here and why the BCPS is trying so hard to keep Patrick in BC.)
And yes, of course we can prove all of this! Why do you think we go through the trouble of posting all that supporting evidence here?
Mark Myhre Agrees Not to Prosecute Patrick if He's Removed from Canada
In order to truly appreciate the utter ridiculousness of this case we have to go all the way back to 2017, to the sentencing hearings in the criminal harassment case against Patrick.
During the sentencing submissions, Crown Counsel Mark Myhre provided the court a list of proposed probation conditions. Amongst those were a condition that Patrick not leave BC without the permission of his probation officer, and that Patrick not be within 100 meters of the US border.
Patrick pointed out that that creates a problem because he has no immigration or citizenship status in Canada and, upon his release from custody, he would expect to be removed (deported). Based on Myhre's proposed conditions, Patrick would be in violation by virtue of being deported. Surely, Patrick argued, he cannot be penalized because CBSA deported him.
Myhre, that smug prick, scoffed and said, with his perpetual half-smirk, that if that were to happen, if CBSA or IRCC were to remove Mr. Fox from Canada, or if they were to order Mr. Fox to leave Canada then he, obviously, wold not prosecute Mr. Fox for violating these conditions because, in that circumstance, Mr. Fox would not be leaving BC voluntarily.
Justice Heather Holmes, the judge presiding over the case, ignored all of Patrick's submissions and granted the Crown everything it was seeking - including the probation conditions that Patrick not leave BC and not be within 100 meters of the US border. Patrick also brought up the fact that if he complies with the condition to not leave BC then he is necessarily violating the condition that he obey all laws because he is not authorized to remain in Canada. Holmes disregarded it.
Patrick Tries to Have the Probation Conditions Removed
On December 30, 2018, Patrick was released from Fraser Regional Correctional Centre, upon the completion of the prison sentence.
Because he has no status in Canada, Patrick is not legally authorized to work. Nor is he elligible to receive any government assistance (not that he'd want that - if anything, he wants the government to stay the fuck out of his life). So, he's unable to work, legally. He's unable to support himself at all. Also, with all the biased, one sided, and false news coverage of him, Desiree and this website, even if he was legally authorized to work, there's no way anyone in Canada would hire him. He was homeless and living on the couple of credit cards that hadn't expired yet.
He then proceeded to try to have the conditions about not leaving BC removed. There were a couple of hearings before Justice Holmes, with Mark Myhre on behalf of the Crown.
Patrick provided documents from IRCC and CBSA, showing that they acknowledge he was born outside Canada and had never received Canadian citizenship. He also provided recordings of telephone calls with CBSA and IRCC, wherein those agencies acknowledged he had no status in Canada. And, he provided documentation from the Ministry of Social Development showing they had communicated with IRCC and that IRCC had informed them Patrick had no status in Canada, and that for those reasons Patrick was ineligible for any government assistance.
Myhre argued that all the evidence he has seen would support the claim that Patrick is a Canadian citizen. He relied on the perjury and false claim of US citizenship conviction from Arizona. He claimed to have spoken with someone from IRCC and from CBSA who both stated as far as they're concerned Patrick is a Canadian citizen - however, he claimed that both parties were not willing to put that in writing or to testify. He claimed he spoke with Steve Riess, who he insisted is Patrick's father, and Steve Riess offered to provide a DNA sample, however Myhre refused to follow through on that offer.
Nevertheless, Holmes praised Myhre and told Patrick it is clear he is trying to manipulate CBSA and IRCC just like he's trying to manipulate the court and the system. She denied his request remove the conditions, claiming the evidence he had provided was insufficient for her to conclude he is not a Canadian citizen.
Patrick told Myhre and Holmes that regardless of the outcome of the hearing, he intended to turn himself in to CBSA within the next week to be removed.
Patrick Turns Himself in to CBSA at the Douglas Port of Entry
The following morning, March 15, 2019, Patrick reported to his probation officer, Abeed Bhimji, just as he's required to do twice a week. He told Bhimji about the outcome of the hearing the day before. He told Bhimji he intended to turn himself in to CBSA within the next week, for the purpose of being removed.
Patrick then went to Starbucks and settled up some last minute affairs and solidify his plan. He was prohibited from leaving BC (and by extension, Canada), but he was not prohibited from entering a port of entry that is within BC, and as long as that port of entry is not within 100 meters of the US border. He knew that the law was that if a person is encountered by CBSA within Canada, other than at a port of entry, the burden is on CBSA to prove the person is removable or inadmissible; however, at a port of entry the burden is on the person, NOT CBSA, to prove they are admissible. Every person who enters an area designated as a port of entry MUST present themselves for inspection and the burden is on them, NOT CBSA, to prove they are admissible before they may leave the area designated as a port of entry and return to Canada (that is, return to the rest of Canada other than the area designated as a port of entry). It's the law!
So, if Patrick were to present himself to CBSA at an inland office, say the Vancouver office on Main Street, CBSA could not remove him unless they could prove he was inadmissible. However, if he presented himself to CBSA at a port of entry then CBSA would have to refuse to allow him to re-enter Canada unless he could prove he was a Canadian citizen - which he is not and which he would not attempt to do.
Essentially, Patrick would be creating a situation whereby CBSA would effectively "remove" him from Canada by refusing to allow him to leave the port of entry other than to return to the US - the country they know he was born in and is a citizen of. And, he would be doing it in a way which would not violate the conditions of his probation.
Patrick made his way to the Douglas border crossing.
Upon his arrival at the Douglas port of entry, a stern female CBSA officer stopped him, just north of the entrance to the secondary inspection building and sternly asked him where he's going. Patrick told her he's turning himself in to CBSA to be removed. He told her he has no status in Canada and has been convicted of an indictable offense. She told him to proceed into secondary inspection.
Patrick's Interaction with Border Services Officer Meagan Polisak
Inside the secondary inspection area, Patrick approached the counter where Border Services Officer Meagan Polisak was stationed. There was another, large male officer standing behind her. Patrick explained his situation to Polisak: the criminal harassment conviction; not having status in Canada; the probation condition prohibiting him from leaving BC; that he had been deported from the US to Canada in 2013, even though he wasn't a Canadian citizen; that he was inadmissible to Canada. Patrick provided Polisak a copy of the documents from IRCC and CBSA showing that he was born in the US and did not have status in Canada. She asked what he wanted from her. He said he wanted to know, if he presented himself to CBP on the US side was CBSA going to allow them to deport him to Canada again, or were they going to say no. Also, he wanted something from CBSA showing that he's inadmissible so he can show that he's not violating the probation order. Polisak took Patrick's phone and laptop bag and told him to have a seat in the waiting area.
After some time Polisak called Patrick back over to the counter. She asked him if he had any documentation or proof that he's a US citizen. He said he has a US birth certificate but it's not on him at the moment. Polisak told him that without proof of US citizenship it's unlikely CBP is going to allow him to enter the US. He said, that's fine, he'll deal with that with CBP - besides, DHS is well aware of who he is.
Polisak told Patrick that yes, he IS inadmissible, but that she didn't think the US authorities were going to allow him to enter the US because he didn't have proof of citizenship on him. He said, "I understand, but to be clear, you're saying I am inadmissible to Canada; it will be illegal for me to leave this port of entry and return to Canada, is that correct?" Polisak responded "If you try to return to Canada I'll have to arrest you."
Patrick thanked Polisak and left the secondary inspection area. Outside, he encountered another CBSA officer. He asked the officer where he goes to return to the US. The officer directed him to a door in a breezeway, next to the primary inspection booths. Patrick passed through the door and proceeded south, along the sidewalk.
Patrick Turns Himself in to US CBP
Once on the US side, Patrick proceeded directly to the CBP secondary inspection building. He entered, got in line and waited. When he got up to the counter he gave his driver's license to the CBP officer and explained that he was a US citizen but had been deported to Canada in 2013 under the name Richard Riess. Moments later, Patrick was surrounded by five or six CBP officers and placed in handcuffs. Another officer came up, behind the counter and asked the first officer "Are you sure it's him?" The first officer motioned to the computer monitor. The second officer appeared to be satisfied.
Patrick was taken to a tiny concrete room and told to strip down. He complied. The CBP officers checked his belongings, presumably for weapons and contraband. They found nothing of interest. Patrick was asked what he was doing there. He said he was a US citizen and wanted to go before an immigration judge to resolve the issue of his citizenship once and for all. He was given his belongings and told to have a seat in the waiting area.
Eventually, another CBP officer, Jeffrey Obrist, approached Patrick in the waiting area and tried to talk him in to simply returning to Canada. He said if Patrick would just turn around and return to Canada we could ignore that he even presented himself to them. Patrick said no. He wanted to go before an immigration judge and prove he's not a Canadian citizen and that he was deported unlawfully. And besides, Patrick said, he would rather be in custody in the US than to be "free" in Canada.
Obrist brought Patrick to an interview room. What followed was a 3 hour video recorded interview.
During the interview with Officer Obrist, Patrick was very careful in how he worded his responses. Given his history with US DHS, particularly ICE, and how they would distort his statements, he needed to make sure they could not misrepresent him again.
Patrick told Obrist his intention, or at least his expectation, was that he would be detained by DHS until he could go before an immigration judge and present the evidence that he is not the person he was deported as. He told Obrist he realized that meant he would be detained for a number of months but he wanted to get this issue resolved so he could return to Los Angeles and get on with his life.
At the conclusion of the CBP interview, Patrick was put into a holding cell and later transported to the Northwest Detention Center in Tacoma, WA. Patrick remained there for two and a half weeks, until April 4, 2019.
Patrick is Returned to Canada, Handed Over to the RCMP
On April 4, 2019, Patrick was transported, by ICE, back to the Douglas port of entry, where he was handed over to the RCMP on a warrant for violating his probation conditions. He was transported to the Burnaby RCMP detachment and processed.
Subsequently, Patrick was interviewed by Constable Jason Potts, regarding the new charges. Potts seemed to show significant interest in how Patrick obtained copies of the disclosure material from the criminal harassment case, which had been published on this website.
Patrick is Denied Bail
The next day Patrick had a bail hearing, which he adjourned a couple of times. He knew he was a flight risk due to not having any status in Canada. Ultimately, he was, of course, denied bail.
At his bail hearing, Patrick even stated to the court that he does not believe he will be granted bail, due to being a flight risk, and that he was only having the hearing as a formality. He also made it clear he would not, under any circumstances, take down the website.
The judge asked Patrick why he was so adamant about the website, why he couldn't just put it behind him and move on. Patrick stated "Because she took my child away from me. There is no forgiving that. You can't put that behind you and move on."
The Trial is Scheduled for August 2019, CBSA Destroys the Video Evidence
The trial date was set for August 12-16, 2019. The case was assigned to Crown Counsel, Bernie Wolfe.
Given Patrick's experience with LSS lawyers, he decided to represent himself again.
In the disclosure material provided to Patrick by the Crown, there was evidence of the RCMP requesting video footage of Patrick from CBP, and from other sources, but no mention of any requests for video footage from CBSA.
Leading up to the trial, Patrick submitted numerous requests to CBSA to obtain the video footage of himself at the Douglas border crossing on March 15, 2019. That footage would prove that he presented himself to CBSA and was denied re-entry. And, based on that, he could not have violated the conditions of his probation. CBSA ignored his requests.
At numerous pretrial conferences Patrick informed the court he did not believe he would be ready for trial by August 12, because he was still pursuing evidence. On Friday, August 9, he informed the court he was still trying to obtain the video footage of himself at the Douglas border crossing and requested an adjournment. At that point, Bernie Wolfe informed the court that he had been informed that CBSA had destroyed all the video of Patrick at the border. Patrick was very disturbed by that - that video was critical evidence that proved his innocence! How the hell could CBSA destroy it? Patrick's request for an adjournment was denied. The trial would begin on Monday.
The Trial Begins
First, the Crown called a few formality witnesses, to prove Patrick was on probation and was aware of his conditions. Nothing interesting there.
RCMP Constable Tyler Hawkins Testifies
Then the Crown called RCMP Constable Tyler Hawkins, who was one of the two officers involved in the investigation. On direct, Hawkins testified about the findings of his investigation, but made no mention of his efforts to obtain the video footage from CBSA.
On cross, Patrick questioned Hawkins about why he promptly requested video footage from CBP but NOT from CBSA? Hawkins responded that he didn't think it was relevant - the purpose of his investigation was to prove I had left BC.
Patrick asked Hawkins "Did you even request the video from CBSA? Certainly after my interview you must have considered it relevant, since I stated in the interview that I had presented myself to them before I proceeded to CBP." Hawkins became flustered and said he does remember requesting the video from CBSA but he can't remember exactly when. He said he'd need to check his records. Patrick said "Okay, so check." Hawkins thumbed through his notes but failed to find anything related to requesting CBSA video footage. He said he'd need to check back at the office. Patrick said "Okay, you can do that and we'll continue tomorrow." Court adjourned for the day.
Patrick suspected Hawkins had never actually made a formal request to CBSA for the video. In which case he would cross examine Hawkins on why, considering Hawkins had asked numerous other sources for their video or Patrick. The goal would be to get Hawkins to admit that they knew the video proved Patrick's innocence and that's why they never took a copy. You see, whatever evidence the RCMP has in their possession must be disclosed to the defense. A common practice with the RCMP is to go to a site and review the video before taking a copy. If the video hurts their case they just don't take a copy and that way they don't have to disclose it to the defense. Technically, their required to inform the defense of the existence of such exculpatory evidence but, of course, they don't.
Alternatively, if Hawkins returned with some evidence that he had requested the video from CBSA then Patrick would question him on why they never disclosed that to the defense. Either way, Hawkins had painted himself into a corner.
The next day, Hawkins produced a printout of an email he had sent to CBSA requesting any video they might have of Patrick at the Douglas port of entry on March 15, 2019. The email was dated May 7, 2019 - almost two months after Patrick was at the Douglas port of entry; almost two months after Hawkins had begun the investigation; and just over a month after Patrick had told the RCMP that he had presented himself to CBSA before he proceeded to present himself to CBP. Hawkins could provide no explanation for why he had waited so long to request the video.
Patrick would later come to learn, through freedom of information requests to CBSA, that CBSA policy required all security video footage which had not been requested and was not identified as being relevant to an investigation, to be deleted from their system between 30 and 45 days after the date of the video. 45 days after March 15, 2019 was April 29, 2019 - eight days before Hawkins submitted the formal request. Had Hawkins requested the video before it was destroyed then CBSA would have been required to keep it for at least two years.
Did Hawkins deliberately wait until just after CBSA destroyed the video to submit his request for it? I believe he did, and I intend to prove that. CBSA is required to keep a log of every time their security video footage is reviewed. That log must include who viewed the video and why. I've submitted ATIP requests for copies of the relevant entries in that log but, so far, CBSA is being uncooperative.
RCMP Constable Kirsty Brown Testifies
Next, Bernie Wolfe called RCMP Constable Kirsty Brown to testify for the Crown.
On cross examination, Patrick questioned her on the timing of requesting video footage from CBSA. She was very evasive, claiming she wasn't sure or couldn't remember. She claimed that she did not know that Patrick had presented himself to CBSA prior to turning himself in to CBP.
Crown Counsel Disclosure
|2019-05-08||Initial Disclosure||I've misplaced this! Maybe the Crown would be kind enough to provide me a copy.|
|2019-05-08||Photos||Just photographs that the RCMP took of Patrick's effects at the time of his arrest.|
|2019-06-12||Supplemental Disclosure 1|
|2019-06-18||Supplemental Disclosure 2|
|2019-06-20||Supplemental Disclosure 3|
|2019-07-18||Supplemental Disclosure 4|
|2019-07-26||Supplemental Disclosure 5|
|2019-07-30||Supplemental Disclosure 6|
|2019-08-08||Supplemental Disclosure 7|
|2019-08-28||Supplemental Disclosure 8|
|2019-08-28||Supplemental Disclosure 9|
|2019-09-05||Supplemental Disclosure 10|
|2019-10-16||Supplemental Disclosure 11|
|2019-11-14||Supplemental Disclosure 12|
Law Enforcement Interviews
|2019-03-15||US CBP||Patrick Fox||
|Interview of Patrick by US Customs and Border Protection after he turned himself in to them at the Peace Arch port of entry.|
|The RCMP's interrogation of Patrick following his arrest for these probation violations.|
|2019-07-02||Sudbury Police||Steve Riess||
The sworn statement of Steve Riess, Ricky Riess's father. Mr. Riess states in the interview that Patrick is his son, Ricky Riess. However, he later admits (or claims) that the only pictures he has of Patrick are the ones he'd received from Desiree; that he has no pictures of his son; that he doesn't know any of the schools his son attended (because, of course, the schools might have old class pictures which might include Ricky Riess); that he hasn't seen or heard from his son in over twenty years - yet he's able to immediately identify the person in the mugshot (Patrick) as his son! He also admits that the only things he knows about Patrick are what Desiree has told him and what he's seen on the news.
It's obvious, in the video, that Mr. Riess has a grudge against Patrick and thinks Desiree is the bee's knees. He probably figures Patrick "stole" his son's identity and trashed his reputation. Oh well, fuck 'em if he can't take a joke.
Emails Between US CBP, CBSA, RCMP, and Crown Counsel
|2012-01-26||Ricky Riess's birth certificate|
|2019-12-17||Patrick's IRCC FOSS and GCMS records|
Bernie WolfeCrown Counsel (prosecutor)
BC Prosection Service
Bernie Wolfe was the prosecutor on this case.
David St PierreJudge
Provincial Court of BC
Meagan PolisakBorder Services Officer
Canada Border Services Agency
Kirsty BrownPolice Constable
Royal Canadian Mounted Police
Tyler HawkinsPolice Constable
Royal Canadian Mounted Police
Abeed BhimjiProbation Officer
Community Correction Division of BC
Shan-Marie PereiraIntelligence Officer
Canada Border Services Agency
Alexander LoAdministrative Superintendent
Canada Border Services Agency