We have received a careful and colorful reply(s) from investigative reporter,Bill Dunphy of the Spectator that should be shared on this blog as we have nothing to hide and no conspiracies but the truth to protect. We will knock ourselves out to ensure proper public accountability and that everyone gets equal and fair treatment-chuckle.
Whistle blowing for rights can be fun but career dangerous , that is why we have anomynity here for your protection. Truth seekers and players should expect barbs back from those with a vested interest or other personal points of view . Great -bring it on -Dialogue, visibility and exposure of the issues is what this blog is all about. Enjoy the scrum ! We are interested in your opinion.
Subject: RE: ProActive Rants: Will Justice be served -the David against Goliath Saga
Siegfried,
So you have a first name. And multiple last names. And a blog that is unsigned with an empty personal profile.
Although I have a great deal of experience doing investigative reporting, what I wrote about Adam was a column, an opinon piece, covering that day's events in court.
The information was accurate, the opinions based on facts, and overall was fair in its treatment of Adam. In your rant reproduced below you've misunderstood or misrepresented what I wrote and that, coupled with the aforementioned reluctnace to honestly identify yourself led me to dismiss your note.
I'm glad you feel he's a cause worth championing. Knock yourself out.
And if you ever uncover anything that truly justifies your apparent belief that this is a man wronged by authorities, instead of someone who systematically engaged in financial practices that I would characterize as unethical at best - well then let me know.
I've read through the rather lengthy materials he sent me and so far I see nothing but a man failing to take responsibilities for his own failings - or frauds.
Bill Dunphy
Sent: Monday, February 7, 2005 1:22 PM To: Dunphy, Bill Subject:
RE: ProActive Rants: Will Justice be served -the David against Goliath Saga
I sent you this RED note on 1/29/05 . You did not respond although you had my e-mail address . Investigative indeed! I appreciate your professional caution but not your arrogance . You can reach me at email My name is Siegfried . "Slaying dragons is part of my namesake -chuckle " I will post your comments to the blog .
Have a nice day S.H ( Any accountability investigations at Revenue Canada-yet ?)
I read the even and fair minded or neutral comment by the Expositor reporter . I would like to comment on your article in the Hamilton Spectator. As an investigative reporter with some knowledge of the situation , I expected more from the investigative side of you. You correctly pointed out some of the facts of the Hamilton Loft project and had obviously read some of the information. Your article indicated that the project failed because there was no demand for the loft units- this is not true and you should verify your information before you publish it. Why do you think there is a 25 million dollars lawsuit on the project before the civil not criminal court? Check it out and then comment please.
You indicated to me " the David Goliath Supporter" (see blog attached) that the press was a potential objective friend of truth , justice and the underdog. Public Information was given to you based on your press inference of being a champion for the underdog and a group which believed in making public interest issues both clear and visible. I fail to see how you can comment on failed development projects , with no development experience or better investigative homework.
Let's see you go get information from your publisher ,follow his instructions, have a formal review of your work and be approved to proceed with an expanded budget. You meticulously fill out the required reports as suggested by your publishers control system. After 3 years, the publisher, has a new editor- the new investigative editor denies all your work, accuses you of taking the money , fires you from your position and then drags you into court on criminal charges before you can be heard by the internal review group. Destitute but not humble, faced with 3 years of jail- I am sure that you would put up a good defense ,convinced of the truth of the facts, vexatious or otherwise , and seek to clear both your name and reputation. Visibility of the situation and the facts would truly be your ally.
While following orders or instructions or "officially induced error", went out as a pure and unassailable defense at the Nuremberg trials -it still has merit. The question to ask is who at Revenue Canada is, or has been made accountable for this.
Best regards and good better investigative reporting S.
-----Original Message----- From: Dunphy, Bill [mailto:BDunphy@thespec.com] Sent: Monday, February 07, 2005 11:45 AM To: 'S' Subject: RE: ProActive Rants: Will Justice be served -the David against Goliath Saga
Dear S.
I've learned not to trust people who post things on anonymous blogs and send e-mails that seek to sheild their identity.
And given that it comes from a supposed supporter of someone awaiting sentencing for fraud, I'm even less inclined to waste much time on it.If you have something to say, identify yourself, and simply say it.
Bill Dunphy The Hamilton Spectator
---------- From: S Sent: Saturday, February 5, 2005 8:55 AM To: BDunphy@thespec.com Subject: ProActive Rants: Will Justice be served -the David against Goliath Saga
S has sent you a link to a wobbles:
Thought you might find this perspective interesting. The press is the shield to protect the common people from being bullied by those special " government" interests that have the power and the agenda but not the color of right on there side
Blog: ProActive Rants Post: Will Justice be served -the David against Goliath Saga Link: http://makeaccountable.blogspot.com/2005/01/will-justice-be-served-David-against.html
No comments:
Post a Comment