I wrote the intro to my new series, having to do with my calls to the police back in late 2021, two days ago. If you would like the backstory, go there. The short version is that a church just 20 minutes drive from me was burned to the ground in the middle of the summer of church burnings, and there were no hate crime charges applied.
Here is the first call in to the Surrey RCMP that I did, fully transcribed. On the other end of the line was Corporal Vanessa Munn, who I do not have a picture of.
And you can find the Odysee version here.
Munn: Surrey RCMP Media Relations, Corporal Munn speaking.
Me: Hi this is Timothy Coish, Surrey resident. I’m trying to write a story just for independent media here, and I was looking if I could be put in touch with Sgt. Eleanor Sturko who was the communications officer, or whatever it’s called, originally in charge of this story.
Munn: Okay uh she is not in right now. She’s not currently working in communications. What story specifically were you looking at?
Me: It’s two. One is the “Islam is Evil,” hate crime graffiti July 16th in Newton. And the other is the burning down of the Coptic Church on July 19th.
The timeline here is as follows. July 14th, Kathleen Panek, someone who we still know very little about, tries to burn down the Coptic Church in Surrey, BC, and fails. July 16th, someone writes “Islam is Evil,” on a bus stop, pictured above. July 19th Kathleen Panek returns to the church and razes it to the ground.
The Surrey RCMP release a report saying that they are investigating the “Islam is Evil,” graffiti as a hate crime. They do not release any report saying that they are investigating the multiple church arsons as hate crimes, despite them obviously being so. The contrast here could not be more stark.
Munn: Okay and what specifically were you looking at for those two?
Me: Well a few factual questions but beyond that I’m looking for where I can find a list of – where I can find what the hate crime charges were for the burning down of the church. And beyond that, for BC hate crimes, where I can find a list of hate crimes in British Columbia more broadly.
Me: Because from the story it didn’t look like Kathleen Panek who, if I understand correctly, tried to burn down this church on July 14th, and then, at least that’s the RCMP claim, and then successfully burned down this church on July 19th. It didn’t look like she was charged with any hate crimes.
Munn: Yeah I, you know what I’m not 100% sure on what she was charged with originally. I’ll have to look into that but I don’t think it was determined to be a hate crime based on the facts of the investigation.
Me: Right so burning down a church isn’t a hate crime?
Munn: You know what I can’t – I can’t speak – like I said I can’t speak to the exact facts but based on the investigation there has to be enough evidence to support uh the motive that that would have been the motive –
Me: Okay so you’re saying it was deemed, if I could, I know you’re off at 4 o’clock so let’s skip forward. It was deemed that she just like accidentally burned down the church?
Munn: No I believe she – I would have to look into the exact file again but I do believe she was charged with arson.
Me: No, I was aware she was charged with arson, I was saying that sarcastically. So why did she burn down the church, and why did she try to five days prior to this, unsuccessfully, but tried to burn down the church. What was the motive deemed? Because I couldn’t read anywhere where I found the actual motive.
Munn: Yeah no and I don’t believe that likely the motive was not actually released. It’s not always something that’s put out in the media. Nor is it always something that conclusively determines that. I think based on the facts of the case they weren’t able to substantiate a charge to do with a hate crime. And ultimately that ends up falling to the decision of Prosecution Services as well.
And we recommend charges. And then it’s up to them to determine what they feel are actually grounds to charge the person with.
I’ve written about this before, but the “justice,” system in Canada is deliberately opaque. It is impossible to figure out who was responsible for charges not being laid. The RCMP does an investigation. They are totally free to simply half-ass that investigation and not recommend hate crime charges whenever they feel like it. Prosecution Services is also free to simply not pursue certain charges.
Both sides can simply pretend that they didn’t have enough evidence to pursue the charges. There are no consequences for this, and they don’t ever have to release the details of their investigation to the public. The only consequences they will ever face are political.
Me: Okay so were hate crime charges recommended for Kathleen Panek who deliberately burned down a church?
Munn: You know what I’ll have to get back to you on that. I’ll have to pull the file to go through it. Obviously within our investigation, it’s a pretty thorough investigation so there’s a lot to it. Uh if I could grab your name again I can give you a call back.
*Personal details exchanged*
Munn: Right, I will look into that and get back to you.
I’ll just cut to the chase. They never told me, because they don’t have to. But we’ll get there in the next few calls.
Me: Well one last question. In the future I was looking for where I could find a list of all the hate crimes that people in British Columbia and Canada more broadly have been charged with and preferably another list of all the convictions. And I couldn’t find that anywhere online. So where would I go if such a thing exists, where would I go to find it.
Munn: I’m not aware that such a list exists.
Me: Okay I mean I know this is probably not your decision but do you know why such a list is viewable to the public.
Munn: I mean again that’s not something –
Me: You could just conjecture.
Munn: No it’s uh not something I have control of. It’s not something that I’ve heard of. But for the majority of crimes and stuff like that there’s not necessarily like a master list of things.
Me: Right, okay. Understood.
*skip over names again*
This is also complete bullshit. Journalists could not write articles with the headlines above if there were not lists of hate crime charges with detailed demographic information. Such lists exist, they are simply not shown to the public, because if people were shown that, as one of many examples, dozens of churches were burned to the ground or vandalized with not one anti-Christian hate crime charge, that would blow the roof off of the RCMP and our injustice system real fast.
Me: Look, you have to be honest here. The fact that on July 14th we had an arson of a church which was not deemed a hate crime and certainly was not talked about as any sort of hate related offense by the Surrey RCMP. Then July 16th, ten minute drive away, we have someone writing “Islam is Evil,” graffiti on what looks like a bus stop station. Deemed a –
*She tries talking over me*
And I’ve called in to the RCMP before and I’ve had some, let’s just say there’s a pattern of behaviour here that I think people would like to know about. And on top of that, to be completely honest now I don’t want to scream at you here because I know this wasn’t your decision, but I would like to know whose decision this was, names and faces, but the idea that you could burn down a church, and this wouldn’t be a hate related crime at all, is so astonishing that it’s almost too absurd to even entertain the idea. With the only exception being that someone had like a mental illness and they thought that they were seeing a demon in like a statue or something.
I’ll get to my prior calls soon.
You know you have to really stretch reality to come up with any plausible explanation for why the burning down of a church would not be deemed a hate crime. Especially since in Surrey, or at least the Surrey RCMP seems pretty hate crime happy when it comes to other religiously motivated offenses.
Munn: Yeah, I uh totally hear what you’re saying and what your concerns are and they are all very reasonable. It’s just, uh, difficult to explain because like I said obviously there was an in depth investigation and they do have to have certain elements to meet of an offense in order to get those charges approved.
Me: Of course.
Munn: And you know if they don’t have the grounds to even recommend those charges based on the facts like the evidence as it presents itself. I know when you just look at the grand scope of things and you just say ‘yeah you know what uh, there was a church burnt down,’ I could see how uh, you know, that would appear to be completely targeted and would be believed to be a hate crime on the surface. But once they get further into it that’s what the investigation has to determine. So if the grounds weren’t there to proceed with those charges then they’re just not there, right? We can’t uh, we can’t create grounds that don’t exist.
But I can get further information for you and I can give you a call back. Uhm, I just have to uh get into the file and touch base with the investigators.
Me: Well please do Constable Vanessa Munn, I hope I’m saying that correctly. But I hope you’ll also accept that this is part of a larger context here where it’s not one single church was burned down, one single church was arsoned, twice though I repeat in two deliberate attacks. We had over 68 churches at least here in Canada over the summer that were either arsoned, or defaced or vandalized in some way. 25 of them were the victims of arson. And many of them were the repeated victims of graffiti on them, etcetera etcetera. And I can’t find a single example of any hate crimes that have been uh, charged to any of the perpetrators and here in Surrey you found the perpetrator. It seems to be just one person here. And again there’s no hate crime charges.
And beyond that I called into the North Van RCMP, or the West Van RCMP, sorry, for a different case of a man who went thirty miles out of his way and stabbed seven presumably White Women to death with a knife, the Yannick Bandaogo case. And when talking to the Constable Frank Jung I believe his name is.
Once again, I’ll show this very important call later.
Munn: Frank Jang.
Me: Right. He really couldn’t explain to me why the victim information wasn’t released to the public. Because as he points out, they only do that if the motive is absolutely 100% known, clear, such as domestic violence cases, where there’s no reason the general public would have any other information about the crime to help. And they couldn’t even explain what Yannick Bandaogo’s motive was. And of course he was also not charged with a hate crime.
So I just think that there’s a bit of bias, systemic bias going on here. And I hope you understand that I’m not going to accept this one church, you know ‘this one church was burned down and that’s not a hate crime,’ because somehow someway they couldn’t find a way that she was motivated by some anti-Christian hate, because she clearly was.
Calls are great for many reasons, but I didn’t quite make the point I was trying to make here. My call with Detective Frank Jang established that the police will almost always publish as much info about the crime as possible to the general public. Oftentimes the public can then come forward and help them solve the crimes. However, they make an exception for anti-White or anti-Christian crimes. When it’s politically disadvantageous to Globo Homo Schlomo, they’ll happily interfere with their own ability to solve the case just to deny us some propaganda.
Munn: Okay. So I will get some of that information and then I will give you a call.
The call ends with me asking for an explanation for the motive in the case. They did in fact call me back, and I’ll transcribe that video as well.