A B.C. Supreme Court judge has given the warden of B.C.’s Mission Institution, 50 kilometres east of Vancouver, three weeks to justify the transfer of a so-called “high-profile” killer from medium to maximum security after he was accused of being a major player in the prison’s drug subculture.
Jeffrey Leinen was subject to an emergency involuntary transfer to Kent Institution, about 35 kilometres away, last November when prison informants fingered him as a drug dealer and a search of his cell turned up “debt-sheets” that authorities claimed he used to keep track of the sale of drugs behind bars.
Leinen — who is serving a life sentence for second-degree murder — claimed he was innocent, suggesting someone set him up and arguing he couldn’t properly defend himself at the hearing which resulted in his transfer, because he wasn’t allowed to see the debt sheets himself.
In a decision handed down last week, Justice Geoffrey Gomery agreed, setting aside the transfer decision — but giving the warden 21 days to convene a new hearing on the evidence.
“I conclude that the law required that the debt sheets … be made available to him in advance of the warden’s board hearing,” Gomery wrote.
“In the result, the hearing was unlawful and the Warden’s decisions are unjustified.”
According to documents filed in the case, Leinen was labelled a “high-profile offender” because of media interest in the 38-year-old’s 2010 crime, which occurred in Olds, Alta., about 100 kilometres north of Calgary, when he plowed his truck into a crowd of people outside a bar.
Leinen had been ejected from the bar after an altercation moments before. He struck four people, killing Nicholas Baier, 18, and seriously injuring another person.
If upheld, the transfer to Kent could have serious implications for Leinen, who is eligible for full parole this October.
Informant could have been labelled a ‘rat’: CSC officer
The legal filings adhere to what Gomery called the “ancient legal remedy” of habaes corpus — Latin for “you should have the body” — through which the court can review the state’s detention of a prisoner.
The documents filed with the court provide a window into both the drug subculture inside Canadian prisons and attempts by those tasked with maintaining order behind bars to gather intelligence through a network of informants.
Correctional Service Canada security intelligence officer Andrew Austin provided an affidavit containing information from sources who claim Leinen sold fentanyl, controlled drug runners and was “heavily involved in the institutional drug subculture.”
The judge ordered the affidavit sealed and Leinen’s lawyer was not allowed to see it. In a public portion of the document, Austin explained why.
“If ever the identity of a confidential informant were to be revealed, he may be labelled a ‘rat’ by other inmates and would face grave danger from those seeking revenge,” Austin wrote.
“This revenge can range from verbal abuse to violent, physical abuse such as beatings, stabbings and murder.”
‘Not given a fair opportunity’
According to an internal prison report, a search of Leinen’s cell last November turned up two shanks, a memory card containing pornography and 378 pieces of Nicorette gum, which is allegedly used as a form of currency in jail.
Several days later, Leinen told staff he needed to retrieve a binder from his cell, but his level of anxiety raised questions.
Another search revealed numerous debt sheets and slips.
“Some of these slips/pages directed payments from other offenders with the apparent intention of gathering outstanding debts,” the report says.
“The various papers made references to ‘boots’ and ‘caps,’ which is consistent with THC use and other drugs, and various forms also utilized up and down arrows, which is consistent with the language for ‘uppers’ and ‘downers’ and street names for various narcotics.”
Leinen’s legal advocate sent a letter to the warden arguing that the allegations were “incomplete and inaccurate.”
“Though the debt sheets and documents were found in Mr. Leinen’s cell, he is adamant they do not belong to him,” the letter says.
“There are many times that his cell has been accessible to others. Throughout the day, those papers could have been left by others.”
Leinen claimed that if the sheets had belonged to him, they were old lists he rewrote for some reason — an argument that didn’t wash with the warden.
But he wasn’t given access to the sheets — a fact that would later become the basis of his B.C. Supreme Court complaint.
Gomery appeared sympathetic.
“That Mr. Leinen did poorly in an unfair hearing is no answer to the charge that the hearing was unfair because of the failure to provide to him information that he should have received in advance,” the judge said.
“Mr. Leinen was not given a fair opportunity to address the matter.”
Despite ruling in Leinen’s favour, Gomery said the inmate should remain at Kent for the time being — suspending his decision for 21 days so the warden can have a new hearing to see whether his transfer is justified.