Friends of Alex and Paige

The Devil is in the Details



Friends of Alex and Paige acknowledge the contributions of Kyle Janzen, Ruth Kora and others who have asked to remain anonymous.

As part of the malicious prosecution against Alex, Paige and Clayton Misener, the French administration asked the government of Canada to provide proof that the girls would not be in danger if forcibly returned to Canada. This despite the fact that their own experts, including the chief expert child psychologist of the French Supreme Court, had already testified and documented that they would be in danger.

The Attorney General of Ontario (AGO) delegated this task to the Niagara Regional Police Service (NRP), and Dennis Osti, a detective sergeant he will have you know, was the stooge appointed. Osti wrote a letter that was so misleading, and so contradictory, it was utterly laughed at. This letter is just one of many examples of how corrupt police, social workers and the courts have deliberately attempted to mislead the French authorities, unfairly and dishonestly, in an effort to paint their own picture, and write their own false narrative, about Alexandra, Paige and Clayton Misener. Revenge.

On its face, this seems like a standard letter that a police officer would write to a superior; however, when examined closely, it becomes obvious that it is anything but. We will explore each component of the letter below. Please reference the coloured highlighting for each point. Remember, the devil is in the details. Some points are relatively minor, while others are astounding. All are interesting. The most important part is near the centre. Before we begin, it may be a good idea to refresh your knowledge of Jason Kenneth Whittington, the man who sexually abused Alex and Paige, here.

Important Notes: Friends of Alex and Paige will not be publishing the diplomatic e-mails requesting this action as it would constitute a crime in France and jeopardize the family, likely exposing them to reprisals.

This is a scan of a secret letter sent from Dennis Osti of the Niagara Regional Police Service, through the Attorney General of Ontario, to the French administration of Saint Pierre and Miquelon.

The highlighted portions of the letter correspond to the content below. The links will open in separate windows for your ease of reference.



"and hold the rank of Detective Sergeant"
People normally sign their name, title, position or interest at the end of a letter; however, in this case, Osti feels his "rank" is of such significance that it must be said twice. If there was a soundtrack to this letter, the claps of thunder and trumpets would blare right at this moment. This is a writer's trick. It's used to reaffirm one's self-importance and, therefore credibility, reliability and control. It is intended to convince the reader that his word is gospel and his authority grand. What he says must be true, he is a detective sergeant.

In the grand scheme of things, a detective sergeant is only one notch up from a first year constable walking the beat. It means very little; however, Osti it seems would rather talk about his rank, and ignore the truth. I can just picture Osti standing alone in front of a mirror, flashing his badge and saying "Detective Sergeant Osti … Osti, Detective Sergeant … the name's Osti, Sergeant of Detectives, make my day."

More about detective sergeants can be found in Section 42 of the confidential agreement between the NRP and their union [
HERE]. A photograph of Osti, when he was a detective constable in the detective office, but still wearing a uniform for some reason, can be found [HERE]. Osti is on the right.


"now faces outstanding criminal charges in Canada if extradited back to Canada"
This is a very interesting sentence for several reasons. First, it imposes an urgency, "Now!" The situation now … available now … for sale now. Using the word "now" not only grabs the attention of the reader, it suggests immediate action is required. The second point is that they are "outstanding" criminal charges. This must mean that there are charges that are not outstanding, or charges that were settled - all entirely incorrect; however, this is a simple and efficient way of demonizing someone. There are no such thing as "outstanding" criminal charges in Canada. There are indictable, dual procedure and summary offences. One has either been found guilty, convicted or otherwise. Third, and most telling, is the continuation "if extradited back to Canada." This tells the reader that they must act. It is a proposition. Justice can only be achieved if YOU act to send this man back to Canada. Many readers, especially those who speak French as their first language, will read this as: You must send this man back to Canada because he must face many criminal charges. It is untrue and deceptive, yet similar to "Act now and you will receive a special gift, and know that you are doing the right thing." Good try, Osti.

For more information on 'Selling Words' like Now, click [
HERE], note that 'Now' is ranked number one.


"I was contacted by Melanie Llerena who is counsel for the Central Authority for the Province of Ontario, Canada with respect to The Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction. The Central Authority for the Province of Ontario is based in Toronto, Ontario."
That sounds pretty impressive, except that it's not true. Melanie Sue Llerena is a lawyer in North York, Ontario (Toronto) who works for the Family Responsibility Office, not for the Hague anything [PROOF]. Her job is to pursue people who, like the biological mother, don't pay child support. It seems that Ms. Llerena and her colleagues missed the fact that biological mother is in terrible arrears [HERE]. The Central Authority for the Province of Ontario is not based in Toronto, although it sounds impressive to say it is. It is based in Haileybury, Northern Ontario, at 393 Main Street, P0J 1K0 [PROOF]. It's area code starts with (705). Osti gets an 'A' for impact, but an 'F-' for accuracy, integrity and honesty.

For a map of Haileybury (about 140 km north of North Bay, in comparison to Toronto, click [
HERE].


"She has requested that I provide a letter outlining the status of any criminal investigations involving Mr. Jason Whittington (DOB: 1982-07-27) and to further indicate whether there have been any criminal charges and/or convictions."
Great, this sentence clearly outlines the scope, depth and breadth of the query. That should make it easy, even for Osti; but no. Osti writes most of the letter about people other than Whittington and fails to answer the questions posed. In fact, he is so deliberate in his concealment of Whittington's criminal history, which is documented to death on www.runningaway.ca, that it brings his independence, integrity and honour into disrepute.

The letter has nine paragraphs and forty-nine lines. Whittington, who is supposed to be the subject of the letter, is mentioned nine times, three as a victim. Clayton Misener is mentioned eight times, always as the bad guy. Kelly Campbell is mentioned six times, mostly as the falsely accused or sad victim. The word Osti is used five times. The words detective sergeant or district detective is used three times. Horton (OPP) is named three times. Alex and Paige are named only four times, entirely as collateral. That says something! True colours, Osti.



"Mr. Jason Whittington"
Note how Jason Whittington, the man who sexually abused Alex and Paige, is referred to as Mr. Jason Whittington. Again, the first mention of a person sets the mind of the reader as to the value or standing of that person. Note also how Clayton Misener is referred to as exactly that. He isn't entitled to the decency or courtesy that Mr. Whittington is entitled to, because he is a bad guy. This slight act of omitting courtesy is enough to set the mind of the reader against Misener and in favour of Whittington, especially when made by a detective sergeant (Osti is a detective sergeant, in the detective office). It is commonly used by people when assigning blame. Good job Osti.

We suggest Osti grab himself a copy of [
THIS] book before he writes another letter, for the sake of his foundering department.



"Kelly Campbell reported her girls missing"
When referring to people, the language used in the early part of the letter sticks with it throughout, even if only used once. This is to say that a letter describing a red flower need not refer to it as red throughout, only as a flower. The reader will infer that it is the red one referenced earlier on. In this letter, Osti assigns the possession of the girls to biological mother early on, "her girls." They are not "their" girls, or "the" girls, they are "her" girls. From this point on, the reader has already associated the girls as being hers. They are hers, her property, her possession. Police often use this form of early association with objects of a crime. First mention is "his" axe, followed by "the" axe, which you already know (because you were told early on) is his. So when any other person is said to "possess" the girls, it can't be right because they belong to her; ergo, ipso facto, Misener is the bad guy who kidnapped the helpless children of this angelic mother.

This [
ARTICLE] is great for detective sergeants and other narcissists who wish to use the power of suggestion in their creative writing in order to coerce people to a particular set of beliefs and assumptions.



"abducted by their father Clayton Misener"
If this was an objective letter, it would read: Clayton Misener, their father, has been accused of abducting … or, Clayton Misener is alleged to have abducted, or is accused of abducting. But it is framed in absolute, to make the reader believe it has been done, concluded, no question. The other aspect of this is the flow of the language. The main words here are abducted, father, Misener. It has been written with that as a natural flow. For example, the flowers in the garden are yellow. Flowers, garden, yellow. It is an absolute verbal syncopation and much easier a sell to the reader. Imagine a hand or a ball bouncing along, one and two and three. It is a pleasing rhythm and, therefore, a believable one. Early cartoon makers deployed this kind of [FLON] to surreptitiously flog their products, services and, in this case, racist propaganda. For a police officer to use this method of suggestion is unthinkable.




"Clayton Misener"
Again, attention to the way Osti introduces people in his letter. Mr. Jason Whittington, Ms. Kelly Campbell and, of course, Clayton Misener. When you use a particular frame of reference to everybody but one, that person is singled out. In this case, detective sergeant Osti, who holds the rank of detective sergeant in the detective office, initially refers to SuperDad as Clayton Misener, but the other names by Mr., etc. The others are more respectful, more demanding of adoration, etc. It is a subtle but useful way of eroding a person by reference. Well done, Osti.

Perhaps Osti is interested in "reading" about how this is/can be done [
HERE].


"Abduction in contravention of custody order 282(1)CC and Disobey court order 127(1) CC for fleeing Canada"
This is a great part. Please review the wording of each charge, direct from the Criminal Code of Canada., paying special attention to the underlined parts.
Abduction in contravention of custody or parenting order 282 (1) Every one who, being the parent, guardian or person having the lawful care or charge of a child under the age of 14 years, takes, entices away, conceals, detains, receives or harbours that child, in contravention of a custody order or a parenting order made by a court anywhere in Canada, with intent to deprive a parent or guardian, or any other person who has the lawful care or charge of that child, of the possession of that child is guilty of (a) an indictable offence and is liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding ten years; or (b) an offence punishable on summary conviction.

Defence 285 No one shall be found guilty of an offence under sections 280 to 283 if the court is satisfied that the taking, enticing away, concealing, detaining, receiving or harbouring of any young person was necessary to protect the young person from danger of imminent harm or if the person charged with the offence was escaping from danger of imminent harm.

First, there was never a parenting order made by a court. Second, Clayton Misener was never lawfully stripped of custody. In fact, the French courts (the court of jurisdiction) gave custody to Clayton Misener. The biological mother appealed this (in France) and lost. There is some information that suggests the biological mother returned to Ontario and continued in the courts there; however, they no longer had jurisdiction in the matter as it was ceded to France. Third to this, and probably the most important, is the defence afforded under s. 285. If anything has been clearly demonstrated, it is that the girls were sexually abused and in grave and immediate danger from the same happening again. This is not only proven by documents forwarded by the family, it was reiterated by psychologists, psychiatrists and judges. Furthermore, the family made every attempt to get help from police forces, social workers and child protection authorities and the courts. The breakdown of the system put those girls in terrible danger. Their loving father was acting to protect them, whatever he may or may not have done. Osti and others knew, or ought to have known this. The charge should never have been laid. Not only is Clayton Misener not guilty of this offence, there are obviously no grounds for the charge and no jury in the world would convict.

Disobeying order of court 127 (1) Every one who, without lawful excuse, disobeys a lawful order made by a court of justice or by a person or body of persons authorized by any Act to make or give the order, other than an order for the payment of money, is, unless a punishment or other mode of proceeding is expressly provided by law, guilty of (a) an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years; or (b) an offence punishable on summary conviction.

First, it is very clear that Super Dad had and continues to have a lawful excuse for refusing to comply with the barbaric and unlawful court orders, if indeed this is what he did. For the same reasons he is clearly not guilty of the abduction allegation, he acted out of a necessity created by the negligence and punitive measures of the police, child protection authorities and courts. He made every possible effort to resolve the situation within the confines of "the system" but was failed. It has been clearly demonstrated that Alex and Paige were in great danger, and it was necessary for action to take place, even if that meant that orders were disobeyed. Had he not acted, he would have been negligent in his duty of care and party to the abuse. Second, the orders made against the family were not lawful. Each and every one of the judges who heard this matter in Canada systematically violated the rights afforded Alexandra and Paige by the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

Judges routinely ordered the girls to attend a place they did not want to attend (the home of biological mother and her pedophile husband). They knew, or ought to have known, and even spoke to the abuse that had taken place in that home. They enacted no measures to protect the girls, except those (orders for Jason Whittington to stay away) that they knew had been violated time and time again, therefore invalid, and would likely continue to be violated. They refused to allow the girls to speak to their experience, preference and interests of self-preservation, to give evidence. They denied them right to counsel and, instead, selected their own agent, who was not a lawyer, to coerce and threaten the girls into revealing information that, obviously, was then used against them. The girls were never charged with an offence, yet they were by order detained and imprisoned arbitrarily, against their will and without any iota of consent from their Father. Their security was taken from them. Their right to justice was taken from them. The validity of their arbitrary detention was never tested. In using the police to enforce their arbitrary detention, imprisonment and cruel treatment, the girls were forcibly stripped of their security, liberty and, in all likelihood, their right to life. In no way could this be interpreted as anything less than cruel and unusual treatment or punishment. What kind of judicial monster would use the force of police to imprison two little girls in the same place, and with the same people, that had confined them, sexually abused them, threatened them, stripped them of all rights and dignities, and then tried to lie and cover up their crimes. Apparently, the Canadian judicial monster.

Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms
(pertinent sections)

7. Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of the person and the right not to be deprived thereof except in accordance with the principles of fundamental justice.

9. Everyone has the right not to be arbitrarily detained or imprisoned.

10. Everyone has the right on arrest or detention (a) to be informed promptly of the reasons therefor; (b) to retain and instruct counsel without delay and to be informed of that right; and (c) to have the validity of the detention determined by way of habeas corpus and to be released if the detention is not lawful.

12. Everyone has the right not to be subjected to any cruel and unusual treatment or punishment.

24. (1) Anyone whose rights or freedoms, as guaranteed by this Charter, have been infringed or denied may apply to a court of competent jurisdiction to obtain such remedy as the court considers appropriate and just in the circumstances. Exclusion of evidence bringing administration of justice into disrepute. (2) Where, in proceedings under subsection (1), a court concludes that evidence was obtained in a manner that infringed or denied any rights or freedoms guaranteed by this Charter, the evidence shall be excluded if it is established that, having regard to all the circumstances, the admission of it in the proceedings would bring the administration of justice into disrepute.

Section 11 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

11.  Any person charged with an offence has the right (h) if finally acquitted of the offence, not to be tried for it again and, if finally found guilty and punished for the offence, not to be tried or punished for it again.</td>


THIS IS VERY SIGNIFICANT



It means that nobody can be punished for the same offence twice. It is part of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. "It is against the very first principles of the criminal law that a man should be placed twice in jeopardy upon the same facts: the offences are practically the same, though not their legal operation." - Observations of Hawkins in R. V. King [8].

Friends of Alex and Paige are in possession of documents recently leaked from the Superior Court of Justice in Ontario.

- Feb. 19, 2021. Wendy MacPherson (a judge) stipulates a bunch of orders.
- Aug. 12, 2021 - Michael Gibson (a judge) stipulates a bunch of orders in an e-mail.
- Aug. 20, 2021. Family left Ontario, according to Niagara Regional Police Service.
- Aug. 27, 2021 - Wendy MacPherson (a judge) grants permission for Misener to be served with notice that he has been charged with contempt for disobeying Michael Gibson's order(s).
- Sept. 9, 2021 - Wendy MacPherson (a judge) "adjourns" the trial for the charges.
- Sept. 10, 2021. Family arrived in Saint Pierre and Miquelon, according to the Gendarme National (French border and immigration police).
- Oct. 7, 2021 - Linda Walters (a judge) finds that Misener disobeyed the orders of Michael Gibson on Aug. 12, 2021, and that Misener abducted the children by removing them from Ontario contrary to the orders of Wendy MacPherson on Feb. 19, 2021. Leaves a sentencing date to the trial coordinator.
- Jan. 26, 2022 - James Ramsay (a judge) reiterates that Linda Walters convicted Misener of those two charges and punishes him to pay $1,500.-
- Aug. 2, 2022 - Caroline Brown (a judge) orders further punishment for those two offences by demanding the family have their passports seized on return to Canada, presumptively.

Whether Misener was given proper notice, attended the hearings, had legal representation or was even notified of the results is not relevant here. It took place. The judges decided. Despite lack of disclosure and other serious violations of his Charter Rights, the bottom line here is that Misener was charged, arraigned, tried, convicted and punished for violating a court order and for taking the girls outside of Ontario (abduction). This cannot be "taken back" or withdrawn by the court or the crown. It's done. So that invalidates all other charges laid for that offence. End of issue.

Misener cannot be tried twice for the same offence, per the Charter. Furthermore, now that Alex and Paige are fourteen, further abduction charges cannot be laid. Furthermore, because Misener is no longer in Canada, he is not obligated to obey the court rulings of Canada any more than those of Nigeria, Russia or China (not to diminish the esteem of those countries by making reference to them in the same sentence as Canada). Even if Misener elected to appeal the verdict, win, lose or draw, he has still been charged, tried, convicted and sentenced for the acts. Furthermore, Misener can not be convicted of disobeying a court order to pay that $1,500 punishment because that crime excludes orders for the payment of money. We are not able to publish these documents at this time as they are presently being reviewed by the French Supreme Court.



"Clayton Misener is also wanted on an outstanding arrest warrant with the Ontario Provincial Police for 2 counts of Criminal Harassment against Kelly Campbell (1978-05-17) and Jason Whittington (1982-07-27) (OPP case 21-0547)"
This is one of my personal favourite parts of the letter, and I am going to give it a great deal of attention.

First, nobody seems to have been aware that any charges were laid against Clayton Misener, except for helping his children escape abuse and neglect. The Niagara Regional Police were unable to deliver any reports or even additional information to the French courts. The OPP did not provide any documentation to support this either. In fact, to date, nobody has provided any evidence, documentary or otherwise, that the warrant claimed by Osti even exists. Neither the OPP nor the Niagara Regional Police is willing to confirm anything over the phone.

Second, the "case number" referenced by Osti is not formatted as a valid case number for the OPP. This has been confirmed by an OPP officer who is also, very quietly, a Friend of Alex and Paige. All OPP documents use the same format: RMyyCCCCCC where RM is exactly RM, initials for Records Management, indicating that they are using the Niche RMS system; and yy is the year, followed by a six digit number representing the case, beginning with 000001 and ending whenever. This makes a lot of sense, because OPP documents made available to me are all ordered that way. Now, say Osti just forgot a few things and the case number is actually RM21000547, which would be the correct format. That would indicate that it was the five-hundred, forty-seventh case in 2021. Given the fact that the OPP laid 9,411 charges in 2021 for impaired driving alone, most in early January, it is safe to assume that the incident leading to this fictitious warrant was initiated very early in January, 2021.

Third, let's try and narrow down the time frame here. We know that on March 18, 2021, Clayton Misener obtained a criminal record check from the Niagara Regional Police proving he had no convictions and no record on file anywhere in Canada. So this alleged warrant must have been issued after March 18. We also know that the Niagara Regional Police claim that the family exited Ontario on August 20, 2021. So the warrant must have been issued between March 18 and August 20, which just doesn't make sense given the number.

We further know that the family arrived in Saint Pierre, France, on September 10, 2021, and we know the website www.runningaway.ca did not commence operation until after August 20, 2021. So, based on all of this, the offence must have occurred somewhere between March 18 and August 20. But the OPP issued a secret report to the courts of France, without giving Misener disclosure, produced on June 9, 2022, and there is no mention of a warrant there, although it does confirm that Jason Kenneth Whittington has an FPS number on CPIC. This means that Whittington has his fingerprints and photographs stored on the Canadian Police Information Centre, where criminal record information is kept in Canada. His FPS number is 606074E. By all accounts, Misener was in France between September 10, 2021, and June 9, 2022. Skeptics may suggest that there was a window of opportunity between August 20 and September 10, except that if they left Ontario on August 20, and committed this offence before September 10, it would not have been an OPP report. The OPP polices the Province of Ontario, not outside. Based on this alone, Osti is lying.

Fourth, we should examine the offence itself.

Criminal harassment, 264 (1) No person shall, without lawful authority and knowing that another person is harassed or recklessly as to whether the other person is harassed, engage in conduct referred to in subsection (2) that causes that other person reasonably, in all the circumstances, to fear for their safety or the safety of anyone known to them.

Marginal note: Prohibited conduct (2) The conduct mentioned in subsection (1) consists of (a) repeatedly following from place to place the other person or anyone known to them; (b) repeatedly communicating with, either directly or indirectly, the other person or anyone known to them; (c) besetting or watching the dwelling-house, or place where the other person, or anyone known to them, resides, works, carries on business or happens to be; or (d) engaging in threatening conduct directed at the other person or any member of their family.

There is no way Misener could have repeatedly followed anyone if he wasn't in Ontario. There is no way Misener could have, or would have, repeatedly communicated with anyone - they fled. Why would they communicate? If there was no communication, how could there be threatening conduct? How could Misener have beset or watched the dwelling-house from France? What threatening conduct could Misener have engaged in from France.

All of this being said, Jason Whittington spied on the Misener family home in St. Catharines. Whittington, Campbell and Clemens Whittington (mother of the pedophile) used Facebook and other messaging software to harass and annoy the Misener. All made threatening communication, even while the family was in France, via Facebo o, reported to the Friends of Alex and Paige group. So the question that Osti or maybe the invisible OPP police might be able to answer: are you sure it wasn't Whittington who was charged? Because he seems to be the only person who could have, wanted to and did carry out these acts that constitute the crime. All of their actions were reported to the Gendarme National (the French police) and an investigation is still underway.

Finally, there are other important considerations. According to Statistics Canada, in the year 2021, in Haldimand County, Ontario, there were 1,457 police incidents; however, there were only 419 adults charged. So even if applied only to the OPP at Cayuga (Haldimand-Norfolk) the case number would be way too high.

The bottom line here is that Osti lied. There is no warrant for harassment, there simply cannot be; however, it sure sounds menacing. It sure sound condemning and official-like. And it would sure be difficult to disprove if it wasn't for the brilliant insight of an OPP who remains a Friend.

Unfortunately, we are unable to provide documentation to this section as it is being used as evidence.



"The complaint was documented in a report and forwarded to the OPP detachment in Cayuga, Ontario, for investigation as the allegation was reported to have occurred in their jurisdiction."
Actually, no it wasn't. Osti's friend, Brett Atamanyk, who is also a detective sergeant in the detective office, but a different detective office than detective sergeant Osti (in 2022 there were 112 sergeants in the Niagara Regional Police, about a quarter of which were detective sergeants in the detective office, one of which is Shane Donovan, the detective sergeant who shot another police officer five times in a heated argument over urinating on a tree, but this did not take place inside the detective office). He (Atamanyk) took a video statement of SuperDad. He refused to take a statement from the girls, even though they were right there, and were told they would give a statement.

The DVD of the statement was couriered to the OPP and promptly lost. Police in Cayuga found it weeks later, after the Commissioner (top boss) of the OPP intervened. It was sitting in the home of an OPP police detective who took the file and forgot, then went on vacation. This delay may have led to the OPP not having admissible evidence against Whittington.

For more information about delays in disclosure, etc. click [
HERE].



"Detective Constable Horton was the lead investigator regarding the complaint against Jason Whittington. Detective Constable Horton concluded her investigation with no criminal charges against Jason Whittington."
Notice how Osti makes reference to Horton in absolute and reverent terms. As if Horton is the final and sole decision maker of charges in the matter. As if Horton did her job and that's that. I love this kind of policing. They are the police, the only police. They are judge, jury and executioner. He doesn't mention that Horton never really did investigate the matter, that she made her conclusion before even speaking to the girls, that she tried desperately to get out of the case. Nope. Detective Constable Horton is the decider here. No room for error or alteration. So sayeth Osti. [Friends of Alex and Paige are in possession of documents leaked from the OPP that prove these statements to be true; however, we are not going to publish them at this time as they are evidence in civil court. Police lie. Facts and computers do not.]

[THIS] is a great article about how not to write a letter.



"I have concluded a query with the Niagara Regional Police Service Versadex data base and confirmed there are no open child abuse or sexual assault criminal investigations involving Jason Whittington or Kelly Campbell."
Of course there aren't. Versadex is a dispatch and reporting system local to the Niagara Regional Police Service. It serves the same function as Niche RMS, the system used by the OPP. Neither Whittington nor Campbell live in Niagara. So there would be no investigations into them at all. Osti saying this suggests to the reader that neither Whittington nor Campbell appear on any police database, when the truth is that they wouldn't appear on the NRP Versadex system because they are not from Niagara. Had he checked them on CPIC, NCIC, Interpol, etc. then he would have found them. More on this below, see: What is Missing.

This [ARTICLE] gives some great advice for dancing around questions.



"I have also contacted the supervisors in the Sexual Assault unit and the Child Abuse unit of the Niagara Regional Police Service and confirmed that no criminal charges have ever been laid in relation to Kelly Campbell or her husband, Jason Whittington."
This is laughable. Instead of running a simple check on CPIC (more on this below) or any other system that houses criminal information, which we already know about and which is already documented on this web site, Osti proposes that he got up, walked out of his office, down the hall and spoke to Brett Atamanyk, who is a detective sergeant in the detective office, but not the same detective office as Dennis Osti, a detective sergeant. Atamanyk is the head of the child abuse unit. This, according to Osti, is viable and verifiable proof. Osti, that's bad. I mean C'mon.

Again, Osti may wish to refer to this [ARTICLE] to learn how to dance around questions a little better.



"Furthermore, since August of 2019 Clayton Misener has not made any new allegations of child abuse or sexual assault involving Jason Whittington or Kelly Campbell in regard to his twin girls, Alexandra and Paige Misener. In closing, the only child abuse or sexual assault complaint that Clayton Misener has ever made to police was in 2019 and was investigated by the Ontario Provincial Police with the conclusion of no criminal charges being laid."
Yeah, no. Osti forgot about NRP files 2019-107545, 2019-74781, the famous "dick picture," the two criminal investigations by the French police into Whittington and Campbell for uttering death threats, criminal harassment and abandonment, plus another into the unauthorized use of the girls' pictures by Campbell and Whittington, and others, two incident reports from Family and Children's Services Niagara, etc. Osti is simply lying here.

This is a great [ARTICLE] about why police officers should never lie.


LINKS

Additional documentation can be found on this site [HERE]. Some of the sections on the page reference documents that we are unable to make available at this time. This may be due to (a) their use as evidence, or future evidence, that would be compromised if they were published; (b) fear of retribution for the family in France; and for other valid reasons. If you have any questions about any of this, or would like to discuss our position, please [CONTACT] us. If you are located in the regional municipality of niagara and need the services of police, you are best to call someone else - we suggest you contact the closest circus, or a local motorcycle gang. They will do a much better and cost effective job at protecting you and your community. If you wish to speak to detective sergeant Osti, a detective sergeant in the detective office, you can call the Niagara Regional Police Service at +1 (905) 688-4111. Please be sure to tell him about this site, www.runningaway.ca.

WHAT IS MISSING FROM ALL OF THIS
(other than honesty, integrity, decency, truth, etc)

Given the clear objective of the request, here are a few things missing from Osti's letter.

1. Canadian Police Information Centre (CPIC). CPIC is the only trusted and complete repository of criminal identification, histories, charges, warrants and the like in Canada. All police forces submit their crime information to CPIC and only CPIC is the authoritative information base for this information. Furthermore, police are required to "confirm" information with the police forces that put information on CPIC. So in order to check to see if a particular person has a warrant or criminal history, a police officer must check CPIC and then check with any police force that made the entry to "confirm" that the information is correct and valid. CPIC does other things and maintains other information; however, this is its function as it applies here. For more information about CPIC click [HERE]. One of the most important databases operated by CPIC is the fingerprint, photograph service (or FPS). If you have an FPS number, like Whittington, you have fingerprints and photographs on file. Click [HERE] for more information on that. Another key piece of information maintained by CPIC is "cautionary data." Had Osti bothered, he may have found cautions that Whittington is violent against police, suicidal, drug addicted and has used weapons in violent crimes. This may have been a tip-off, but it wouldn't have served Osti's purpose.

2. Niche RMS Check (Local Records Check). In the five minutes it would take to slam out an e-mail to his counterparts with the OPP, Osti could have had a full and complete list of every interaction, telephone call, complaint and investigation that Whittington has been involved with - as a witness, accused, complainant, etc. This kind of thing is really useful when conducting security investigations as it points to trends, potential future actions, and events that did not culminate in criminal convictions. Osti may have been able to "read" the police report that noted how Whittington's sister had a lock put on her bedroom as a teen, and why. He may have learned how his brothers entirely distanced themselves from him, and why. He may even have learned about the report of other girls who were likely sexually abused by Whittington, but never contacted or properly investigated. The OPP use Niche RMS and not Versadex. The two are not directly compatible or connected, so Osti would not have seen the barrage of police contacts attributed to Whittington through his NRP Versadex terminal. This amounts to willful ignorance.

3. NCIC and Interpol. The National Crime Information Centre is the US version of CPIC, operated by the Federal Bureau of Investigation. Interpol is an international database of wants, warrants and the like that police publish to in order to harass suspects and criminals who have already served their sentence. It is another way of police being judge, jury and executioner. In some cases, active warrants for some pretty nasty crimes are published, but that is the exception and not the rule. While we are reasonably certain that Whittington is clear on Interpol, had Osti checked NCIC he may have found records of arrest and further warrants in the State of New York. He may also have run across complaints of stalking and trespass warnings. But the recipient will never know that because Osti likely figured such information would work against his private agenda. Click for more information about [NCIC] or [INTERPOL].

4. Child Abuse Register. This highly secretive database is operated by the Ontario Ministry of Children, Community and Social Services. It contains a virtual cornucopia of files on the victims and perpetrators of child abuse, whether they are charged, convicted, suspected or not. This database is often referred to as "The Cauldron" or the place where social workers post their dirt, to be used against anyone who doesn't cow tow to their portrayed authority. Had Osti obtained an order for this database, which he would have received without breaking a sweat, he would see Whittington all over it - when he strangled his son, when his children were seized by warrant, when his children were deemed to be in danger, etc. He would also have seen notations and documentary references about Whittington's psychological state and the many victims he has impacted. But Osti doesn't need all of that as it may run against his agenda. For more information about this database, that is supposed to be secure and controlled (but isn't), click [HERE].

5. Serious Occurrence Reporting. This is another highly secretive database is operated by the Ontario Ministry of Children, Community and Social Services; however, in this database is compiled information about serious incidents that occur involving children seized by the state, while in group homes or foster care. Had Osti bothered to check in this system, by way of easily accessible warrant, he may have found references to Whittington's behaviour when his children were seized, children being observed as being over-sexualized, in need of protection due to incidents, etc. For more information about this (again, secure and controlled system, she says with a grin), click [HERE].

6. Warrant of Committal Tracking Database. Yet another secret little pot of information kept by the Ontario Ministry of Children, Community and Social Services, that tracks warrants issued for, amongst other things, the taking of children. Had Osti checked this database, the information in which is also normally available through CPIC, he would have discovered court ordered removal of Whittington's children and contact prohibition orders. But since Osti couldn't be bothered, we have published the orders in document form for all to see [HERE].

7. Child Protection Authorities. Both Family and Children's Services Niagara (FACS) and the Children's Aid Society of Haldimand Norfolk (CASHN) have lengthy and robust files regarding Jason Whittington. Friends of Alex and Paige have intercepted damning correspondence, documents and media, and published it all in the documents section of this web site. Admissions of negligence, deep concerns over the safety of children, investigations into sexual deviance, physical abuse, even attempts to murder his own children. Their files are packed full of this, and more. But when you are a detective sergeant in the detective office, you automatically just know what to look into and what to ignore. Us mere mortals could never possibly understand.

8. French Justice Ministry/French Courts. Now, I understand that connecting the dots can be difficult; however, Osti should have considered checking records with the French police, courts and other authorities, since he knew that the family was in france, had contact with the courts, etc. I mean he was writing his letter for the French administration. Had he done so, he would have discovered the three criminal complaints made against Whittington and Campbell for uttering death threats, harassment, abandonment, failure to pay child support, using photographs without permission, etc. Realizing this would, again, not support Osti's agenda, it would have provided some much needed context into the tremendous risk posed to Alex and Paige by Jason Whittington. Most importantly, Osti would have been able to access the highly detailed asylum application made by the family, which includes a detailed description of the sexual abuse suffered by the girls at the hands of Whittington and Campbell.

9. Psychiatric and Security Records. There are a plethora of lengthy security and psychiatric records about Whittington available on demand in court records, hospital records and corrections records. Some of those documents can be found in the documents section of this web site. Had Osti bothered to check, he would have found expensive and exhaustive lists of reasons Whittington should be incarcerated, prevented from having contact with children, and admissions that he is a violent offender, undoubtedly going to reoffend. He would also have found transcripts of police services begging that Whittington not be released from custody, details of his relationship with Kelly Nina Campbell and other very connecting and incriminating text.

10. Canadian Court Records. Had Osti bothered to search Canadian court records, he would have found the most damning testimony against Whittington, confessions, unbelievable allegations, clear and convincing evidence of child sexual abuse, even testimony of his own family as to his sanity. Osti would have found family court files, criminal court files, magistrate orders, police reports and all kinds of proof that Whittington is a menace to children everywhere. This would have been a great place to start, end or just include.

11. Alex and Paige Written Submissions. For the price of an e-mail (free), Osti could have been provided with scanned images of hand-written letters and sketches from Alexandra and Paige Misener to the judges and medical experts in Saint Pierre begging not to be returned to Whittington, chronicling the abuse they sustained, reporting the collusion of authorities in Canada, etc. These letters are detailed, hand-written and were admitted into evidence at all stages of the French courts, including the custody attempts made by the biological mother.

12. Interviews with the Family. With a little bit of goodwill, and some honesty, Osti may have been granted interviews with Alex, Paige and Clayton Misener, as well as other family members. He could have noted their experience, taken formal statements and gathered a much better sense of the dangers posed by the biological mother and her pedophile husband. Osti would have a much clearer understanding of Whittington than he conceals at present and all it would have taken is an earnest apology. This option is no longer readily available.

13. Friends of Alex and Paige. This website, and others like it, are a great resource for documentary, audio, video and contact information. The documents section alone clearly lays out the events that led up to he sexual abuse, the assailant and actions he took to aggravate the situation. Furthermore, Osti would have been able to access images and other media. Why he didn't bother to even glance at this site, or even mention its existence, alludes me altogether. It can't possibly be an oversight, it has to be negligence and bias.

14. Google. Anyone who uses the internet knows, or really should know about Google. It is by far the most popular and commonly used search engines available. It is free and comprehensive. Had Osti run a simple Google search for "Jason Kenneth Whittington" he would have found links to Whittington's Facebook page (another popular social media site), taxidermy sites, other social media and reference to legacy news articles covering accusations of child abuse against Whittington. Osti would also have discovered several links to this website, operated by Friends of Alex and Paige. Here he would have found a virtual treasure trove of information about Whittington complete with original scanned documents, news articles, petitions and such. A simple, basic Google search, but again this would work against Osti's agenda of criminalizing Misener for saving his children.

FINAL EVALUATION

Detective Sergeant Denis Osti, a detective sergeant in the detective office, exhibited laziness, bias, detrimental slant and vengeance when he wrote this letter. He pushed his own narrative, not supported by fact, and tried to dance around the question being asked. He took revenge. He set out to derail the family, to damage them, to criminalize them, to paint a picture true or not that would bolster his credibility, authority and influence. He had an agenda far from that of truth. He put a spin on a lie. He put lipstick on a pig and tried to sell it as a prized poodle.

I would expect this kind of conduct from a two-bit, ambulance chasing lawyer who enjoys the company of prostitutes and uses cocaine (and we have evidence of that as well, by the way - coming soon). I would expect this from a narcissistic pedophile, from a cauldron stirring social worker. But I always believed police officers to be above all that, probably because I am one and I know I am better than this. Now, I didn't write this entire article, and didn't do all of the research, but I know for certain that Osti left every stone unturned. His only verification was a computer system he knew would not contain information about the subject, and a brief walk down the hall to see another police officer, to ask a question from memory, and to forget that the police officer he asked is also implicated in negligence.

This is a classic example of laziness, purposeful and dutiful neglect. It is exactly what we were taught not to be at OPC (Ontario Police College). It is exactly the kind of flon that judges reject, that defence counsel loves to pick apart and that other police officers cringe at. I really hope that my input into this assessment results in Osti, and people like him, being (where possible) retrained or put back into a uniform and sent out to write tickets. It is garbage like this that makes all police officers look bad and obstructs us from building trust relationships with the communities we are supposed to serve. They say, "a fish rots from the head down," and while I have never met Superintendent Brian Ash or Deputy Chief Brett Flynn, the two most senior police commanders in charge of Osti's unit, Ash has ben described as "slick, glad handler, politician" and Flynn as being implicated in the Green Ribbon, Paul Bernardo, Karla Homolka, Scarborough Rapist debacle. I guess that when you screw up that badly, you can't ever shake it. Both are loathed by their front-line staff, much more than is normally the case. Ash in particular is known to sign anything you put in front of him and very sensitive to political pressure. He worries about his priorities and nothing else.

Overall, Osti gets a F- for the way this letter was researched and composed. In fact, that grade in my opinion should be a C for Corrupt. If I wrote something like this, based on the absolute lack of research and obvious personal bias, my inspector would shit down my throat. The letter would be put up in the stalls as an example of what not to do and I would be patrolling the trash pile without a mask. It is unacceptable. Full stop.

P.S. Nobody uses the same 'top-sheet' letterhead for subsequent pages in a letter. It's just not considered good form.

WWW.RUNNINGAWAY.CA - CONTENT ADVISORY

This web site describes events, experiences and perspectives that may be disturbing to some. The content may not be suitable for younger audiences, even with parental consent or accompaniment. This content may act as an emotional trigger. Viewer discretion is strongly advised. Privacy. We understand and share your privacy and security concerns, and your desire for anonymity. We feel the same way. You should know that this website is hosted on a private server, in the confines of a private network, well outside of Canada. Nobody is traced, no logs are kept. Information is routed through a geographically separated server in another hemisphere. The only information about you that goes through this system is information that you choose to provide.