Maclean's reports that gunman in Nova Scotia shooting might have been working for RCMP
The article published June 19 strongly considers whether Wortman may have been a confidential informant or agent for the RCMP, based on the information that he withdrew a large sum of cash just days before the shooting.
Police sources say the Nova Scotia killer's withdrawal of $475,000 was highly irregular, and how an RCMP ‘agent’ would get money https://t.co/XsfZrFOTtF— Maclean's Magazine (@macleans) June 20, 2020
Wortman withdrew $475,000 from a Brink's location in Dartmouth on March 30 in hundred-dollar bills, transporting the money in a carry-all.
Maclean's obtained two videos of Wortman driving into the yard of the security facility, making a transaction inside, and then carrying a duffel bag filled with cash back to his car.
A source close to the police investigation of Wortman told Maclean's the money came from CIBC Intria.
A source familiar with RCMP undercover operations told them that's exactly how they pay confidential informants, saying "There's no way a civilian can just make an arrangement like that" and "That transaction alone proves he has a special relationship with the force." Another Mountie called it "tradecraft."
Maclean's also talked to a retail banking expert, who told them it was unlikely Wortman was cashing out his own savings.
The expert said under those circumstances the bank would likely order the money from Brink's, then count it out in front of the person requesting it, verifying identity and documenting it to make sure the money is going to the right person.
Wortman, who was shot by the RCMP during his attempted arrest following the shooting, was a denturist. He was also the owner of a company called Berkshire-Broman, which legally owns one of his police replica cars. There's no public evidence that either business would have any reason for handling such a large amount of cash.
Neither CIBC nor Brink's would give comment to Maclean's, and the RCMP has repeatedly stated they had no special relationship with Wortman.
A copy of the RCMP Operations Manual obtained by Maclean's quoted in the article states, "The identity of a source must be protected at all times except when the administration of justice requires otherwise, i.e. a member cannot mislead a court in any proceeding in order to protect a source."
A spokeswoman for the RCMP declined to answer any further questions from them, saying there is still an active ongoing investigation.
A law enforcement source told Maclean's that it's probable that Wortman was an agent, which would mean he had even more responsibility than an informant. "Informants are never paid more than a couple hundred at a time," a person briefed on RCMP operations told them. "Anything over $10,000 is agent money."
Former Mounties and investigators question why Wortman would turn against the force that was paying him such huge sums of money, point out that he would eventually be expected to testify and note that "This guy always wanted to be a Mountie. He was acting like a Mountie. He was doing Mountie things. It’s clear to me that something went wrong."
Based on the allegations in this story alone there's got to be a public inquiry. The allegation that a mass shooter who killed 22 people may have been an RCMP agent, and then the police lied about it, needs to be explained or repudiated with evidence.— 𝙅𝘼𝙈𝙀𝙎 🤨 𝙈𝘾𝙇𝙀𝙊𝘿 (@jamespmcleod) June 20, 2020
People on social media are saying "Based on the allegations in this story alone there's got to be a public inquiry."
Wow... The Nova Scotia killer appears to be an RCMP informant. Probably why the RCMP ignored earlier complaints of illegal guns and domestic abuse https://t.co/BVe1SAO0wf— James Hutt (@JamesRHutt) June 20, 2020
Maclean's and others are saying ties to the RCMP could be a possible reason why previous complaints against Wortman of illegal guns and domestic abuse were ignored.
That Maclean’s story about the Nova Scotia shooter is ***wild***.— elaine corden (@elainecorden) June 20, 2020
The story is so dramatic, people are also calling it "wild." Some, however, feel the piece is based on weak evidence.
@stphnmaher and Shannon Gormley @ShannonGormley have adopted an approach akin to 'throwing burning torches atop a roof' of the @rcmpgrcpolice investigation in the hopes that it'll draw information. At best, its (highly) speculative assertions are misleading and not sophisticated.— Andy Brooke (@AndyBrookeLmstn) June 20, 2020
Someone formerly from the RCMP even created a thread on Twitter discussing the issues with their reporting.
Okay. I've had a chance to re-read this article this morning and the speculation / nonsense in the article is epic. A short thread: https://t.co/NMjwup7Snw— JMDavis (@JessMarinDavis) June 20, 2020
Another created a thread to explain how they feel "the speculation/nonsense in the article is epic."
Others are saying this "could easily turn into the biggest scandal in Canadian history."
Join the conversation Load comments