Rebuttal and Decision

On June 9, 1994, Gary Weaver's lawyer, Kate Ker, submitted a rebuttal to the Notice of Involuntary Transfer Recommendation. She pointed out that Mr. Weaver had not been involved in any incidents of violence or assaultive behaviour since his transfer from the Saskatchewan SHU in 1991. Between January 20 and February 17, 1994, the date on which Ms. S.R. was arrested and Mr. Weaver segregated, eight to ten more visits had taken place between them. No transcripts of communications intercepted during those visits had been produced by the institution, underscoring the unusual nature of the conversation on January 20 and exposing Mr. Weaver's talk of violence as "con puffery" and bravado designed to impress his visitor. In particular, the expression of wanting to do physical harm to a police officer was

nothing more than a means of releasing tension through fantasy which is a by-product of the overall process of desensitization to violence the longer one spends in SHU and segregation units. It is a coping mechanism for [Mr. Weaver] given the extreme brutality and violence he has had to witness and endure in SHU and segregation units. (Submission of Gary Weaver in response to Notice of Involuntary Transfer Recommendation, Kent Institution, June 9, 1994)

Warden Lusk, in a decision dated June 13, 1994, advised Mr. Weaver that he intended to uphold his recommendation for transfer to the SHU. He concluded, "After reviewing all of the materials submitted, I remain convinced that Mr. Weaver's direct involvement in the drug traffic at Kent Institution and the threat that such action presents, indicate that the level of risk he presents to the good order of the Institution can only be managed in the Special Handling Unit" (Notice of Involuntary Transfer Recommendation, Kent Institution, June 13, 1994). On August 31, 1994, the Deputy Commissioner for the Pacific Region approved the transfer of Mr. Weaver.

Page 1 of 1