Gary Allen, faced with the prospect of serving his full sentence in a provincial prison in administrative segregation, sought to transfer to a federal penitentiary, something that can be arranged pursuant to a federal-provincial transfer agreement. That request was reviewed by the warden of Kent Institution. In a letter from Bob Lusk, warden of Kent Institution, to Ron Williams, Director of the Fraser Regional Correctional Centre, Mr. Lusk indicated that Kent was prepared to accept Allen under certain circumstances. In the course of the letter Mr. Lusk expressed concern that Gary Allen "not enter into a transfer to Kent Institution under any illusions" and pointed out that "currently, all new intake is being housed in segregation until general accommodation cell space can be found for them. Cells are allotted on a first come, first serve basis. Our current waiting list is eleven and it should be approximately six weeks before a cell can be found for him." (Letter from Bob Lusk to Ron Williams, January 6, 1994).

Dave Dick, the institutional preventinve security officer (IPSO) at Kent, went to Fraser Regional Correctional Centre on January 12 to interview Gary Allen. The subject matter of that interview is reflected in a detailed memorandum Mr. Dick prepared for the deputy warden of Kent Institution, dated January 13, 1994. It read:

1. Gary Allen requested an ESA [Exchange of Services Agreement] transfer to Kent from the Fraser Regional Correctional Centre where he is currently being housed in their segregation unit . . . The warden has agreed to accept Allen provided he signed an understanding he would participate in programs and that, should he require long-term segregation at Kent, he could be returned to the provincial system.

2. I interviewed Allen yesterday morning at FRCC. He refused to sign the understanding as presented, objecting to the wording which implied he might be segregated for his own protection. He wanted that changed and said he would sign if it stated segregation "for any reason." He emphasized he had never requested protection and never would.

3. He made the point several times that he had never run from any confrontation and would never go to staff with any problems. If someone had a problem with him, he would deal with it on his own terms. He said this was the way he was taught years ago when he entered the system and he was not going to change now.

4. I gave him a list of our current inmates, asking if he had any particular problems with anyone. He started to go through it, making comments on one or two of them but very quickly gave the list back to me, saying he had never done that before and would not start now. The brief comments he did make confirmed one previously identified incompatible. . . [A prisoner is then named.]. . . In addition, there are certain others which should be regarded as likely sources of conflict. . . [A number of prisoners are then named.]

5. Finally, there is a serious and previously unidentified incompatibility with Hugh MacDonald who is currently in J unit GP segregation. Allen became extremely agitated when seeing this name on the list, saying he had not encountered him in many years but that he had "fucked him over badly" when he was a new kid in the system. He noted that MacDonald was now much older and he, Allen, was in his prime and "what goes around, comes around!" Allen noted that MacDonald had killed two guards and suggested this was a good reason for me to put them together on the same range and Allen would "look after him for you."

6. When his suggestion was rejected out of hand he seemed to realize what he had said and backtracked somewhat. He did not withdraw his threats, however. He only wanted to keep the conversation private, "between you and me."

7. Given this interview, I feel more strongly than ever that Allen represents a serious risk to our institutional security and he is unlikely to ever be released to our general population. He will be both a potential target and aggressor and I would anticipate a violent incident within days, if not hours, of his arrival in an open unit. In segregation he would be manageable -- but even there we would constantly need to monitor who he comes into contact with on his range.

8. I have told Allen my concerns and my recommendation that he not be accepted at Kent. I have also told him he would likely not be released to population though this would, of course, be reviewed on a regular basis. Given our discussion, he is reconsidering his request for transfer but has asked that a revised letter be given to him for signature.

Somewhat surprisingly in light of Mr. Dick's strong recommendation against it, the warden of Kent confirmed with his provincial counterpart that he was prepared to accept Mr. Allen.

At the preliminary inquiry of Hughie MacDonald -- in serious cases, the first stage of the criminal trial process -- Jesse Sexsmith, who had left Matsqui in late 1993 to become the deputy warden of Kent Institution, was questioned by defence counsel as to how he interpreted the threats made by Gary Allen against Mr. MacDonald as reported in Mr. Dick's memorandum. Mr. Sexsmith responded:

I knew this fellow, Allen, well. He was a braggart . . . He loved to sit and brag. He loved to sit and talk violent. He loved to believe that he was the toughest guy on the block, and he consistently spoke in terms like that. In my experience, my personal experience with Allen, the experience of others on the management team . . . provided us with a . . . considered opinion that the man was a braggart and that it really didn't mean a lot . . . because there was no record that we were aware of any incident. No-one had ever told me of previous incidents or anything in particular . . . There was nothing on case management files. There was nothing on our offender management system in terms of our computer files for incidents. There was nothing there, or as I was told, there was nothing there. (Proceedings at the Preliminary Inquiry of Hughie MacDonald, November 17, 1995 at 58-59)

Page 3 of 4