A member of Congress is seeking a new investigation by the U.S. State Department into a case documented by a former New England police officer who reported he was arrested, jailed and tortured in Canada, apparently in direct violation of an international treaty.

WND broke the story earlier this year of Scott Loper’s account of his experiences in Canada and subsequent failure to obtain the help he sought from U.S. authorities.

Loper and his civil rights attorney have been working to obtain a full investigation of his jailing and treatment by Canadian authorities, and also have taken their case directly to the people of America by posting a YouTube video about his case.

It can be seen here:

His battles for justice also are being highlighted on a website, the ScottLoperStory.com, and his case has been the subject of an action alert by RestoreTheRepublic.com.

Restore the Republic asked its 37,000 members to contact Congress to demand hearings to review what happened in Loper’s case.

“When one bleeds we all bleed, and until Bush gives the same attention to Loper as he gave Jose Medellin, America will continue to bleed,” Gary Franchi, national director of Restore the Republic, told WND when the alert was released. Medellin was a convicted murderer from Mexico for whom the U.S. government argued a defense because of an alleged violation of the Vienna Convention, which gives a defendant in a foreign country a right to consular access.” He later was executed in Texas.

Loper earlier had sought the help of his member of Congress at the time, Steny Hoyer, a Democrat whose work did not contribute significant additional knowledge to the case, he said.

But Loper has since moved, and his new member of Congress, Frank Wolf of Virginia, has taken up the cause.

In a letter just days ago to the State Department, Wolf said, “I have enclosed information which has been brought to my attention by my constituent, Scott Loper. As you can see, Mr. Loper was incarcerated in a Canadian jail and he has stated that the treatment that he received was inhumane.”

The congressman continued, “I believe that Mr. Loper’s situation should be investigated by appropriate officials from the State Department. Please let me know if you require additional information. I am sure that Mr. Loper would be available to speak with the appropriate officials that would be involved in this investigation.”

Loper told WND he is cautiously optimistic that he may seen some results because of Wolf’s intervention.

However, it was the State Department that earlier produced a document allegedly from the Canadian government that officials explained waived Loper’s international treaty rights.

That, according to C. Scott Shields, Loper’s attorney, isn’t possible, because an individual cannot waive rights under an international treaty. And the handling of the “investigation” that was done earlier at Hoyer’s request raised more questions than it answered, Loper said.

The situation is described on Loper’s website:

“On the verge of exposing a police-run narcotics ring in Durham, Ontario, Loper was discovered by the ring and imprisoned for four years on trumped-up charges. There, he was tortured to the point where he often questioned his ability to make it out alive.

“Those he had been about to expose were after the evidence – audio and video recordings Loper had made of their illegal operations. They also wanted him to keep quiet.

“The Canadian government originally said the whole thing, including Loper’s arrest, never happened, denying that Loper had ever lived in Canada, let alone been incarcerated there,” it says.

The Vienna Convention, signed by 164 nations in 1967, requires nations to notify foreign nationals when arrested of their right to contact their own embassy and allow to allow the contact.

Loper reports that never happened. The Canadian government contends Loper “waived” those rights but has been unable to produce documentation.

Canadian officials repeatedly have declined to respond to WND questions about the case. They provided the U.S. State Department a copy of a document a copy of a document they explained was a “waiver” of his rights to notify consular officials from his own nation.

But the document is dated 2003, even though Loper’s case developed in 2000. It also is unsigned and pertains to a different type of hearing, according to Shields.


Note: Read our discussion guidelines before commenting.