Should Man Acquitted of Child Sex Charges Sue the Police?

Considering the victim was not a child but a 16 yr old young man and the hacking revealed a "previous correspondence" between the offender and the young person - not the diatribe and later faux conversation orchestrated by the mother- I think you should sue so the truth comes out. I believe this police service took a video statement from the young man (not child) and he gave further evidence to the service (Durham Region) actually "in charge" of the investigation and laying of the charge, arrest and detention. Peterborough canvassed the possibility of an exploitation, which led to disclosure of offences in another jurisdiction. What is great about the civil case is that all of the school records of the boy, credit card transactions of accused, emails, phone records, banking records are now subject to reverse disclosure in a civil matter. Electronic information never dies. It just sleeps until it becomes necessary to acquire-LOL. The other service dropped the ball in not securing this information to prove out the charge. So shame on them. So yes- sue, so the public can see all of the information electronic and otherwise with respect to your interference with the trial and the witness and display the truth of how you are now re-victimizing this young man. Please, sue - please, continue to play the victim and we will see the truth of it in the light of reason and not the obvious obfuscation of a sabre rattling zealot who slipped through the cracks of the judicial system and whores himself out to the media. You Sir should be thankful you are not rotting in jail where you should be. The public will soon know the truth because you didn't know when to leave well enough alone. Lets be clear about that! I watched the trial day after day - you should know better! You have made a tragedy that much more abhorrent and should be ashamed of yourself.

Raymond Collingham, was arrested on a Canada-wide warrant on July 09, 2007. The allegations against him arose from a homophobic father, a disturbed mother, manipulated emails and an inexperienced police officer. Ray was held in custody for 4 days while only being fed once and interrogated for a horrifying crime he did not commit. He was then boarded on a plane in hand cuffs and shackles and flown across the country where he was stripped of his clothes and threatened by a police officer while he stood naked and afraid. Ray was detained in a range with 32 other inmates where he feared for his life until he was released on a cash bail of $5000. It would take two years before Ray could clear his name in a court of law and much longer than that to find the strength to start putting his life back together. A picture of Ray was spread on the front page of what seemed like every newspaper across Canada, with a title that similar to “Potential Child Molester.” His partner was refused as surety and he was not given permission to go back to his home province. He was banned from Gymnastics and his coaching certificates were marked nil and void. He lost his job, his home, his pets, his dignity and his pride.
We as citizens are expected to conduct ourselves in an appropriate manner, following the laws and regulations that our police officers enforce or we will face consequences. Our expectations for the police should be held in the same regard. In Ray's case those expectations were not met and it cost him his reputation. I do not know the dollar amount that a person's quality of life is worth, but what I do know is that he has a right to try and regain what was stolen from him. Emails are not sufficient enough evidence to warrant an arrest and in most cases they are not considered enough to even warrant an investigation. Ask yourself, have you ever forgot to sign out of your email account? How many people live with you? Who visited your house that day? and more importantly, did you give enough thought to your security questions and/or passwords? What if someone gets into your account and writes things on your behalf? Wouldn't you want the opportunity to explain? Neither Ray or his partner were questioned before his arrest. He was assumed guilty and processed as such.
In Canadian law, the accused are to be presumed innocent until proven guilty. It is not a police officers job to prosecute someone based on an assumption. It is however, their job to take complaints and investigate. The gathering of legitimate evidence in an investigation is important to avoid overwhelming the justice system with an enormous amount of people who are accused of something they did not commit. For two years Ray was forced to live in depression, worry and wondered what was to become of him. He lost respect and was looked at suspiciously by all. Ray Collingham taught children for over 20 years and he was just trying to his job. The Peterborough police didn't stop for a moment to make sure the officer was doing his and he was interrogated for hours trying to get him to admit guilt. Will they admit theirs?

Considering the victim was not a child but a 16 yr old young man and the hacking revealed a "previous correspondence" between the offender and the young person - not the diatribe and later faux conversation orchestrated by the mother- I think you should sue so the truth comes out. I believe this police service took a video statement from the young man (not child) and he gave further evidence to the service (Durham Region) actually "in charge" of the investigation and laying of the charge, arrest and detention. Peterborough canvassed the possibility of an exploitation, which led to disclosure of offences in another jurisdiction. What is great about the civil case is that all of the school records of the boy, credit card transactions of accused, emails, phone records, banking records are now subject to reverse disclosure in a civil matter. Electronic information never dies. It just sleeps until it becomes necessary to acquire-LOL. The other service dropped the ball in not securing this information to prove out the charge. So shame on them. So yes- sue, so the public can see all of the information electronic and otherwise with respect to your interference with the trial and the witness and display the truth of how you are now re-victimizing this young man. Please, sue - please, continue to play the victim and we will see the truth of it in the light of reason and not the obvious obfuscation of a sabre rattling zealot who slipped through the cracks of the judicial system and whores himself out to the media. You Sir should be thankful you are not rotting in jail where you should be. The public will soon know the truth because you didn't know when to leave well enough alone. Lets be clear about that! I watched the trial day after day - you should know better! You have made a tragedy that much more abhorrent and should be ashamed of yourself.

This is so ridiculous, it makes me sick to read these opions of people who read one line in an article "mom hacked into accounts". Come on, just like the Casey Anthony case there was sufficient evidence to show the child was murdred yet the mom gets off. Yet thousands of people and Casey herself knows she is guilty. This guy knows he is guilty and continues these rants to prove his innocence because he has to try really hard to clear the bad name he brought on himself and continues to do so until this day. I would love to see some close family or friends show all the crap that he has done since his aquittal that would show how guilty he really is. It's pathetic, and if you know what I'm talking about, and he knows what I'm talking about, this whole website would be flooded with rants against this man and not the mom or the victim. He needs to stop playing victim here, step it up, go far far away, change his name (oh wait I think he already tried to do that..or has) and leave this awful situation alone. Seriously if I was aquitted of a serious charge like this, I think I would try to move on, without publishing everything all over again in the paper and making a total ass of myself. Karma is a "b*&$h" and will come back and bite you in the ass. The only thing I agree with is that the Mom should have not hacked into anything and let the police do their job, which they did very well, but unfortunatley lost in this case. As I read these comments and see the "the poor guy, OMG, he should just be able to get on with his life" , well what about the child who is the real victim? When does he get to get on with his life and stop having to deal with this crap? There is so much more to this story and situation that is not being told because it is all one sided. Good thing this young man (victim) has a strong support system, or who knows what he might do. So until you have actually spoke to the victim and heard his chain of events, you would see a whole new side of Ray Collingham! Move along and go hug your children and hope that this never happens to them.
"Child abuse casts a shadow the length of a lifetime"

I just wanted to let everyone know that have brought up valid points about suing the police. I am suing because the police were negligent in investigating my case. If my case was investigated prior to my arrest I would not have been arrested and bythen it was too late. Then the system takes you on this journey. The paper unfortunately, cannot tell the whole story either.

My human rights were violated while incarcerated as well. I was fed once while in jail in Smithers BC. I lost 9 lbs. I was not taken to see a Justice of the Peace until 7 days after my arrest. By law I am suppose to see a JP within 24 hours, so the courts know who is in costody and why. I was not allowed to shower or brush my teeth and was illegally interrogated for 6 hours. The crown was thinking about dismissing the case, but I said no, I want this to go to trial so I can prove my innocence.

As for the mother, you have no idea how much I want to sue her. But if I sue her it will cost thousands and thousands of dollars and I will not get any money back from her, even just to pay my lawyers. The satisfaction of me suing her would be great, but I could not afford to do it just for doing it.

All I want is for the officer that did not follow policies and procedures to pay for his negligence. I don't think he was malicious in what he did, but he even admitted "flying by the seat of his pants" when he was dealing with my case.

And I wish our system was not run the way it was either but hopefully this will raise some awareness with the police and he will hve to take what he is doing more seriously.

Considering the victim was not a child but a 16 yr old young man and the hacking revealed a "previous correspondence" between the offender and the young person - not the diatribe and later faux conversation orchestrated by the mother- I think you should sue so the truth comes out. I believe this police service took a video statement from the young man (not child) and he gave further evidence to the service (Durham Region) actually "in charge" of the investigation and laying of the charge, arrest and detention. Peterborough canvassed the possibility of an exploitation, which led to disclosure of offences in another jurisdiction. What is great about the civil case is that all of the school records of the boy, credit card transactions of accused, emails, phone records, banking records are now subject to reverse disclosure in a civil matter. Electronic information never dies. It just sleeps until it becomes necessary to acquire-LOL. The other service dropped the ball in not securing this information to prove out the charge. So shame on them. So yes- sue, so the public can see all of the information electronic and otherwise with respect to your interference with the trial and the witness and display the truth of how you are now re-victimizing this young man. Please, sue - please, continue to play the victim and we will see the truth of it in the light of reason and not the obvious obfuscation of a sabre rattling zealot who slipped through the cracks of the judicial system and whores himself out to the media. You Sir should be thankful you are not rotting in jail where you should be. The public will soon know the truth because you didn't know when to leave well enough alone. Lets be clear about that! I watched the trial day after day - you should know better! You have made a tragedy that much more abhorrent and should be ashamed of yourself.

Your statement of claim suggest the officer was not so much negligent but quite adept at interrogating a "child" and forcing him to disclose. That is a fantastic feat for an incompetent police officer. To get a 16 year old male to spill out a ritual pattern of grooming and abuse to a police officer where the substance of which was re-visited confirmed and expanded upon with further information is such a way that was not hyperbolic but textbook grooming. Wow, this inexperienced officer you suggest is complicit in your incarceration appears to be quite savvy. What you suggest is a miracle. This teenager was forced to disclose a false allegation by an officer who was not even in charge of the investigation and gave the statement to another service as it was theirs. How could a police officer be so invested and just toss it away? Your claim also suggests the CAS was not involved. Was he under 16 - NO- was he under arrest- NO. Did he disclose again to yet another police officer without discrepancy - YES. The officer should have written a search warrant with a few lines of a communication? What offence should it have been written to? By all accounts the email suggested only a consensual sex act? What offence was there on its face to obtain a search warrant for the facebook account or whatever means of electronic communication was used? The IP address of the original email or FB communication is registered as is the date of the communication no matter what service you or she or this young man used. It is etched in the electronic stone that is the internet. It will discover who wrote what, from where, when and exactly what was said and the location of the computer at the time. The IP address of the mother will be there as well.The date she hacked the account, the time, the print function or forwarding and her location at the time she hacked it. There is a trail that was not at the trial. Five Million dollars will ensure it is at the next one. You have really got yourself in a jackpot now...GooD LUCK CHUCK! The contradictions you present are so glaringly obvious I am surprised the media has not in their infinite interest seen the obvious. You are hiding in plain sight... I can't wait to read the outcome of this one!!!