“Not Criminal Harassment” — Issued by Castlegar RCMP Staff Sgt Monty Taylor October 2019.
Black Sheep Whistleblower
Date: December 27, 2025
🔗 CONTEXT & CONTINUITY (READ FIRST)
This post is Part 1a and must be read in conjunction with Part 1, which documents the broader EGBC harassment, jurisdictional fraud, and denial of natural justice that led directly to the RCMP correspondence reproduced below.
👉 Part 1 (Primary Post):
https://blacksheepwhistleblower.com/2025/??/??/egbc-harassment-cover-up/
(WordPress ID: 1905 — original post)
Part 1a exists for one purpose:
To place the RCMP’s own words on the public record and demonstrate—using their correspondence alone—how a false assumption of EGBC “authority” was accepted by police despite being factually and legally untrue, as established in Part 1.
What follows is the unaltered evidentiary addendum.
📎 “Not Criminal Harassment,” Says Staff Sgt. Monty Taylor
Issued Days After My Birthday, Following Repeated Harassment by EGBC and Its Lawyers
This addendum preserves verbatim correspondence confirming that the harassment I reported in 2019—arising from actions taken by Engineers and Geoscientists British Columbia (EGBC) and its legal counsel—was reviewed by the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) and declined for criminal prosecution.
A HUMAN RIGHTS COMPLAINT AGAINST THE EGBC
At the time of this correspondence, I was on disability, having been formally diagnosed in July 2019. That diagnosis directly led to the filing of a Human Rights complaint against EGBC, arising from the same course of conduct described here. That complaint was dismissed after five years with zero investigation, a matter that will be addressed in a separate blog post.
The conduct at issue occurred repeatedly over more than a year, including a significant escalation in October 2019, despite EGBC having no governing authority over me at any material time.
The RCMP’s written refusal was delivered on or immediately following my birthday which was the very day the EGBC criminally harassed me and contacted me directly when I was not a member of the EGBC and had been told to not contact me directly by the RCMP dating back over a year but to contact my lawyer instead … this was the umpteeth time in a year I was criminally harassed by the EGBC and the umpteeth time I had reported it to the Castlegar RCMP but nadda by the RCMP.
That detail matters.
For more than a decade, individuals and institutions acting against me have repeatedly chosen birthdays and other significant personal dates to escalate pressure, deliver adverse decisions, or inflict psychological harm. This correspondence fits that established pattern precisely.
What follows is the complete communication chain, reproduced verbatim, with email addresses redacted and my legal counsel anonymized, so the record may speak for itself.
📧 RCMP RESPONSE (REDACTED – VERBATIM)
From: Monty Taylor RCMP–emailredacted
Sent: October 2, 2019 – 4:08 PM
To: David Drover emailredacted
Cc: mylawyer
Subject: Re: Fwd: 190926 Drover Determination – Clarification – executed[96076].pdf
Good afternoon Mr. Drover,
In review of the circumstances in relation to the charge of criminal harassment they do not meet the threshold for the Castlegar RCMP to recommend a criminal harassment charge to Crown Counsel.
Legal counsel representing Engineers and Geoscientists of BC (EGBC), Mr. Lindsay, is acting within his duty in relation to the proceeding(s) EGBC has taken. Partly, as you have been representing yourself, the correspondence EGBC and their counsel have sent has been in relation to these proceeding(s) and/or in relation to request(s) to cease and/or block e-mails they deemed inappropriate.
Whereas you believe EGBC does not have “governing authority” over you, EGBC believes under legislation they do have authority. It is our understanding you have retained legal counsel, mylawyermy lawyermylawyer, to assist you with the action taken by EGBC and it is recommended, if required, you continue with his legal support and advice.
I am not familiar with EGBC processes but from the stress this appears to be causing you hopefully there is a resolution in the near future.
The Castlegar Detachment will not be recommending to Crown Counsel a charge of criminal harassment. As you are aware, as a private citizen you do have the option of laying a private Information. This is an option you can explore but again prior to exploring this option, if required, consult with your counsel mylawyermy lawyermylawyer.
Thank you,
Monty
Sgt. M.M. Taylor
Castlegar Detachment
Castlegar, BC
Tel: redacted
Fax: redacted
📧 MY COMPLAINT TO RCMP (REDACTED – VERBATIM)
📎 EGBC COUNSEL COMMUNICATION (REDACTED – VERBATIM)
From: Richard B. Lindsay, Q.C., P.Eng., FCIArb emailredacted
Date: September 26, 2019 – 11:24 PM PDT
To: David Drover emailredacted; thirdparty–redacted; mylawyermy lawyermylawyer
Subject: FW: 190926 Drover Determination – Clarification
Richard B. Lindsay QC, P.Eng., FCIArb
LINDSAY LLP
Vancouver, BC
Ms. Waddell / mylawyermy lawyermylawyer / Mr. Drover,
Attached is a Clarification related to the Determination in this matter.
📎 EGBC COUNSEL COMMUNICATION (REDACTED – VERBATIM)
📎 EGBC COUNSEL COMMUNICATION (REDACTED – VERBATIM)
From: Richard B. Lindsay, Q.C., P.Eng., FCIArb emailredacted
Date: September 26, 2019 – 11:24 PM PDT
To: David Drover emailredacted; thirdparty–redacted; mylawyermy lawyermylawyer
Subject: FW: 190926 Drover Determination – Clarification
Richard B. Lindsay QC, P.Eng., FCIArb
LINDSAY LLP
Vancouver, BC
Ms. Waddell / mylawyermy lawyermylawyer / Mr. Drover,
Attached is a Clarification related to the Determination in this matter.
🚨 FINAL NOTE — WHY SGT. MONTY TAYLOR’S CONCLUSION IS FLATLY WRONG and I believe constitutes misconduct on its face.
I need to be absolutely clear about the following statement made by Monty Taylor of the Castlegar RCMP:
“In review of the circumstances in relation to the charge of criminal harassment they do not meet the threshold for the Castlegar RCMP to recommend a criminal harassment charge to Crown Counsel.”
That conclusion is egregiously wrong, legally unsupportable, and speaks directly to the institutional failure—and corruption—I experienced at the hands of the Castlegar RCMP in this matter.
🔴 EGBC HAD NO GOVERNING AUTHORITY OVER ME — PERIOD
At all material times relevant to the harassment complained of:
- I was NOT a registered professional member of Engineers and Geoscientists British Columbia (EGBC).
- I had resigned / been removed prior to the conduct complained of.
- EGBC’s own disciplinary record confirms they lacked jurisdiction over me.
- A separate professional association in Alberta independently reached the same conclusion.
In fact, one professional body explicitly characterized me as “ungovernable”—not because of misconduct, but because they had no authority over me whatsoever.
Despite this:
- EGBC continued contacting me through counsel.
- EGBC blocked me from responding or communicating.
- EGBC initiated and relied upon a disciplinary process I was never invited to, never attended, and was never permitted to defend myself in.
That is the very definition of denial of natural justice.
⚖️ WHAT THE CRIMINAL CODE ACTUALLY SAYS (CANADA)
Without editorializing, the Criminal Code of Canada is clear:
- Section 264 — Criminal Harassment
Criminal harassment includes repeated communication with a person, after being told to stop, where that conduct causes the person to reasonably fear for their safety or psychological well-being. - Sections 298–301 — Criminal Defamation
Criminal defamation captures the knowing communication of false statements that are likely to injure a person’s reputation, particularly where authority or institutional power is abused.
At the time of the conduct:
- EGBC had no legal authority to communicate with me.
- I explicitly demanded no further contact.
- Communications continued through counsel.
- Those communications were coercive, intimidating, and reputationally damaging.
- I was suffering from documented PTSD, which was clearly communicated.
The suggestion that this “does not meet the threshold” is not a close call.
It is wrong in law.
🚨 WHY THIS IS SO SERIOUS
What Sgt. Taylor effectively did was this:
- He accepted EGBC’s asserted authority as fact, despite it being false.
- He failed to verify jurisdiction, which is foundational to any lawful analysis.
- He collapsed criminal conduct into a civil/regulatory fiction where no regulation applied.
- He ignored the denial of natural justice entirely.
This is not a difference of opinion.
This is a failure of duty.
When a police officer concludes that harassment is “lawful” because an institution claims authority it does not have, that officer becomes an enabler of abuse, not a neutral arbiter.
🧨 THE BOTTOM LINE
- EGBC had no governing authority over me.
- I was not a professional member.
- I was never given natural justice.
- I was harassed after demanding no contact.
- The RCMP chose institutional convenience over the law.
Sgt. Monty Taylor’s statement is so egregiously wrong that it cannot be explained as error.
It speaks directly to the systemic corruption and institutional protectionism I have faced at the hands of the Castlegar RCMP in this case.
The record is now public.
Let it speak for itself.
ONE MORE THING — A SIMPLE QUESTION FOR STAFF SGT. Monty Taylor
Since it’s Christmas season, I’m asking for clarity.
Do you have any response regarding Danny Keith Martin, who has been harassing my wife and her workplace since May 2025, a matter reported to the Castlegar RCMP under File #25-1433?
Specifically:
Danny has been telling people that “arrest warrants” were coming — even suggesting they would arrive “for Christmas,” and directing those claims toward my wife. See Danny Keith Martins X post saying the same from December 14 2025 just 11 days before Christmas actually:
So the question is straightforward:
- Who exactly are these alleged arrest warrants for?
- Do they exist at all?
- Or is this simply another instance of unchecked intimidation being allowed to continue?
Given past experience, including how complaints of harassment have previously been dismissed without action, public clarification seems reasonable.
This is not sarcasm.
It’s a request for accountability.
The record already exists.
A response would help prevent further harm.
⚖️ LEGAL NOTICE & DISCLAIMER
This publication is made in good faith for documentation, public-interest reporting, and whistleblower disclosure.
All correspondence reproduced herein is verbatim, with limited redactions applied solely to protect personal contact information and legal-client privacy.
Opinions expressed are clearly identified as such and are based on documented facts and lived experience.
Nothing in this publication constitutes harassment, defamation, or a threat.
No allegation of criminal guilt is made.
© 2025 — Black Sheep Whistleblower. All rights reserved.
Leave a Reply