Apparently, Britz was also found to have associated with a “Subject A.”
Turns out, “Subject A” was her husband, Gerald MacMullin.
The issue? MacMullin’s vehicle was spotted at several different times near Hells Angels members and at events held by the gang, including funerals.
MacMullin is a service manager for a top-rated Harley-Davidson garage. (I don’t think I need to point out that motorcycle gang members often drive Harleys, but I will anyway.) He and Britz explained every contact with the Hells Angels outlined by security officials, saying that attending the funerals of longtime customers is something that he would be expected to do, and did.
MacMullin also added reference letters from — wait for it — the RCMP. “The first reference letter was from an RCMP sergeant who wrote in regards to the husband’s professionalism and general character. The RCMP sergeant confirmed the applicant’s husband had overseen the servicing of most of the Harley Davidsons used by the RCMP in the K Division Integrated Traffic Services since 2008,” the judge wrote.
And like with Meyler, Britz was asked to explain why her husband had gotten into a car with a customer who was also a known drug dealer. That’s hard to explain, since security officials didn’t tell her where, when or with whom her husband was supposed to have met.
Once again, the security clearance was revoked by the federal Transportation minister, over what Britz might do in the future: “A review of the information on file led me to believe, on a balance of probabilities, that you may be prone or induced to commit an act or assist or abet any person to commit an act that may unlawfully interfere with civil aviation.”
The exact same language as the Meyler case.
The Federal Court judge sided with Britz.
“Contrary to the finding of the minister, not only is there no evidence to support a finding that the applicant is prone to such illegal acts, the evidence is to the contrary: the applicant has no such inclination.”
But it’s taken over a year for Britz to get this far, and the decision may yet be appealed. Even if it isn’t it, just goes back to the minister again.
So, how would you answer the question, “Why did you meet with ‘Subject A?’” Russell Wangersky is TC Media’s Atlantic regional columnist. He can be reached at Russell.firstname.lastname@example.org — Twitter: @ Wangersky.